Ernst & Young and PricewaterhouseCoopers, two of the Big Four accounting firms, recently issued separate statements expressing cautious support for an alternative path to CPA licensure. This path allows candidates to substitute professional work experience for 30 of the typically required 150 college credits. Both firms articulated this position in their respective statements.

In a statement emailed to CFO Dive last Friday (date not disclosed), PwC said: "PwC is committed to creating new pathways into the profession and expanding opportunities for those interested in pursuing a career in accounting. We support alternative pathways that preserve mobility and help more aspiring professionals achieve CPA licensure." When asked whether this includes a path that reduces academic credits, a spokesperson said PwC "supports a 120-credit alternative," but declined to comment further.

Meanwhile, an EY spokesperson expressed similar cautious support on Thursday (date not disclosed), but did not respond to whether the firm is actively lobbying for the 120-credit alternative path. The spokesperson said: "We continue to be encouraged by efforts to address the additional 30-hour education requirement through alternative means and support a career-based approach that does not disrupt or undermine the mobility system." The spokesperson also noted that EY US recently committed to investing $1 billion over the next three years to raise starting salaries for entry-level accountants and advance several technology initiatives to strengthen the talent pipeline.

When asked whether EY is actively lobbying in support of the 120-credit option, the spokesperson said EY is "carefully reviewing the exposure draft issued by the American Institute of CPAs (AICPA) and other potential changes, and remains actively engaged in relevant conversations," referring to the proposal put forward by the AICPA.

With the latest statements from PwC and EY, the Big Four firms appear to be converging around alternative CPA licensure pathways, although levels of support vary for this amendment that could reduce the number of credits required for licensure. The amendment aims to address the accounting industry's talent shortage and the shrinking pipeline of accounting students. KPMG appeared to express the strongest support for the 120-credit option last week.

As previously reported by CFO Dive, KPMG US Chair and CEO Paul Knopp has given full support to the 120-credit initiative, which would allow work experience to substitute for the education requirement that effectively amounts to a fifth year of college. In a statement, Knopp described the accounting talent shortage as a "crisis in the making," saying it would affect accounting firms and the businesses that rely on them for audits and financial reporting.

"The cost of becoming a CPA has become too high, including the cost of additional education and the opportunity cost of spending another year in school," Knopp said in a statement shared with CFO Dive.

The Big Four firms' expressions of support come about a month after the AICPA reversed its position and formally moved forward with initiatives to increase pathways and flexibility in response to the accounting talent shortage. The accounting industry association had previously opposed reducing credit requirements, citing concerns that it could lead to inconsistent licensing rules across states, which would impede CPAs from practicing across state lines—the so-called "mobility" issue.

Deloitte also weighed in last week, with a statement that similarly emphasized the need to preserve mobility. Deloitte said: "As a national firm, we believe any changes should support automatic mobility to ensure all CPAs can practice in all U.S. states, regardless of the path through which they obtained their licensure."

According to analysis by Jack Castonguay, an associate professor of accounting at Hofstra University in New York, the cautious wording of most firms' support, aside from KPMG, may stem from the nature of the proposal in the AICPA's exposure draft. Because the final draft could evolve, firms may not want to be forced to retract their support later. Additionally, he speculated that the Big Four may not need to support a proposal aimed at reducing credits, as they have already offloaded much of their entry-level tax and audit work through automation, artificial intelligence, and offshoring.

"Over the past two years, despite widespread industry concerns about talent pipeline and staffing, all Big Four firms have conducted layoffs, which suggests they believe they do not need to add headcount now or in the near term," Castonguay said in an email response. "I think there's a strong possibility that the softer support is because they believe they have already found solutions within their own firms."