Question

In which of the following scenarios did a member act properly?

A. Ranny Tandor, fresh out of school and on her own, named her one‐person firm “PriceWaterhouseKoopers.”

B. Sally and Duncan were partners in a small firm that was auditing Flexmin Corporation. For personal reasons, Duncan had to move to another city and they dissolved their partnership, though they later completed the Flexmin audit. To save money, Sally and Duncan reported their results on the stationery they had had printed up when they were still partners.

C. Sandor, Salman & Dingle continued to use this firm name years after founding partner Jessica Dingle died in a car wreck.

D. Melba, Toast & Jam included in its advertisements “Members of the AICPA” because slightly more than half of its CPA/owners were, indeed, members of the AICPA.

Answer 1

The members acted properly in part "D" : Melba, Toast & Jam included in its advertisements "Members of the AICPA" because slightly more than half of its CPA/owners were, indeed, members of the AICPA.

This is because as per AICPA professional code of conduct, members or firms shall not seek to solicite work through misleading or false advertisements, but since majority of the members of firm are members of AICPA, hence this is not solicitation by false means and hence is a valid firm of advertisement.

On the other hand "A" is obviously not the correct answer. In case of "B" the partners cannot continue to audit Flexmin Corporation after dissolution of the partnership under false pretenses. In case of "C", partners are not allowed to use the name of the deceased founding partner.