CIoT backs qualification call for all advisers

'Accountant' or tax adviser?

I'm intrigues to note the CIOT support of this campaign, which to date has focused on protection of the term: Accountant.

What concerns me is that the proponents for protection of this term may not have thought through the consequences that would ensue if their campaign were successful.

I have an alternative view borne of many discussions with members of the public in connection with my Tax Advice Network which provides a support service for accountants. I quickly realised that that most non-accountants assume that all accountants are tax advisers as the words are thought to be synonymous.

Whilst Finance Directors may appoint accountants for their companies, why do most other typically appoint an accountant? Does the client really care about their accounts? Or are they more interested in obtaining help and advice as regards their tax returns and tax planning? Private investors, the retired and many other clients do not even have accounts in the conventional sense. Yet still the majority of such taxpayers turn to accountants for help.

With apologies to the Chartered Institute of Taxation (of which I am proud to be a Fellow), the concept of a ?Tax Adviser? as distinct from an ?Accountant? has yet to enter the public consciousness.

Even if only qualified accountants could describe themselves as such, it is inconceivable, in my view, that only they would be permitted to provide tax return completion services and tax advice. For me to be wrong on this would mean that Chartered Tax Advisers (?CTAs?), to take just one example, would be precluded from practicing their profession. That?s a fanciful idea that will obviously never happen. There is equally no prospect of CTAs agreeing to be described as Accountants. Hence the reason for their support for the campaign against unqualified advisers.

It's ironic that if only the term 'accountant' were to become protected, the public would quickly become much more familiar with the distinction between an Accountant and a Tax Adviser. And given the choice between a specialist in preparing accounts and one specialised in advising on tax, which will they choose to appoint?

The CIOT would then be well placed to highlight the benefits of using qualified (chartered) tax advisers.

I am in no doubt that attempts to distinguish qualified and unqualified accountants will increase awareness of the difference between accountants and tax advisers. And if that happens I fear that qualified accountants would lose more than they gain.

Posted by: Mark Lee, 18 Jul 2008 | 00:00