Surrender of CPA license, via stipulated settlement.

Mr. Klingensmith shall cease practicing as or under the accountancy firm of Ron Klingensmith & Associates, CPAs, Inc, and shall cause to be removed from the Internet its website “Ron Klingensmith & Associates, CPA” as of the effective date of CBA’s decision and order.

Mr. Klingensmith fully understands and agrees that as a condition precedent to the restoration of any license to him from the CBA, he shall submit proof to the CBA that he has responded to and produced documents and information within his possession, custody or control as previously requested by the CBA’s subpoenas and inquiry letters.

Mr. Klingensmith shall pay the CBA its costs of investigation and enforcement in the amount of $10,000 within 30 days after the effective date of the decision and order.

If Mr. Klingensmith ever files an application for licensure or a petition for reinstatement with the CBA, the CBA shall treat it as a petition for reinstatement. All of the charges and allegations contained in Accusation No. AC-2010-36 shall be deemed to be true, correct and admitted by Mr. Klingensmith when the CBA determines whether to grant or deny the petition.

Mr. Klingensmith shall pay the CBA its remaining costs of investigation and enforcement of this matter in the amount of $14,996.64 prior to the issuance of a new or reinstated license.

Effective October 27, 2012

Also See:

Klingensmith, Ronald D

Mr. Klingensmith admits the truth of each and every charge and allegation in Accusation No. AC-2010-36.

Mr. Klingensmith is subject to disciplinary action for breach of fiduciary responsibility in administering a charitable remainder trust. Mr. Klingensmith, as the sole trustee of the charitable remainder trust, failed to make two quarterly distributions in 2008, failed to prepare annual accountings, and failed to provide Schedule K-1’s to the beneficiaries for 2007 and 2008. Mr. Klingensmith failed to respond to the CBA’s multiple inquiries and subsequent subpoena regarding administration of the charitable remainder trust.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §: 5100 (i) and (g). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 52 (a) and (b).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via proposed decision.

Respondent is required to reimburse the Board $18,803 for investigative and prosecution costs.

Effective May 2, 2001

Also See:

Thomas Kalajian & Company

During the period of time from February 27, 1997, through February 10, 1998, Respondent wrote 45 checks on behalf of a client payable to himself, totaling $120,638. However, documents provided to the client only disclosed that Respondent received $26,333. The balance, which totaled $94,305, was received without the client's authorization, knowledge, or consent.

Furthermore, Respondent's CPA certificate was not valid between April 1, 1995, and June 13, 1995, and between April 1, 1997, and June 13, 1997. Respondent performed public accountancy and used the CPA designation during these periods of delinquent licensure.

Respondent also practiced public accountancy as "Thomas Kalajian, CPA, Inc." even though the corporate name was not licensed with this Board.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5050, 5060, 5100 (c), (h), (i), and (j).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation stayed with three years' probation, via stipulated settlement.

Mr. Kalinowski shall take and pass with a score of 90 percent or better a Board-approved ethics course within the first year of probation.

Mr. Kalinowski is required to reimburse the Board $3,820 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Other standard terms and conditions.

Effective August 30, 2007

Mr. Kalinowski admitted to have practiced public accountancy with an expired license between November 1, 2005, and April 27, 2006.

Mr.Kalinowski admitted to practicing as a principal accountant in an accounting firm between November 1, 2005, and April 27, 2006.

Mr. Kalinowski's renewal application was due on October 31, 2005, but he did not submit the application to the California Board of Accountancy until April 28, 2006.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5050 and 5100 (g).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Surrender of license, via stipulated settlement.

Ms. Kaplan shall pay the CBA $4,212.50 for its investigation and prosecution costs prior to the issuance of a new or reinstated license.

