The deals done between the IFA and Australian IPA where they are now one professional body.
Initially I was quite positive about the merger as IFA was showing signs that it had got itself into a bit of a financial pickle and needed help (#2)).
However...
After the initial corrspondence I for one was not given a vote in what happened.
The promised expansion of details of the merger (takeover!(#1)) was never given to the membership. All that we got were opinions and selective information rather than hard facts that people were asking for (members should refer to the linkedin discussion groups)
No alternatives were ever given to the membership (i.e. why was a merger of the IFA and AIA never proposed?) and no concrete details of the position of UK membership was ever really elaborated upon.
The main thrust always seemed to be the cost saving of back office systems now being controlled from Australia.
I have been torn for some time between ACCA (for all of the issues over practicing within the remit of regulation 8) and much easier practicing rules but lack of commercial side recognition of the IFA.
I really believed that post IFAC recognition I was coming into a professional body at the stage of transformation from lower tier body to a serious contender and was proud of my membership of a professional body that I felt was on the rise.
However, The debarcle over poor information for decision making provided to those with a vote (and seemingly not allowing everyone who pays subscriptions to them to vote in this) has made up my mind for me and with immediate effect I for one will not now be renewing my IFA membership next month.
I'm actually thinking that this may all be a Christmas come early for the IAB, AIA and ICPA.
Comments?
Shaun.
#1 The IFA remains a UK limited company but with one member.... The Australian IPA.
#2 Always a bad sign when a professional body brings forwards collection of fee's which they did this year wanting 18 months practice certificate and MLR cover rather than 12 in order to "align" practice certificate and membership renewals.
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
The IFA still has the advantage of IFAC membership and I think the merger leaves its relative status re employed and self employed unchanged. If you are self employed in practice it remains a good qualification. If you are employed it is unlikely to be recognised. But then the same applies ICPA, AIA, IAB etc.
I wouldn't move across to the AIA as it doesn't have IFAC recognition and to my mind doesn't offer any advantage in recognition.
I don't think that you can compare IFA AIA ICPA to the CCAB and CIMA bodies in terms of status; but, as you have said on more than one occasion, it does provide a way of practising for ACCA qualified who can't meet reg 8.
Hal
-- Edited by Hal on Sunday 23rd of November 2014 03:32:47 PM
don't know if you follow the IFA group on Linkedin but the way that a council member talked to someone voicing their opinion over there (not me) is a real eye opener.
i.e. threatening litigation if members question the IFA's actions, pass comment on how the institute is being run, or ask to see the books.
There is a very good post in that thread from an ex council chair Beryl Shepard that is worth a read.
I really feel for her as you can read between the lines "What the heck are they doing to the professional body that I helped build". Not sure how to post a link to it without linking to my profile so I'll let you find it yourself.
The thread is "Congrats to David & the whole IFA team! Amalgamation with Australia's "Institute of Public Accountants"".
As with yourself I personally have no intent of moving to AIA but I feel that it would have been a better match for a UK based institution than the IPA.
And you are of course right, it's comparing chalk and cheese. But my figuring was that the IFA seemed to be becoming a home from home for chartered certifieds denied practice licences under regulation 8. The quality of the training that membership had gone through was raising the institute post IFAC recognition faster I'm sure than even they had hoped. (They really should send a thankyou note to the ACCA for training their members then making it almost impossible to stay with the ACCA).
Considering that it was my assumption that the IFA could have risen to be a real contender but now I'm not so sure and I'm not going to give my money via subscriptions to a body that won't exist in current form come January the 1st, talks to people the way that a council member spoke to a poster who was raising genuine concerns on Linkedin and will not allow all members vote on what's happening to their professional body (only AFA's and FFA's can vote).
Shaun.
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
It is an interesting discussion and a merger with an Australian accounting body is not what many may have predicted; but conversely I am not sure what a merger with AIA would have achieved.
IFA did well to get IFAC membership and seemed to be progressing in recognition terms. There must be something that the IPA sees as a benefit from the takeover / merger.
However I am not sure how much this is driven by necessity rather than an attempt to improve the institute.
