Suspension of license for 90 days stayed with three years' probation, via stipulation settlement.

Mr. Rabkin shall complete 24 hours of continuing education courses as specified by the Board or its designee.

Effective August 25, 2006

Also See:

Moss Adams LLP

Sanchez, Anthony

Accusation AC-2006-5 contains allegations that Mr.Rabkin is subject to discipline for unprofessional conduct including gross negligence, repeated negligent acts, failure to comply with professional standards and issuing a review report that did not comply with professional standards.

The charges are based on Mr. Rabkin's performance of a review of the financial statements for Lanico, Inc., as of and for the year ended December 31, 1998.

The Board's charges include allegations that Mr. Rabkin failed to properly perform the review engagement and failed to exercise due professional care.

Allegations also include Mr. Rabkin's failures to modify the accountant's report and to properly date the report in accordance with professional standards.

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

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective January 29, 2010

On March 26, 2009, Ms. Rachele was convicted by her plea of guilty to 107 felony counts of violating Penal Code Section 470(a), forgery. The circumstances that led to the conviction are, from 2001 to 2007, while Ms. Rachele was the controller of a company, she wrote checks to herself or to cash, totaling over $500,000 and deposited the checks into her bank account. The checks were recorded in the company's records as payments to vendors or to cost of goods sold.

Ms. Rachele also failed to self report the conviction to the CBA.

Business and Professions Code, Division 1.5, Chapter 3, § 490; Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5100 (a), 5063, 5100, 5100 (i) and (k).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via stipulated settlement.

Effective May 1, 1998

On July 18, 1995, Respondent plead guilty in United States District Court for the Eastern District of California to filing false claims against the United States in the matter of United States of America v. Bruce Raine. He was ordered to make restitution totaling $306,000, jointly and severally with other defendants, and sentenced to a five-year probation term.

Respondent agrees to refrain from applying for reinstatement for a period of at least five years from the effective date of the Board's decision, and to pay the Board for investigation and prosecution costs prior to filing any petition for reinstatement.

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

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective July 21, 2000

On June 10, 1999, in the Alameda County Superior Court, Respondent was convicted after entering a plea of guilty to embezzlement and the sale of unlicensed securities.

Respondent's convictions resulted from acts substantially related to the qualifications, functions and duties of a certified public accountant.

On September 16, 1999, Respondent was sentenced to serve four years and eight months in state prison and was remanded to the California state prison at San Quentin.

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

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective April 28, 2008

On February 27, 2007, Mr. Rassam entered a guilty plea to securities fraud in a criminal proceeding in the United States District Court.

While employed as the Vice President of Finance and Chief Accountant at Peregrine Systems, Inc., Mr. Rassam participated in a scheme to fraudulently manipulate Peregrine's publicly-filed financial reports in order to inflate and sustain Peregrine's share price. Mr. Rassam falsely characterized accounts receivable write-offs as unrelated acquisition costs. Mr. Rassam admitted that he did this in order to conceal the amount and extent of Peregrine's uncollectible receivables, and to mislead securities analysts and the investing public as to Peregrine's true financial condition.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5100 (c), (i), (j), and 5063(a)(1).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

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

Respondents shall be permanently restricted from performing audits until such time as Respondents successfully petition the CBA for the reinstatement of their ability to perform audits.

Respondents shall enroll with a Board-recognized Peer Review program by July 1, 2012 and have the Peer Review accepted within nine (9) months of the decision.

Respondents shall at all times maintain an active license status with the CBA.

Respondents shall reimburse the CBA in the amount of $14,853.63 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Other standard terms of probation.

Effective June 28, 2012

Also See:

Young, Raymond

Accusation No. AC-2012-2 contains the following allegations:
Respondents performed an audit which departed extremely from professional standards. Respondent' audit documentation was insufficient to enable a reviewer to understand the nature, timing, extent, and results of the procedures performed, evidence obtained and conclusions reached. The audit report that the Respondents issued was not in compliance with professional standards. The Respondents also failed to maintain a written audit documentation retention and destruction policy.

Respondent Young also used an unregistered firm name on his website.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5100 (c), 5100 (e), 5100 (g), 5062, 5097, 5060. California Code of Regulations, Title 16, §§ 58, 68.2, 68.5.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

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

Ms. Reed's license is suspended for 30 days.