Effective March 3, 2013

Accusation No. AC-2012-3 contains the following allegations:

On or about March 22, 2011, a final judgment was entered against Ms. Kaplan by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) enjoining her from further SEC violations, ordering her to pay $31,050 in disgorgement of ill gotten gains and prejudgment interest of $16,445, and further provided that upon motion of the SEC, the court will determine whether or not a civil penalty is appropriate and the amount of any such penalty. Additionally, on or about April 8, 2011, in a case entitled "In the Matter of Nicole Rae Kaplan, CPA, Respondent," Securities and Exchange Commission Release No. 64271/Administrative Proceeding file No. 3-14331, the SEC permanently suspended Ms. Kaplan from appearing or practicing before the SEC as an accountant.

Ms. Kaplan admits the truth of each and every charge and allegation in Accusation No. AC-2012-3.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5100 (l) and (h).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via proposed decision.

Ms. Kardos shall return all requested accounting records to complainant or designated accountant.

Ms. Kardos is required to reimburse the Board $13,780.11 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Effective September 1, 2008

Ms. Kardos is subject to disciplinary action following disbarment from practice before the Internal Revenue Service by order of the IRS on or about October 2, 2006. The facts are that the United States Department of Treasury, Director of Professional Responsibility, filed a complaint on November 1, 2004, alleging that Ms. Kardos engaged in disreputable conduct. Ms. Kardos filed an answer. The matter was set for hearing in August 2006 but neither Ms. Kardos, nor a designated representative, appeared. Therefore, a Default Decision was entered in favor of the IRS.

Ms. Kardos is subject to disciplinary action for failing to report to the Board her disbarment from practice before the IRS and for failing to respond to the Board's request for a written explanation of the facts and circumstances that led to the disbarment.

Ms. Kardos is subject to disciplinary action for her failure to respond to the Board's written requests regarding complaints filed against her by a client.

Ms. Kardos is subject to disciplinary action on the grounds of unprofessional conduct in that she demonstrated gross negligence in failing to exercise due diligence when processing and filing Forms W-2 and W-3 and failing to timely file state and federal income tax returns, as they relate to client F-W, Inc.

Ms. Kardos is subject to disciplinary action in that she failed to provide client records requested by or on behalf of F-W Inc.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5037(b), 5063(a)(3), and (e), 5100(c), (g), and (h). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, §§ 52 and 68.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

License revoked.

Effective September 6, 1995

On December 20, 1991, Respondent's certificate was revoked, however, revocation was stayed and Respondent was placed on three years probation including certain terms and conditions. During the period of September 1992 through December 1993, Respondent misappropriated funds entrusted to him by his client totaling more than $4,850 while his client was out of the country.

Respondent admitted his embezzlement to the police; however, criminal charges were not filed, and Respondent paid the client restitution.

Respondent was grossly negligent in his preparation of another client's 1988 tax return. When his client informed Respondent of additional tax due to Internal Revenue Service (IRS), he failed to take action as promised. As a result, the client received notice of a federal tax lien and their IRA fund was levied. In addition, Respondent did not return his client's tax records when the client refused to pay the tax preparation fee.

Business and Professions Code §§ 5100(c) (f) (h) and (j), California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, §§ 60, 68, and 99(a) and (d), and a violation of probation terms.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Surrender of license accepted. Reimbursement to the Board for investigative and legal costs.

Effective February 14, 1994

Having certified under penalty of perjury that all applicable continuing education requirements were met in the renewal of his active license in 1990, Respondent failed to maintain records confirming his attendance and/or failed to submit records upon repeated requests of the Board. Respondent further failed or refused to appear before the Administrative Committee pursuant to written notice.

Business and Professions Code § 5100 (f). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, §§ 69.1, 89 (c) and (d).

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective January 6, 1999

Reinstated January 18, 2006

Mr. Kelly prepared a review report that contained reporting deficiencies; used the plural designation "certified public accountants" while practicing as a sole practitioner; and failed to make payments to reimburse the Board for investigation and prosecution costs pursuant to Stipulation in Settlement AC-96-6.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5100 (f) and 5062. California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, §§ 58 and 66.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation stayed, three years' probation, via stipulated decision.

