I'm wondering if anyone knows if I would be eligible to become an EA with a DUI conviction from 1993 that resulted in a fine in excess of $500. Question 9 on Form 23 asks if you have been convicted of a crime that resulted in a fine of $500 or more. Obviously I have to answer yes to this question. I can provide clear and convincing evidence of strong moral character with many personal references but I'm wondering if the IRS will even consider that because of my 1993 conviction. Answers strongly appreciated!
David Williams, the IRS head honcho for Paid Preparer Registration, told us you need to include a good explanation of why the conviction should be excused and you should be issued credentials. So come up with a good reason and it's very likely you'll be cleared.
He's not trying to kick someone with one DUI out of the registration program.
Just as a personal comment, it would really suck if someone was disqualified for something they did 20 years ago - regardless of what it was! (With the exception of tax fraud or the like.)
Thank you for your response. I can't really come up with a creative answer as to why this conviction occurred other than I was young and stupid but what I can do is present a long and consistent record of career and personal accomplishments following that unfortunate event. With a little more research on this... I see to become an EA or CPA with a misdemeanor conviction it's important to present character references and to this effect, I could literally walk into the IRS's office with an army of people behind me ready to present evidence of strong moral character along with documented evidence of being trustworthy managing money - i.e. I previously managed a hedge fund for a number of years until the stress drove me out of the business.
I had composed a longer response yesterday, that for reasons completely unknown to me, I am unable to post either using my normal method or Google Groups, after repeated attempts.
However, the gist of it was (with various references and cites to back it up) that the law seems to be concerned with "disreputable conduct" that involves creating bad tax returns or dishonesty, fraud, or breach of fiduciary duty. This seems to apply to CPA's also, at least in California. No mention is made of other types of crimes.
So I don't think other types of crimes are necessarily a barrier to becoming enrolled. I believe you can also appeal a denied application.
Personally, I wouldn't go beyond just a very short, one or two sentence statement of facts with regard to the question on Form 23.
I don't know how they handle EA's in this situation. But for lawyers, they want you to show you have been successfully rehabilitated. My suggestion is to demonstrate that you have been rehabilitated, by explaining the things you have done tthat show your honesty and commitment to society. If you have friends (especially those who are in positions that will indicate their honesty, like other EA's, priests, etc.) letters from them attesting to your rehabilitation and honesty would also help.
I strongly suspect they will find your application acceptable. Personally, I wouldn't even go overboard on your explanation of your answer on the form, I'd just keep it to a simple statement of facts.
You can appeal a denied application, AFAIK.
When you look at the "Sanctions" section of Circular 230, the focus is on actions that result in bad tax returns or that involve dishonesty, neither of which would apply to a DUI conviction, nor many other crimes. Any crime involving fraud, on the other hand, would probably be a significant obstacle to becoming enrolled.
"§ 10.51 Incompetence and disreputable conduct. (a) Incompetence and disreputable conduct. Incompetence and disreputable conduct for which a practitioner may be sanctioned under §10.50 includes, but is not limited to ? (1) Conviction of any criminal offense under the Federal tax laws. (2) Conviction of any criminal offense involving dishonesty or breach of trust. (3) Conviction of any felony under Federal or State law for which the conduct involved renders the practitioner unfit to practice before the Internal Revenue Service. (4) Giving false or misleading information, or participating in any way in the giving of false or misleading information to the Department of the Treasury or any officer or employee thereof[...]"
Further, Circ. 230 states that anyone disbarred or suspend by their state as a CPA or lawyer is automatically subject to Circ. 230 sanctions. By way of example, the California Board of Accountancy lists the following as examples of sanctionable behavior, again with an emphasis only on those things directly related to providing accounting services:
Negligence or incompetence; * Fraud, deceit and misrepresentation in the professional practice; * Fraud or deceit in obtaining a license; * Aiding and abetting unlicensed practice or any other violation of the CBA's laws and regulations; and * Conviction of a crime substantially related to the duties and functions of Certified Public Accountants.
