Soon to finish studying.
Just wondering if it's worth becoming a CPA or a CA or none of them? It looks like there are a number of years worth of experience to get to the CPA / CA level.
What's the wage difference between a non CPA / CA Accountant and a CPA / CA with the same years of experience?
I'm assuming its also not a statutory requirment to join one of hte professional bodies in order to open up your own practice?
Thanks for any advice
It depends on what you want to do. If you just want to do tax returns, then a you just need to become a registered tax agent – no need to join either.
Terryw | Structuring Lawyers Pty Ltd / Loan Structuring Pty Ltd
http://www.Structuring.com.au
Email MeLawyer, Mortgage Broker and Tax Advisor (Sydney based but advising Aust wide) http://www.Structuring.com.au
There are definitely benefits of further education, and both the CA and CPA programs offer the opportunity to sharpen your accounting skills.
I'm a CA, and even though I don't work in the industry as such any more, the ability to think through a financial issue in a logical and probelm solving manner is of great help.
Gaining a professional qualification is not a walk in the park though. It requires a lot of hard work, especially if you want to learn and benefit as opposed to simply trying to pass.
Perhaps I'm bias, but if you plan to work in a large accounting firm, or work in big business, then I think CA is the better qualification. Afterall, the ICAA claims to be #1 in numbers
Cheers,
Steve McKnight | PropertyInvesting.com Pty Ltd | CEO
https://www.propertyinvesting.comSuccess comes from doing things differently
SteveMcKnight wrote:There are definitely benefits of further education, and both the CA and CPA programs offer the opportunity to sharpen your accounting skills.
I'm a CA, and even though I don't work in the industry as such any more, the ability to think through a financial issue in a logical and probelm solving manner is of great help.
Gaining a professional qualification is not a walk in the park though. It requires a lot of hard work, especially if you want to learn and benefit as opposed to simply trying to pass.
Perhaps I'm bias, but if you plan to work in a large accounting firm, or work in big business, then I think CA is the better qualification. Afterall, the ICAA claims to be #1 in numbers
Cheers,
I have been brainwashed enough as Steve to recommend a CA qualification.
It really does open a lot of doors.Eddie
[email protected]CA, CPA or NIA would largely depend upon the direction you intend with your career and how you want to grow. As Steve pointed out, you won't necessarily stay in a role which utilises all of your knowledge (eg audit, management a/c, financial a/c etc) however you will use a great deal of the skills that you acquire along the way.
To answer your other question what is the pay difference between a CFO & a CEO – depends where you work.
Brizza, as you are still studying ask your lecturers which direction they would go given their years of experience. Post grad qualifications are almost an essential nowadays as is CPD.
Thanks for all your replies and input.
I'll finish the initial studies first and work out what I want to do from there.
On another note, besides following the usual path of getting hammered at a big 4 firm for 3 years and coming out with a CPA / CA. Do any graduates follow the path of getting experience as an Accountant to meet the ATO tax agent registration requirments and look to practice on their own?
This old chestnut of which is better never seems to go away in Australia – the society and the institute have voted on merging a number of times (CPA's have the large #'s of members and therefore the huge cashflow from subs whereas the CA's have no money but the perception of prestige). I think the last time it was the young ones in the intitute who voted it down. Don't know why and don't care.
Having said that, I have worked for both CPA and CA firms and can recommend it to you. Yes the larger firms will hammer you (it seems the larger the firm the harder they work you and when you work it out for less pay) but you do get to see a wider range of business's than you would in a smaller firm. Just depends on what you are keen on. If you have your degree, registration is 1 years guidance under a registered tax agent, then you can hang your shingle out. BTW when I started you only had to get a credit in Tax A & B and send off your $2 to the ATO to get registered.good luck
tony
The young ones vote it down because of the perception that the CA's have to work harder to get their designation, compared to the CPA's. That was certainly true in the past, but the CPA's have caught up. From people in the know, the CPA designation is easier to attain. CA Program takes about 2 1/2 years to finish.
Your salary will definitely be limited if you don't get either one. Most employers out of the profession don't differentiate between the two, but if you are in practice, especially bigger firms, would want you to do the CA Program.
It's not a requirement to join either body to be a tax agent, but it would definitely help in marketing and attracting clients.
It's hard work, but it's worth it in the end. Good luck!
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