Probation terms include:

Respondent must complete 48 hours of continuing education in addition to the 80-hour requirement for the licensing period ending November 30, 1998. Respondent must also pay investigative and prosecution costs within 24 months, and undergo supervised practice for all audits, reviews, and compilations by an outside CPA selected by Respondent and subject to approval by the Board or its designee.

Other standard terms of probation.

Effective June 22, 1997

Respondent admits to the allegations contained in the Accusation; specifically, Respondent committed gross negligence in the performance of three homeowner's association audits, and was unable to produce continuing education documentation in support of 48 hours claimed in the licensing period ended November 30, 1992.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100(c) and (f). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, §§ 87 and 89.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

License revoked by default decision.

Effective September 6, 1995

Respondent was grossly negligent in the preparation of a client's 1988 tax return and breached his fiduciary responsibility to the client by failing to file an appeal or amended returns with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) as promised. He also failed to return tax records of a second client and was grossly negligent in failing to timely prepare his 1987 tax return.

Mr. Kelly failed to appear before the Administrative Committee at the Board's request.

In addition, Mr. Kelly failed to provide the Board Investigator evidence of having completed 80 hours of required continuing education.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5100(c), (h), (f), and 5037. California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, §§ 3, 60, and 68.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation stayed with three years' probation, via stipulated settlement.

Mr. Kenneally's license is suspended for 90 days.

Mr. Kenneally shall reimburse the CBA in the amount of $5,000 for its investigation and prosecution costs to be made within one year of the effective date of the decision or per an approved payment plan.

Effective December 26, 2012

First Amended Accusation No. AC-2011-19 contains the following allegations:

On August 17, 2010, a federal court entered a final judgment in the civil action filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) which ordered Mr. Kenneally to pay disgorgement of $126,676, prejudgment interest of $23,324, and a civil penalty in the amount of $32,500. The final judgment further permanently enjoined Mr. Kenneally from future violations of the Exchange Act. On or about September 10, 2010, the SEC issued an order suspending Mr. Kennally's right to appear or practice before the SEC as an accountant. After three years, Mr. Kenneally may request the SEC to consider reinstatement.

The circumstances surrounding the above referenced judgment and order are: Mr. Kenneally was New Century Financial Corporation's (New Century) controller (July 2005 to March 2007) and assistant controller (July 2003 to July 2005). The SEC's complaint alleged that Mr. Kenneally, among other things, in the second and third quarter of 2006, contrary to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, implemented changes to New Century's method for estimating its' loan repurchase obligation and failed to ensure that New Century's backlog of pending loan repurchase requests were properly accounted for, resulting in an understatement of New Century's repurchase reserve and a material overstatement of New Century's financial results.

Mr. Kenneally failed to report his discipline by the SEC to the CBA within 30 days of notice thereof.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5063(c), 5100(g), (h) and (l).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Kenny H. Lee CPA Group, Inc.'s license is revoked, via decision, following appeal and court judgment sustaining decision. Effective date of the decision was stayed pending the appeal.

Effective June 3, 2011

Also See:

Lee, Kwang-Ho

Kenny H. Lee CPA Group, Inc.'s registration with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) was revoked. The firm was grossly negligent in audit services it performed, lacked independence in one engagement, and failed to perform any audit procedures prior to issuing an audit report. The firm failed to report to the Board the initiation of the investigation by the PCAOB and the discipline imposed by the PCAOB.

In a separate matter, Kenny H. Lee CPA Group, Inc. was grossly negligent in tax preparation services they provided by preparing an estate tax return for a client whose mother's estate consisted of a house valued at $270,000, well below the $1,500,000 filing requirement.

On June 4, 2009, the California Board of Accountancy ("Board") adopted the attached "Decision After Non-Adoption of Proposed Decision," revoking Kenny H. Lee CPA Group, Inc.'s License effective July 4, 2009. On June 22, 2009, the Board corrected clerical errors in the decision and issued the attached "Order Correcting Clerical Error and Amended Order Nunc Pro Tunc After Non-Adoption of Proposed Decision."

