Further providing for definitions, for general powers of the board, for examination and for requirements for issuance of certificate; repealing provisions relating to practice in this Commonwealth by individuals under substantial equivalency; further providing for practice outside this Commonwealth under substantial equivalency and for practice by firms and unlicensed entities under substantial equivalency; providing for practice in this Commonwealth by individuals under automatic mobility; and further providing for licenses to practice, for licensing of firms, for grounds for discipline, for reinstatement and for unlawful acts.
HB1410 revises Pennsylvania’s CPA Law to modernize licensure and practice rules for certified public accountants and accounting firms. The bill adds definitions for “automatic mobility” and “post-secondary” education, changes how CPA exam candidates may sit for and retain credit for exam sections, and updates the education and experience requirements for CPA certification. It allows applicants to take exam sections in any order, uses a rolling 30-month credit window, and permits the Board of Accountancy to extend that window in limited circumstances beyond the applicant’s control.
The bill also restructures interstate practice rules by repealing the existing “substantial equivalency” provisions and replacing them with an “automatic mobility” framework. Under that framework, out-of-state CPAs who are actively licensed and in good standing may practice in Pennsylvania without obtaining a separate Pennsylvania license, so long as they meet specified education, exam, and experience thresholds. The bill similarly updates rules for firms and unlicensed entities, continuing to allow practice through qualifying individuals while preserving the board’s disciplinary authority and notice-sharing with other state regulators. It also makes conforming changes to discipline, reinstatement, continuing education, and unlawful acts provisions to reflect the new mobility system.
In practical terms, HB1410 would affect the State Board of Accountancy, CPA candidates, licensed CPAs, accounting firms, and out-of-state practitioners seeking to work in Pennsylvania. It relaxes some entry and mobility requirements while retaining oversight tools, including jurisdiction over mobile practitioners, discipline for misconduct, and restrictions on unauthorized use of CPA-related titles and services. It also narrows some application requirements by limiting when photographs and character references may be required.
The overall sentiment reflected by the bill text is reform-oriented and pro-licensure portability, with the measure designed to streamline access to practice and align Pennsylvania with modern CPA mobility standards. Because no committee transcript or vote record was provided, there is no recorded public debate in the supplied materials, and no formal vote history to indicate support or opposition. The structure of the bill suggests an intent to reduce administrative barriers while preserving consumer protection and disciplinary oversight.
Notable points of contention, based on the bill’s changes, would likely center on the shift from substantial equivalency to automatic mobility, the reduced need for separate Pennsylvania licensure for out-of-state CPAs, and the revised education pathway that allows candidates to sit for the exam with 120 credits before completing 150 credits for certification. Another potential issue is the balance between easing workforce entry and maintaining standards through board discipline, continuing education rules, and experience verification requirements.
HB1410 would amend the Pennsylvania CPA Law by replacing substantial equivalency provisions with automatic mobility for qualified out-of-state CPAs, revising CPA exam and certification requirements, and updating related disciplinary and firm-licensing provisions. It would change the statutory framework governing who may practice public accounting in Pennsylvania, how exam credit is earned and retained, and how the State Board of Accountancy oversees and disciplines licensees and mobile practitioners.
The bill appears generally favorable toward professional mobility and licensure modernization, aiming to make it easier for qualified CPAs to practice across state lines and for candidates to enter the profession. No committee discussion or vote data was provided, so there is no recorded opposition or support in the supplied materials beyond the bill’s reform-oriented structure.
The main likely points of contention are the repeal of substantial equivalency in favor of automatic mobility, the extent to which Pennsylvania should defer to other states’ licenses, and whether the bill lowers barriers too much by allowing exam candidacy at 120 credits and by easing firm and individual practice requirements. Critics may focus on consumer protection, oversight, and maintaining uniform standards, while supporters are likely to emphasize workforce access, reciprocity, and administrative simplicity.