A similar recent discussion over at TaxAlmanac (scroll to the 2010 posts) seems to be in line with my views:
formatting link
Lastly, I found the following footnote in an article but couldn't find the original source document (but would like to; shouldn't this be available through FOIA request?):
formatting link
"See Referrals to the Director of Practice, Coursebook (Training
9994-102) (IRS, Dec. 1992), p. 4-4. While a conviction for drug trafficking would constitute disreputable conduct under Section 10.51 (see pp. 4-8 and 4-16), if the conviction is for a crime less related to a governmental interest or to practice before the IRS (e.g., a sex crime), a finding of disreputable conduct is less clear. Nevertheless, referral to the Director is recommended, who will make an appropriate disposition; see p. 4-16."
You've gotten some really good answers from Mark, Rich, Art & Stu. I would like to add that primarily they are concerned about three things -
1 - are you a habitual criminal likely to get into financial trouble and be willing to commit financial crime to get out of it?
2 - how long ago did you commit the offense?
3 - was the offense financially oriented?
For example, if you killed someone 20-years ago in the "heat of passion" you would have a better chance of getting licensed as an EA than if you were convicted of robbing a liquor store 5 years ago. Conviction for a crime like embezzlement will pretty much keep you from ever working in a financial field.
I also agree that your best bet is to be short, sweet, clear and simple in your explanation. One paragraph should be sufficient, certainly don't go on for more than one page (including the addresses and headings). I once had a technical writing professor who said he could tell who knew what they were talking about and who was bulls*****g by how long an explanation they offered. The longer the dissertation, the less the writer tended to know - hoping that by using a shotgun technique they would cover something that the reader would find appealing.
Sorry about that. It was a glitch in the spam filter for the newsgroup.
For the record, if you encounter a problem where posting methods that used to work stop working suddenly, you're probably better off writing to the admin address for the group, snipped-for-privacy@asktax.org, which is in the header of every posting, rather than attempting to repost the same message eight times. :-)
Heh he, thanx Jonathan. I seem to have an average of three or four time-outs of this type per year, and I usually attribute it to my ISP or NNTP service. So that is why I didn't bother the group admin, but tried various tests on my own.
I'm curious, what in my message triggered the spam filter?
On the initial application I'm going to be short and sweet about the conviction and cite Circular 230 10.51. If I'm denied then I will>
appeal and turn it up full throttle. I believe I will be successful upon appeal (assuming I have to go this route) because I have many years of experience of honestly managing money for other people whether it be in an investment setting or helping someone who is mentally disabled and unable to manage her finances. In addition to this I have began laying the groundwork for a business that offers pro bono taxation representation so I think that will tip the scales in my favor, if needed. Thanks again to all!!
"I was convicted of a DUI in 1993. Since then I haven't been convicted of that or any other crime."
My point is to be careful how you word it. You don't want the explanation to sound like you've been arrested many times, but the DA simply couldn't get a conviction. When I was just out of college, I was asked during an interview if I had ever been convicted of a felony. I answered "No, I've never been convicted." The man interviewing me shot back with "But they're still trying?" I got the job. He recognized that I was just nervous.
I've worked for a couple of financial firms. The joke is that somebody convicted of stealing $50 from a client's account is ruled out as a potential employee, but if somebody is just out of jail for killing somebody then there isn't a problem.
replying to Gary Goodman, John stevens wrote: I am in a similiar situation. i am planning on taking the EA exams and understand that they will be doing a criminal background check. About 20 years ago, i did something really stupid (being young) and received a felony for not complying with an officer while being taken into custody. it was a suicide attempt while being under the influence. i received a 2 year probation. I have not had anything since..not even a parking ticket. So it was a long time ago, nothing involved with tax fraud or financial. Would I be ok? It would be a bummer if i spent so much time taking the 3 exams to get denied. Is there a way to be pre-checked by the IRS?
BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.