Respondent subsequently filed a petition for a Writ of Mandate and Ex Parte Application for Stay of Administrative Hearing on or about June 25, 2009, in Los Angeles County Superior Court (Kwang-Ho Lee and Kenny H. Lee CPA Group., Inc. v. California Board of Accountancy, Case No. BS121343). On June 26, 2009, the Superior Court granted Respondent's request for a stay and ordered the Board to "stay the operation of its decision... pending the entry of judgment in the administrative mandamus proceeding..." However, the Superior Court also ordered Respondent's license restricted pending entry of judgment: Respondent was "prohibited from performing any estate tax work or independent audit work." On January 4, 2010, the Superior Court denied Respondent's petition and issued a judgment in favor of the Board.

Subsequently, Respondent filed a notice of appeal on December 30, 2009, and then an Application for a Writ of Supersedeas and request for stay on January 12, 2010 with the California Court of Appeal. (Kwang-Ho Lee and Kenny H. Lee CPA Group., Inc. v. California Board of Accountancy, Cal.Ct.App.2nd Dist., Case No. B221561.) On January 19, 2010, the Court of Appeal ordered that the Board's decision be "temporarily stayed" pending further order of the Court. However, the Court also ordered that Respondent's license was restricted and that the firm was prohibited from performing any estate tax work or independent audit work pending the outcome of the Court's decision. On February 10, 2010, the Court of Appeal vacated its January 19 stay order, and issued a new stay order with the same practice restrictions as the January 19 stay order. On May 4, 2011, the Court affirmed the Superior Court's judgment to uphold the Board's decision and vacated its stay order entered on February 10, 2010.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, Sections 5100(c), 5100(l), and 5063.

California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, Section 65.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Superior Court Order BS 121343

Appellate District Court Orders and Disposition

Revocation stayed, with three years' probation, via stipulated settlement.

Mr. Kim shall take and pass with a score of 90 percent or better an eight-hour Board-approved ethics course within 180 days from the effective date of the Board's decision.

Mr. Kim is required to reimburse the Board $3,300 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Other standard terms and conditions.

Effective June 23, 2006

For purposes of settlement, Mr. Kim admits that on or about December 28, 2001, he pleaded no contest to the crime of petty theft.

The circumstances surrounding the conviction are that on or about November 23, 2001, Mr. Kim did unlawfully steal, take, and carry away personal property belonging to Fry's Electronics. Mr. Kim did not report his conviction to the California Board of Accountancy.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5063, and 5100 (a), (g), and (k).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA license, via default decision.

Effective October 27, 2012

Accusation and Petition to Revoke Probation No. D1-2008-19 contains the following allegations:

Mr. Kim is subject to disciplinary action, on the grounds of unprofessional conduct, in that Mr. Kim failed to respond to inquiries made by the CBA or its appointed representatives within 30 days of notices mailed on or about October 8, 2009, February 8, 2010, April 15, 2010, and April 19, 2011.

Mr. Kim is subject to disciplinary action in that he failed to comply with certain terms of his probation. Mr. Kim failed to reimburse the CBA in the amount of $7,456.80 for its investigation and prosecution costs. Mr. Kim failed to submit written reports during his probation to the CBA and make personal appearances as directed by the CBA. Mr. Kim failed to complete continuing education courses and take and pass an approved ethics examination during his probation as required.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100 (g). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 52.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation stayed with three years' probation, via proposed decision.

Mr. Kim shall complete continuing education courses as specified by the Board.

Mr. Kim shall take and pass with a score of 90 percent or better a Board approved ethics course.

Mr. Kim is required to reimburse the Board $7,456.80 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Other standard terms and conditions.