Ms. Reed shall take and pass with a score of 90 percent or better, a CBA approved ethics examination.

Ms. Reed shall complete 24 hours of continuing professional education courses in addition to the 80 hours required for license renewal.

Ms. Reed is required to reimburse the CBA $5,000 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Standard conditions of probation.

Effective September 4, 2010

Ms. Reed admits the truth of each and every charge and allegation in Accusation No. AC-2009-11 as amended in the stipulated settlement.

The CBA's accusation contains the following allegations:

Ms. Reed failed to comply with citation number CT-2009-1 issued to her on July 21, 2008. The citation was issued for failure to respond to CBA inquiries including a subpoena sent to her during an investigation. Ms. Reed also practiced public accountancy while her license was in an expired status.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§5100 (g), 5050, Division 1, Chapter 1, §125.9. California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 95.4

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective October 25, 1997

On January 23, 1996, in U.S. District Court, Middle District of Louisiana, in United States of America vs. Charles E. Reichman, Respondent was convicted after plea agreement of one count of mail fraud and one count of filing false statements on an income tax return. Respondent was sentenced to 18 months in prison and ordered to pay restitution, a fine, and a court assessment.

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

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective August 30, 2007

Mr. Resnick practiced public accountancy without a valid permit to practice when he issued an audit report during a period in which his license to practice public accountancy was in an expired status.

Mr. Resnick failed to provide course completion forms as evidence that he completed the 80-hour renewal requirement for the June 30, 2004, renewal period.

Mr. Resnick failed to maintain audit documentation to support the statement in his audit opinion that the audit was performed in accordance with Generally Accepted Auditing Standards.

Mr. Resnick did not fulfill the 24-hours of accounting and auditing continuing professional education requirement for licensees who prepare financial statements.

Mr. Resnick failed to respond to a Board inquiry within 30 days.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5050, 5097, and 5100 (e) and (g). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, §§ 68.1, 68.2, 68.3, 87, 89, and 94.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via proposed decision.

Effective August 26, 1999

On August 13, 1998, Respondent was convicted of four felony counts of theft in the Superior Court for King County in the state of Washington. Respondent embezzled $30,279 from his client by issuing approximately 10 checks payable to himself, forging the signature of the client, and then depositing the checks into his own bank account. Respondent also failed to report his conviction to the Board of Accountancy within 30 days.

Business and Professions Code, Division 1.5, Chapter 3, § 490, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5063, and 5100 (a) and (f). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 99.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective June 24, 2005

The revocation of Ms. Richard's license was based on her obtaining money under false pretences, knowingly preparing and disseminating a materially misleading audit report, and willfully violating audit document requirements.

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

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

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

Mr. Richards' license is suspended for three years.

Mr. Richards shall at all times maintain an active license.

Mr. Richards is required to reimburse the Board $3,977 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Other standard terms of probation.

Effective June 17, 2007

Mr. Richards was sanctioned by the SEC, an action subjecting his CPA license to discipline.

Without admitting or denying the findings in the SEC Order, Mr. Richards consented to entry of a SEC order that denied him the privilege of appearing or practicing before the SEC as an accountant.

According to the SEC Order, Mr. Richards was involved in a fraudulent scheme to inflate his employer's revenues. The scheme occurred while Mr. Richards was employed as a Manager of Financial Planning with Homestore, Inc.

The scheme involved hiding from Homestore's auditors the true nature of the fraudulent revenue transactions.

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

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

License revoked.

Effective November 17, 1993

After accepting a tax engagement, Respondent failed to prepare the 1989 income tax returns for a client and also failed to return the client's tax records despite repeated demands made by the client and the Board. Respondent further failed to appear before the Administrative Committee after being requested to appear and moved from his address of record without notifying the Board within 30 days of said change of address.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100 (c) and (f). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, §§ 3, 54.1, 68, and 69.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Surrender CPA certificate.

Effective May 4, 1996

Respondent neither admits nor denies the allegations of Accusation No. AC-95-33; however, for purposes of endorsement of the provisions of the stipulation, the allegations shall be deemed true and uncontestable by the Respondent.