Interesting times ahead for several Institutes all being questioned on various forums but with little constructive response. As you have already mentioned Shaun, the IFA "no camp" on LikedIn are struggling to be heard. Have you read the the AccountingWeb post "Why should I retain my membership?"Not a ringing endorsement for ACCA. And last but by no means least a post on the ICB website "Frustrated with ICB" which has attracted over 40,000 views without meaningful response. Although Kris has now contacted Garry Carter via LinkedIn and a response has been promised.
Without analysing any of these in any detail I am surprised that given the power and reach of social media these days that the various Institutes PR machines appear to have no interest in damage limitation even if unwilling to answer certain questions.
Regards
Gordon
-- Edited by GordonB on Monday 24th of November 2014 06:04:51 PM
It strikes me that most, if not all of the bookkeeping, accounting and finance bodies seem to be going through something of an upheaval at the moment - everywhere I look there is adverse press about one or another!
Could it be, that with the current migration policies that we have now become a sufficiently diverse culture that we are losing the 'stiff upper lip' that stopped us from complaining for so long?
While they may indeed be something to complain about when the professional bodies think they can ignore their membership and not encounter any repercussions, is this a new situation? Or have we just accepted it before as part of the price we pay for the job we do?
The world is shrinking and all the professional bodies need to move with the times or be left behind, to make their offering more truly global seems only sensible in the face of endless e-commerce. How much of what we are all seeing is an attempt (poorly thought out as it might be) to stay current?
I am a member of IFA and AAT and am inclined to retain both for next year.
In my view IFA has been making significant progress in recent years and I am not sure that I want to abandon it at this stage, although I do have concerns over the takeover/ merger.
What benefit do you think it would bring to you being a member of the IFA as well as AAT?
I like the idea that IFA gives me a "proper" title. Apparently, its not as expensive to be a member (though this may possibly change with the new merger) and I have enough quals and experience to "get in". I am told the practice assurance rules are less strict, but to be honest, I think the AAT keeping us on our toes isn't necessarily a bad thing. To be fair, I haven't had time to review things properly, so am possibly making sweeping statements here!
Wow, I just called to have a chat, and was told to fill out a form and pay £72, and they will decide what level I can go in at - and maybe invite me to be MIP..
£72 just to enquire... thanks for that!
And I need to create a CV.... wow, its been a while!
One thing that I think the IFA have definitely got wrong is charging people a non-refundable fee to be assessed for membership! It's like a shop charging you for walking through the door! You would think they would want to encourage people to join, not put them off!
I thought exactly the same. 72 quid is a lot of money just for an enquiry! I would probably be a member by now as I was on the verge of starting an application until I noticed this fee.
I could appreciate a small fee for someone's time looking things over, but this seems a bit steep! Then you have a ton of other fees to pay, so its not like they aren't going to make money if you have a free enquiry!
Lots of the bodies seem to charge a non refundable fee for enquiries -I know ICB are same -I am both ICB and AAT qualified and MIP with both -expensive but have reasons for keeping both -I looked at IFA but then thought how many do I need !
I have just checked my paperwork and the members still have to vote for or against it at the AGM on 16 December 2014. You can attend in person or send a proxy to vote by 14 December. The meeting starts at 12 noon. It will be interesting to find out if the vote goes against it!
One of the reasons the IFA are doing this is for several years now the expenditure has exceeded the income. (It was not like when I first joined). "They" feel that by being taken over by the Australian IPA it will enable them to reduce costs.
The AIA did actually try to take the IFA over once - it was soon after I first became a IFA member. The IFA had a very heathly balance sheet at that time.
have you seen the announcements in Australia. There is no question mark over the takeover / merger from their side.
The AIA really should try again as IFA finances wouldn't get in their way this time and I think that a vote by the members that the IFA allows to vote (#1) would be more likely to go AIA than IPA.
I think that David Andersen does make some very valid points in the thread over on Linkedin, plus I could really feel for Beryl in that you could hear in her post her frustration that this is happening to the professional body that she helped build.
I don't know about others but I've received unsolicited emails from other professional bodies offering transfer fee waivers.
When IPA actually take over I do wonder all things considered what they will actually be getting as I can see that there are three camps.
1) Those who believe in the takeover
2) Those who don't but are too lethargic to do anything about it (i.e. move to another professional body).
3) Those who will leave (which should (but probably won't) reduce the cost to the IPA).