Effective October 30, 2009

Beginning July 7, 2006 and continuing through September 2007, Mr. Kim willfully impeded an Applicant's certification process by failing to appear and respond to the Board's Qualifications Committee's inquiries. The inquiries were in regards to the Certificate of Attest Experience in which Mr. Kim certified the Applicant's practice experience for the period of July 1, 2003 through August 31, 2005. In conjunction with this time period, Mr. Kim willfully violated continuing education basic requirements as he could not provide satisfactory evidence of completing qualifying education for the period ending January 31, 2005. Mr. Kim also failed to register his firm name "Kim & Co."

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5060 and 5100(g). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 52, 69(b), 69(e), 69(f), 87(a), and (c).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation stayed with three years' probation, via stipulated settlement.

Mr. Kim's license is suspended for 180 days.

Mr. Kim shall be permanently prohibited from performing audit or review engagements.

Mr. Kim shall complete 80 hours of continuing education courses (CE). The CE shall be in addition to the CE requirement for license renewal.

Mr. Kim shall take and pass with a score of 90 percent or better a Board approved ethics course.

Mr. Kim is required to reimburse the Board $8,423.30 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Mr. Kim shall at all times maintain an active license status with the Board.

Other standard terms and conditions.

Effective October 30, 2009

Mr. Kim admits the truth of each and every charge and allegation in Accusation No. AC-2008-169.

Mr. Kim was grossly negligent for issuing a review report when he lacked independence and for preparing both a report and work papers that did not conform to professional standards.

Mr. Kim misrepresented material facts on his December 31, 2006, license renewal reporting that he had completed the 80-hour license renewal requirement when in fact he had only completed an 8-hour ethics course.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5062, 5100 (b), (c), and (g). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 58.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via stipulated settlement.

Effective February 24, 2006

For previous violations of the Accountancy Act and Board regulations, Mr. Kimball's permit to practice public accountancy was revoked; however, the revocation was stayed, and a term of three years of probation was imposed. The discipline imposed included a three-month period of suspension effective on April 1, 2004.

Accusation and Amended Petition to Revoke Probation, No. D1-2003-34, contain the following allegations of Mr. Kimball's additional unprofessional conduct.

From on or about January 1, 2004, through on or about March 31, 2004, Mr. Kimball engaged in the practice of public accountancy and continued to use the CPA designation during the time in which his license was expired. During this time, Mr. Kimball provided professional income tax preparation services to clients.

From on or about April 1, 2004, through June 30, 2004, Mr. Kimball continued to use the CPA designation in correspondence with third parties for the purpose of preparing tax returns and in billing his clients while his permit was under suspension.

Mr. Kimball failed to comply with the terms of his probation.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5050 and 5100 (g).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation stayed, with three years' probation, via stipulated settlement.

Mr. Kimball's license is suspended for three months.

Mr. Kimball shall not prepare income tax returns for clients during the period of suspension, unless he has a valid tax preparer registration with the California Tax Education Council.

Mr. Kimball shall maintain an active CPA license.

Mr. Kimball is required to reimburse the Board $6,947 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Mr. Kimball is required to notify his clients of suspension from practice as a certified public accountant.

Other standard terms and conditions.

Effective April 1, 2004

Mr. Kimball is subject to discipline on the grounds of unprofessional conduct in that he was suspended from practice before the IRS for a six-month period, July 1 through December 31, 1996, as a result of his failure to timely file his personal income tax returns for the years 1986 through 1993.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5050, 5100 (g) and (h), and Division 8, Chapter 14, § 22253 (a) (1). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, §§ 80 and 87.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via stipulated settlement.

Effective January 19, 1996

Respondent has admitted the charges. Specifically, on August 24, 1993, in the Contra Costa County Superior Court, Respondent pled guilty to a charge of grand theft under Section 487.1 of the Penal Code. The circumstances were that Respondent unlawfully took money and personal property from his client between 1986 and 1989 and from the estate of this client following her death in 1989 until 1991. The approximate loss to the clients exceeded $770,000.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100 (a).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Surrender of license accepted.