This accusation contains an allegation that Respondent served as the auditor for a company during a period when he had a direct financial interest in the client by owning 2,000 shares of its common stock. The accusation further alleged Respondent issued an unqualified audit report relative to financial statement that included material misstatements relative to the collectability of accounts receivable. Respondent was subsequently barred by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) from appearing or practicing before the SEC.

Business and Professions Code § 5100 (c), (g). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 65.

Revocation of CPA license, via decision after hearing.

Mr. Ritchie shall reimburse the CBA in the amount of $81,673 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Effective April 28, 2012

The Decision, (OAH) Case No. 2010040960, includes the following causes for discipline:

Between 1996 and 1999, KPMG marketed three tax products, called FLIP (Foreign Leveraged Investment Program), OPIS (Offshore Portfolio Investment Strategy) and BLIPS (Bond Linked Issue Premium Structure). These products were sold to high net worth individuals who needed to generate tax losses to offset capital gains. Mr. Ritchie was a partner in KPMG's tax department when FLIP was implemented and sold, and when OPIS was developed. The evidence establishes that Mr. Ritchie signed opinions in which he advised clients that a FLIP transaction was "more likely than not" to be upheld by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), when he knew that if all the facts were disclosed to the IRS, the transaction would not be upheld. Mr. Ritchie played a key role in bringing OPIS to market when he knew, if all the facts were disclosed to the IRS, the transactions would not be upheld. Mr. Ritchie took steps to conceal the true nature of FLIP and OPIS from the IRS.

Cause to discipline Mr. Ritchie exists for 1) fraud in the practice of public accountancy; 2) dishonesty in the practice of public accountancy; 3) failure to observe professional standards; 4) knowing preparation, publication, or dissemination of false, fraudulent or materially misleading information, and 5) obtaining valuable consideration by false pretenses.

Business and Professions Code, Division 1, Chapter 1, § 125 and, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100 (c), (g), (i), (j), and (k). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 58.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

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

Mr. Rivkin's license is suspended for three years.

Mr. Rivkin shall take and pass with a score of 90 percent or better an eight-hour Board-approved ethics course.

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

Mr. Rivkin shall comply with Court orders and cooperate with the Board in any investigation of other Board licensees regarding tax shelters.

Mr. Rivkin is required to reimburse the Board $15,000 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Other standard terms of probation.

Effective April 29, 2007

On March 27, 2006, Mr. Rivkin was convicted, by pleas of guilty in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York in the case of United States v. David Rivkin.

Beginning at least in or about 1999, Mr. Rivkin and other KPMG tax professionals and associates conspired to devise, market, and implement fraudulent tax shelters.

He prepared and caused to be prepared and filed and caused to be filed, with the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and other tax authorities, false and fraudulent individual income tax returns containing the fraudulent tax shelter losses. He also fraudulently concealed those shelters from the IRS and other taxing authorities.

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

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Via default decision - Revocation of CPA Certificate.

Effective November 4, 1996

Also See:

Dubin, Robert Perry

On November 11, 1994, Respondent Dubin was convicted, upon a jury verdict, of violating one count of 18 United States Code (U.S.C.) Section 371 (conspiracy), six counts of 18 U.S.C. Sections 152 and 2 (false statement and concealed assets in bankruptcy; aiding and abetting and causing an act to be done), and two counts of 26 U.S.C. Section 7206(1) (false statement on tax return).

The Director of Practice, of the Office of Director of Practice, of the Department of the Treasury, of the United States, brought a complaint against Respondent seeking to disbar him from engaging in practice before the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). On or about January 25, 1993, Respondent executed a Consent to Voluntary Suspension, which prevented him from practicing before the (IRS).

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

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Surrendered certificate, via stipulated settlement.

Effective August 29, 2003

For purposes of settlement, Mr. Roberts admits that at a hearing, it could be established that he issued reports with accompanying financial statements in which he dishonestly states that he conducted an audit for a nonprofit organization for the year ended December 31, 2000, in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and government auditing standards, as issued by the Comptroller of the United States.

Mr. Roberts further admits that at a hearing, it could be established he issued the above reports knowing that he had not in fact performed said audit.

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

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation stayed with five years’ probation, via stipulated settlement.

