The Slippery Slope of Subjective Judgments

The article “Probability and Materiality” in the June 2001 issue reminds me of the age-old conflict faced by the accounting reporter between stating objective facts and making a subjective presentation to enforce a predetermined judgment. The CPA has attained the status of “most trusted professional” because of persistent adherence to objectivity. The use of subjective judgment has almost always involved pandering to the client’s (usually not) enlightened self-interest and abandonment of the discipline that fostered the trust. Standards for subjective judgment provide nothing more than a barricade or safe haven behind which to hide when the subjective judgment proves faulty.

CPAs take great pride in the position of being the most trusted professional and join the rest of society in excoriating the legal profession as being just the opposite. Let us remember that the CPA fills the attest function while the attorney-at-law fills the advocacy function. Both professions also fill consultative roles, but these are offshoots of the underlying professional function.

In the minds of many, the attorney outranks the CPA in the pecking order of the professions. In the minds of many, the attorney is merely more rank than the CPA. In my view, the latter is the more accurate interpretation, but I fear that the CPA is working hard to reverse the positions ... by both interpretations.

David D. Freeman
Freeport, N.Y.

The CPA Journal is broadly recognized as an outstanding, technical-refereed publication aimed at public practitioners, management, educators, and other accounting professionals. It is edited by CPAs for CPAs. Our goal is to provide CPAs and other accounting professionals with the information and news to enable them to be successful accountants, managers, and executives in today's practice environments.