Effective January 11, 1995

Accusation No. AC-91-16 charged that during 1981 to 1986, Respondent solicited accounting clients to invest in or make loans to an entity in which he was an officer and sole shareholder. The Accusation further charged that Respondent failed to fully disclose to his clients the suspended status of the entity and misrepresented the nature and liquidity of the investments. The Accusation also alleged that Respondent accepted commissions and/or finder's fees for referring clients to invest in limited partnerships. In addition, if Respondent ever reapplies for a license to practice public accountancy, the surrender of license shall be deemed as admission to the above facts and grounds for denial of such license.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100 (f). California Code of Regulations Title 16, Division 1, §§ 56, 57, and 60.

Revocation stayed with three years' probation, via Stipulated Settlement.

Mr. Klein's license is suspended for six months.

Mr. Klein shall maintain an active license status.

Mr. Klein shall complete an ethics exam with a score of 90 percent or better.

Mr. Klein is required to reimburse the Board $6,073.57 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Other standard terms of probation.

Effective June 17, 2007

Mr. Klein is subject to discipline in that he failed to complete the minimum number of required hours of continuing education (CE) to renew his CPA license in October 2005.

Mr. Klein is further subject to discipline in that he knowingly made false statements on his October 2005 renewal application as to completion of the minimum required hours of CE for renewal to active status in October 2005.

During the Board's investigation, Mr. Klein admitted that he had not completed all of the CE courses reported for renewal. In addition, the certificates of CE completion provided during the investigation were for courses completed outside of the relevant renewal period.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5100 (b) and (g). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 87.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Surrender of CPA license, via stipulated settlement.

Mr. Klingensmith shall cease practicing as or under the accountancy firm of Ron Klingensmith & Associates, CPAs, Inc, and shall cause to be removed from the Internet its website “Ron Klingensmith & Associates, CPA” as of the effective date of CBA’s decision and order.

Mr. Klingensmith fully understands and agrees that as a condition precedent to the restoration of any license to him from the CBA, he shall submit proof to the CBA that he has responded to and produced documents and information within his possession, custody or control as previously requested by the CBA’s subpoenas and inquiry letters.

Mr. Klingensmith shall pay the CBA its costs of investigation and enforcement in the amount of $10,000 within 30 days after the effective date of the decision and order.

If Mr. Klingensmith ever files an application for licensure or a petition for reinstatement with the CBA, the CBA shall treat it as a petition for reinstatement. All of the charges and allegations contained in Accusation No. AC-2010-36 shall be deemed to be true, correct and admitted by Mr. Klingensmith when the CBA determines whether to grant or deny the petition.

Mr. Klingensmith shall pay the CBA its remaining costs of investigation and enforcement of this matter in the amount of $14,996.64 prior to the issuance of a new or reinstated license.

Effective October 27, 2012

Also See:

K2 Certified Public Accountants

Mr. Klingensmith admits the truth of each and every charge and allegation in Accusation No. AC-2010-36.

Mr. Klingensmith is subject to disciplinary action for breach of fiduciary responsibility in administering a charitable remainder trust. Mr. Klingensmith, as the sole trustee of the charitable remainder trust, failed to make two quarterly distributions in 2008, failed to prepare annual accountings, and failed to provide Schedule K-1’s to the beneficiaries for 2007 and 2008. Mr. Klingensmith failed to respond to the CBA’s multiple inquiries and subsequent subpoena regarding administration of the charitable remainder trust.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100 (i) and (g). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 52 (a) and (b).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation stayed with three years' probation, via stipulated settlement.

Respondent shall have a peer review completed by December 31, 2013 and submit it to the CBA within 45 days after acceptance by a Board-recognized peer review provider.

Respondent shall reimburse the CBA's investigative and prosecution costs including costs of probation monitoring not to exceed $50,000. The current investigative and prosecution costs of $29,163 shall be reimbursed within 30 days of the date the CBA's decision is final. Any costs owed, exclusive of costs of probation monitoring, shall be reduced by any payments made by co-Respondents to Accusation No. AC-2012-32, Kendall Merkley and Anthony J. Price.