Mr. Robinson’s license is suspended for 30 days.

Mr. Robinson shall complete four hours of continuing education in ethics within 90 days of the effective date of the CBA’s decision.

Mr. Robinson shall reimburse the CBA in the amount of $2,500 for its investigation and prosecution costs within 120 days of the date of the CBA’s final decision.

Mr. Robinson shall successfully complete or shall have successfully completed a rehabilitation program for chemical dependence which the CBA or its designee approves and shall have reports submitted by the program.

Mr. Robinson shall completely abstain from the personal use of all psychotropic drugs, including alcohol, in any form except when the same are lawfully prescribed.

Mr. Robinson shall when requested submit to such tests and samples as the CBA or its designee may require for the detection of alcohol, narcotics, hypnotic, dangerous drugs or controlled substances. Mr. Robinson is responsible for all costs associated with this investigation and testing.

Mr. Robinson shall at all times maintain an active license status, including during any period of suspension.

Other standard terms of probation.

Effective October 27, 2012

Mr. Robinson admits the truth of each and every charge and allegation in Accusation No. AC-2012-23.

Mr. Robinson was convicted of a crime that is substantially related to his qualifications, functions and duties as an accountant. On June 22, 2011 Mr. Robinson was charged with transporting and possessing 57 grams of methamphetamine for sale. Mr. Robinson subsequently pleaded nolo contendere and was convicted of violating Health and Safety Code Section 11377- Possession of a Controlled Substance, a felony.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100 (a). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 99.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

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

Respondents shall reimburse the CBA in the amount of $12,000 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Other standard terms of probation.

Effective December 28, 2011

Also See:

Stump Davis Greenberg, Accountants Incorporated

Accusation No. AC-2009-37 alleges that Respondents were grossly negligent and committed repeated acts of negligence by failing to complete and file requisite financial and tax documents in a timely manner for tax years 2000 through 2006 for a client. Respondents failed to comply with professional standards by issuing financial statements to the same client for the month of July 2007 that did not include a compilation report and Respondents did not have an engagement letter with said client documenting the services to be performed.

The Accusation also alleged that Respondent Rodriguez failed to respond in a timely manner and with true and accurate information to CBA inquiries related to Respondent's work.

Respondents understand and agree that the charges and allegations, if proven at hearing, constitute cause for imposing discipline.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100 (c), (g) and 5062. California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, §§ 52(a) and (d) and 58.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate and CPA Corporation Permit, via stipulation settlement.

Mr. Zita may not petition for license reinstatement for at least three years from the effective date of the Stipulated Settlement and Disciplinary Order.

The Board shall require payment of its investigation and enforcement charges associated with this proceeding prior to accepting for its consideration a petition for reinstatement or application for licensure.

Effective November 3, 2007

Also See:

Zita, Roland

Mr. Zita agrees that the charges and allegations in the First Amended Accusation AC-2004-31, if proven at hearing, constitute cause for imposing discipline upon his CPA certificate and on his CPA Corporation permit.

The Board's accusation outlined the circumstances supporting the imposition of discipline related to Mr. Zita's tenure as his client's CPA.

From approximately mid-1993, Mr. Zita assumed sole responsibility as his client's CPA and continued to provide services to her until his dismissal in late 1998. Mr. Zita acted as his client's accountant, tax preparer, and business manager during their professional relationship.

Mr. Zita's sworn testimony or representations constitute the basis of the categorization of monies as fees and gifts, which amounted to $887,000 and $477,757.72, respectively, over the period 1993 to 1998. Total fees included a brokerage account transfer of $500,000 in 1995.

The Board's accusation charged that Mr. Zita had a confidential and fiduciary relationship with his client, occupied a position of trust and owed her a fiduciary relationship duty. Mr. Zita was charged with using his position and influence with his 90-year-old client to his financial advantage and to her detriment as general unprofessional conduct, breach of fiduciary duty, and conflict of interest.

Mr. Zita was charged with fiscal dishonesty and knowing preparation and dissemination of false, fraudulent financial information, by his failure to report on his personal or corporation income tax return the $500,000 that he claimed to be a professional fee earned in connection with his assistance to his client in the settlement of a lawsuit.

Mr. Zita also practiced under his corporation permit while the corporation permit was expired from July 1, 1998, to July 1, 2001.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5050 and 5100, 5100 (g), (i), (j), and (k). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, §§ 57 and 58.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective July 1, 1993

Reissue CPA Certificate (CPA 80183). Reinstatement of CPA Certificate with three years' probation including terms and conditions. Respondent is required to reimburse the CBA $1,200 for investigation and prosecution costs.

Reinstated December 4, 2000

On May 3, 1992, Board disciplinary action was imposed on Respondent's certificate. Said discipline included probation subject to specific terms and conditions of probation. Respondent failed to comply with various terms of probation.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, § 5100 (f). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 69.1.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

The application for licensure of Mr. Rooker is denied, via proposed decision.

Effective March 4, 2011

On June 30, 2008, in the Third District Court for Salt Lake County, State of Utah, in the matter entitled State of Utah v. David George Rooker, Case Number 081902884, Mr. Rooker was convicted on a plea of guilty of violating Utah Code Annotated section 76-6-404 (theft, second degree), a felony. When he entered the guilty plea, Mr. Rooker expressly admitted that during the period between June 1, 2000 and June 1, 2006, he was employed as a bookkeeper for the law firm of Rooker, Mohrman, Rawlings and Bailey. During that time, Mr. Rooker embezzled monies in excess of $400,000.00 from the firm. After the embezzlement was discovered, Mr. Rooker admitted his involvement in the embezzlement to his employers and entered into a restitution agreement with them.

Business and Professions Code, Division 1.5, Chapter 3, § 480; Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5080, 5100 (a), (i) and (k).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Probation and License Revoked. Respondent must reimburse the Board for investigative and prosecution costs.

Effective December 28, 1995

Reinstated July 7, 2010

Respondent violated the terms of his probation as follows: Practiced public accountancy during his suspension period; failed to notify the Board in writing that he left California to reside and/or practice outside of this state; failed to either reimburse the Board for investigation and prosecution costs or, alternatively to make installment payments as required; failed to complete the 80 hours of additional continuing education; failed to complete the ethics course and pass the Board's ethics examination.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5050, 5051, 5100, and 5100 (j). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 63.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

License revoked. Revocation stayed, with three years probation imposed.

Probation terms include suspension for two months; reimbursement to the Board for investigative costs; completion of an ethics exam; completion of 80 hours of CPE, in addition to the CPE required for license renewal; and other standard terms of probation.

Effective March 24, 1994

Respondent issued misleading advertisements relating to a tax avoidance scheme that violated income tax law, practiced public accounting with an expired CPA license, and was grossly negligent in his preparation of materially misleading financial statements and reports. Respondent further failed to provide evidence of continuing education courses after notice and request that he provide this documentation to the Board.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5100 (c), (h), (i), and 5050. California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 63 and 87 (a).

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Mr. Rosenthal's license is revoked, via Decision, after Non-Adoption of Proposed Decision.

Effective January 25, 2005

Mr. Rosenthal agreed to represent his clients at an IRS audit; however, he failed to do so. Mr. Rosenthal gave his clients repeated false assurance that he was taking care of all matters and that they need not worry.

Tax liens and a wage garnishment were levied against the clients.

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

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Surrender CPA Certificate, via stipulated settlement.

Effective June 25, 2009

Accusation No. AC-2009-17 contained allegations that Mr. Rosenthal while a tax partner at KPMG LLP participated in employing various means to conceal from the IRS and other taxing authorities fraudulent tax shelters. The accusation contained further allegations that Mr. Rosenthal's involvement or acquiescence resulted in:

• The failure of KPMG to register the tax shelters.
• The preparation of, or causing to be prepared, false or fraudulent documentation supporting the implementation of the tax shelters.
• The preparation and/or causing to be prepared or participating in the preparation and/or filing of income tax returns that contained the fraudulent tax shelter losses.

Mr. Rosenthal denies the allegations but for the purpose of resolving the charges agreed to the stipulated surrender of his CPA Certificate.

Business and Professions Code, Division 1, Chapter 1, §125, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5100, 5100 (c), (g), (i), and (j). California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, § 58.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective April 22, 2005

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued an order suspending Mr. Ross from appearing or practicing before the SEC.