The IFA I feel are banking on the bulk of membership falling into one of the first two categories and if swapping utility providers is anything to go on they could well be right in that the bulk of people who are not happy do not do anything about it.
Currently I think that the main three options to IFA are AIA, ICPA and AAT with the latter one being possibly the most problematic to move a practice certificate to.
As the old Chinese curse goes, We are living in interesting times indeed.
kind regards,
Shaun.
#1 only AFA's and FFA's are allowed to vote where many IFA members in practice are DipFA's. Students also get no say in what happens to their professional body.
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
Sure that you've read rather than simply disregarded the letters Hal.
Love the way that one body in particular (#1) emphasises :
- UK based administration
- Robust finances
- Transparency and readily accessible accounts
I think that the writers of that one have been reading members concerns from the linkedin thread!
As for it being a bit previous, regardless of how this goes at the vote I feel some IFA members have become somewhat disenfranchised and would not expect them to remain regardless of the way that the vote goes.
All of these love letters from other bodies wooing our allegiences simply makes it somewhat easier to jump from the ship that would have been abandoned by them anyway and as such I don't really consider the other bodies poaching but rather merely going into the life raft provision business.
Shaun.
#1 I won't say which one but if you've recieved the letter you will know.
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
Yes they have obviously been following the debate with interest.
Of course it is not just IFA members who are feeling disenfranchised - looking at another sector you only need to see the comments from solicitors re the Law Society and SRA to show that is not just Accountancy / Book-Keeping whether the discontent with regulatory / membership bodies is.
The deals done and I've now left the IFA (I had already sorted out my MLR through HMRC and removed all reference to the IFA from my stationary and website assuming from the preemptive announcements in Australia that there was no scope for any other result to this).
The announcement was posted at 15:00 today that the IFA had gained the yes vote for the IPA merger that they wanted.
I wish all remaining IFA members the very best of luck and truly hope that you get a professional body out of this that is worthy of you.
kindest regards,
Shaun.
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
Just to let you know it is me - I was against the takeover from the start and as you pointed out, my voice was not heard - or rather it was shut down. As the "no" campaign was not allowed to air it's views in the magazine, at branch meetings, by email or by post (all of which the IFA monopolised) it was a surefire concluded matter before the vote was even taken. So much so, that the Australians had told reporters it was a done deal 2 months before the vote!
As a result, I resigned from the IFA. I feel completely cheated and used by the management team there. Myself, and many others, have spent considerable time, energy and personal money in supporting and trying to raise the profile of the IFA which we now know was futile as David Woodgate had been planning the takeover for many years.
Also, I had brought up the point about the "£72 membership gamble" on a number of occassions and was told an element was to cover costs of enquiring with other bodies but I always maintained it was too high and was off-putting for potential members. As usual, comments were ignored.
I also stated on a number of occassions that the IFA needed a simple straight line, at a glance illustration that showed the potential member what level of entrance they could expect from their current position - again, ignored! Probably because they wouldn't get their £72 :)
Anyway, as you can see, I am now with the AIA and can now do charity accounts without having to defend the "but you're not on the list" statement :)
Myself, and a couple of other members, will be speaking with the AIA about re-opening a local AIA branch around the Winchester area in the near future if anyone local is interest in some CPD.
I notice that IFA are applying to be added to the Charities list this month. With regards to you re opening a local branch, it might be worth mentioning it on AccountingWEB as well. I tried to encourage an ACCA member to attend a Marwell meeting a few months back as he was commenting on the lack of any activity in the Hampshire area by ACCA.
I notice that all of the people that I know that left the IFA on merger (cought... takeover!... cough) have gone AIA.
I don't know how you're finding them but the other comments that I've been receiving have been extremely positive.
In all future comments on here I think that I'll be pushing them as a viable option, not least as the FRC do acknowledge their existance as an accountancy body.
(see here : https://www.frc.org.uk/Our-Work/Publications/FRC-Board/Key-Facts-and-Trends-in-the-Accountancy-Profession.pdf)
Ok, they might be on the edge of the top table but they are on it.
kindest regards,
Shaun.
__________________
Shaun
Responses are not meant as a substitute for professional advice. Answers are intended as outline only the advice of a qualified professional with access to all relevant information should be sought before acting on any response given.