Respondent shall provide two eight-hour training courses for its accountants officed in California in the area of audits conducted under PCAOB Standards and Rules by December 31, 2013. For those accountants who attend, the 16 hours of training shall not be counted towards the CBA's continuing education requirements for relicensing.

Respondent shall disseminate the Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order to all of its professional personnel officed in California, within 15 days of the effective date of this order.

Respondent shall comply with all requirements imposed by the SEC and shall report such compliance with the CBA.

Other standard terms of probation.

Effective March 3, 2013

Also See:

Merkley, Kendall Glade

Price, Anthony Joseph

Accusation No. AC-2012-32 contains the following allegations:

On or about September 13, 2010, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued an Order which censured Respondent KMJ/Corbin & Company, LLP (KMJ); suspended KMJ Partner Respondent Kendall Merkley from appearing or practicing before the SEC as an accountant for three years and required Merkley to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations and any future violations of certain federal securities laws; and suspended KMJ Partner Anthony J. Price from appearing or practicing before the SEC as an accountant for two years. Respondents consented to the entry of the SEC order against them without admitting or denying the findings therein.

The SEC Order stated in pertinent part: "While supervising and conducting KMJ's audits and reviews of Home Solutions of America's (HSOA) financial statements for 2004, 2005, 2006 and the periods ended March 31 and June 30, 2007, Merkley (except as to 2007) and Price failed to adhere to PCAOB Standards and Rules. In summary, Merkley and Price failed to: (i) obtain sufficient competent evidential matter regarding bonuses, revenues, and cost of revenues with respect to KMJ's 2004, 2005, and 2006 audit engagements; (ii) comply with PCAOB Auditing Standard No. 3, Audit Documentation; (iii) adequately plan the audit and properly supervise assistants in connection with the 2006 engagement; and (iv) conduct reviews of interim financial information in accordance with PCAOB Standards and Rules. Additionally, Merkley caused KMJ to issue inaccurate audit reports in that he should have known that KMJ's audit reports were false because they incorrectly represented that the audits were conducted in accordance with PCAOB standards and that HSOA's financial statements were prepared in conformity with GAAP."

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100(l).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation stayed with one year's probation, via stipulated settlement.

Respondent shall be prohibited from performing audits, reviews, compilations, and other attest engagements for a period of at least one year from the effective date of the Board decision.

Respondent may resume providing attest services after one year from the effective date of the Board decision when the following conditions are met:

- Respondent shall take and pass the audit section of the CPA Examination prior to his resumption of such professional services.

- Respondent shall notify the California Board of Accountancy of his intentions to resume performing attest engagements and arrange for review of his work by another CPA.

- Respondent is required to reimburse the Board $1,000 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Effective September 1, 2001

Respondent admits that he was grossly negligent in the three engagements set forth in the Accusation. Respondent performed two audits of nonprofit organizations that contained extreme departures from generally accepted auditing standards and government auditing standards.

Respondent performed a review engagement that contained extreme departures from professional standards.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5062, 5100 (c), (f). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 58. Terms of probation.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

License Revoked.

Effective May 27, 1995

Reinstated June 18, 1997

Effective November 11, 1993, Respondent was placed on probation by the Board for practicing public accountancy between February 1984 and September 1990 without a valid license.

Respondent violated the terms of his probation in that he failed to file the Probationer's Quarterly Reports of Compliance and submit his payments for reimbursement of costs in a timely manner.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100(f).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

License revoked. Revocation stayed with three years probation imposed.

Terms of probation include 30 days actual suspension, an ethics course, reimbursement to the Board for investigative costs, along with other standard terms of probation.

Effective November 17, 1993

For purposes of settlement, Respondent admits that he practiced public accountancy between February 1984 and September 1990 without a valid license.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5100 (f), 5050, and 5055.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Suspension of CPA Partnership for one year stayed, with three years' probation, via stipulated settlement.

Probation terms include:

Administrative sanction of $1,000,000.

Cost reimbursement to the Board for its costs of investigating and prosecuting this and related tax shelter cases.