The SEC complaint alleges that from April 1997 to April 2000, Mr. Ross was the chief financial officer of Styling Technology Corporation (Styling). Mr. Ross engaged in a number of accounting practices that were not in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) that materially inflated Styling's reported earnings.

During 1997 and 1998 Mr. Ross directed or approved the recording of revenue from transactions in which Styling did not ship any product to customers but merely shipped the product between warehouses it controlled. In addition, during 1999, Mr. Ross continued to direct or approve the recognition of revenue from sales that did not meet GAAP criteria, and Mr. Ross and others falsely attributed the write-off of $4.1 million of uncollectable accounts receivable to a strategic business realignment.

Mr. Ross did not report the SEC suspension to the California Board of Accountancy as required.

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

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective June 17, 2007

Reinstatement of CPA Certificate with three years' probation with terms and conditions including reimbursement of investigation and prosecution costs in the amount of $3,000.

Reinstated January 18, 2012

Also See:

John M. Roux and Company

John M. Roux & Company

Accusation No. AC-2007-22 included the following allegations:

Mr. Roux's license expired January 31, 2006. During the period that his license was expired, Mr. Roux practiced without a valid license until he renewed his license on August 26, 2006.

In August, 2006, Mr. Roux submitted false information on the continuing education reporting worksheet that accompanied his license renewal application. Mr. Roux claimed that he completed 70 hours of continuing education in December 2005 and January 2006 when he actually completed the hours in August 2006.

In addition, Mr. Roux claimed that he completed three hours of teaching credit in January 2006 but could not provide documents to support the hours claimed. Also, Mr. Roux could support only eight hours of the 24 hours claimed for Accounting and Auditing courses and six hours of the eight hours claimed for a non-technical course.

Business and Professions Code, Division 3, Chapter 1, §§ 5100, 478, 498, and 499. California Code of Regulations, Title 16, Division 1, §§ 87, 88, and 89.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

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

Probation terms include the following:

30 days' suspension;

Reimbursement of the Board's investigation and prosecution costs;

Completion of 40 hours of continuing education courses, in addition to the 80 hours required for license renewal;

Review of all audits and reviews by another California CPA.

Effective March 4, 2000

Respondent admits he exhibited gross negligence in the public accounting practice in connection with audits he performed for Ancona Group, Ltd. ("Ancona"), and its subsidiaries, for the years ended December 31, 1991, and December 31, 1992. The audited financial statements were filed with the National Association of Securities Dealers to demonstrate compliance with Securities and Exchange Commission Rule so that Ancona's common stock could be traded on the over-the-counter market.

The 1991 audited financial statements were not consolidated, and the audited financial statements for 1991 and 1992 omitted disclosures required by generally accepted accounting principles.

In addition, the work papers underlying both audits failed to document internal control weaknesses, consideration of audit risk and materiality, substantive testing, analytical procedures performed, and evaluation of subsequent events.

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

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective August 26, 2005

On June 23, 2004, a Petition to Revoke Probation was filed against Mr. Rub, as he has not compiled with the terms of probation. Mr. Rub did not submit written quarterly reports within 10 days of completion of the quarter.

Mr. Rub failed to make scheduled payments to the Board as ordered for its investigative and prosecution costs. The outstanding balance is $9,500.

Terms of probation.

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

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

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

Mr. Ruth is required to reimburse the Board $1,567.11 for its investigation and prosecution costs.

Other standard terms of probation.

Effective April 28, 2008

For purposes of settlement, Mr. Ruth admits he was suspended from practice before the Internal Revenue Service for a period of 18 months as a result of his failure to timely file his federal individual income tax returns for the tax years 2000 to 2004.

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

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision

Revocation of CPA Certificate, via default decision.

Effective February 25, 2007

Ms. Ruvalcaba pleaded guilty on or about March 21, 2005, to conspiracy to commit a crime, theft and grand theft. On or between June 1 and November 13, 2002, Ms. Ruvalcaba unlawfully took money from multiple individuals while doing business as Pacific Beach Portraits and Serafina Bridal. Ms. Ruvalcaba failed to report the conviction in writing within 30 days of the date of her knowledge of the conviction.

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

Related Documents:

Accusation and Decision