Dissemination of the Stipulated Settlement within 30 days to all KPMG professional personnel located in California offices.

Cooperation with the Board in its ongoing investigation and prosecution of other Board licensees regarding KPMG tax shelters.

Other standard terms and conditions.

Effective January 18, 2008

On or about August 26, 2005, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York and KPMG entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) along with an accompanying Statement of Facts. KPMG consented to the filing of a one-count Information (which was dismissed upon KPMG's successful compliance with the DPA). This Information charged KPMG with participating in a conspiracy to defraud the United States and its agency the Internal Revenue Service to commit tax evasion, to make and subscribe false and fraudulent tax returns, and to aid and assist in the preparation and filing of said tax returns. Within the DPA and the associated Statement of Facts, KPMG accepted responsibility for violations of law. KPMG admitted, through the conduct of certain KPMG tax leaders, partners, and employees, KPMG had assisted high net worth United States citizens to evade United States individual income taxes on billions of dollars in capital gain and ordinary income by developing, promoting and implementing unregistered and fraudulent tax shelters.

Accusation No. AC-2006-28 incorporated the facts admitted by KPMG in the DPA and its associated Statement of Facts. Causes for discipline within the accusation include:

- Fraud in the practice of public accountancy.

- Gross negligence in the practice of public accountancy.

- Dishonesty in the practice of public accountancy.

- Knowing preparation of false, fraudulent or materially misleading information.

- Willful failure to observe professional standards, and

- Conspiracy with unlicensed persons to violate the Accountancy Act.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 125, 5100, 5100 (c), (g), and (j).

Related Documents:

Stipulated Settlement

Accusation

Exhibit A

Exhibit B

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective September 1, 2001

On May 2, 2001, a Petition to Revoke Probation was filed against the Respondent, as the Respondent had not complied with the terms of probation pursuant to a Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order.

Respondent did not submit written quarterly reports within 10 days of completion of the quarter. Respondent did not reimburse the Board $7,912 for its investigation and prosecution costs or, in the alternative, provide evidence of financial hardship to the Board and request consideration for community service.

Terms of probation.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation stayed with three years' probation, via stipulated settlement.

Respondent shall complete eight hours of ethics education.

Respondent is required to reimburse the Board $7,912 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Other standard terms and conditions.

Effective September 1, 2000

Respondent admits the truth of the allegations set forth in Accusation AC-2000-7. Respondent failed to prepare the 1996 income tax returns for a client prior to the tax deadlines.

Respondent retained the client's tax records despite demands from the client. Respondent returned the records only after being issued a subpoena by the Department of Consumer Affairs, Division of Investigation.

Respondent practiced public accountancy with an expired license, and he also used a fictitious name that had not been approved by the Board.

Respondent failed to notify the Board of Accountancy in writing of his change of address.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5037, 5050, 5060, 5100 (c), and (f). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, §§ 3, 52.1, 67, and 68.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via stipulated settlement.

Effective June 24, 2005

Mr. Krell admitted the truth of each charge and allegation in Accusation No. AC-2005-6.

Mr. Krell, as a custodian of a client's trust account, wrote checks to himself totaling approximately $998,900. A majority of the funds were taken by Mr. Krell for his own personal use.

In a separate incident, Mr. Krell had a different client write checks to Mr. Krell totaling $538,000 to be invested with Mr. Krell's firm. Mr. Krell only invested $138,000 of the $538,000 and embezzled $400,000 for his own personal use.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100 (c), (i), and (k).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

License revoked.

Respondent must reimburse the Board for investigation costs.

Effective May 27, 1995

During the period September 8, 1986, through August 26, 1992, the Respondent, in her position as assistant controller and later as controller, embezzled an amount approximating $35,000 from her employer. The Respondent agreed to reimburse her employer for all amounts embezzled together with legal fees, audit fees and interest. The Respondent has paid to her employer the reimbursement amount in full.

Business and Professions Code § 5100(f) and (j). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 60.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision