[Column] Protests by Successful CPA Candidates Call for a Complete Reassessment of Accounting Talent Supply

In 2001, the minimum number of certified public accountants (CPAs) to be selected suddenly increased from 500 to 1,000. After passing the second round of the CPA exam, one of my students came to me, unable to find a training institution, and said, “Professor, I was only happy for a day…” trailing off at the end. Watching my student become discouraged because they could not secure a training placement was heartbreaking. History does seem to repeat itself. These days, I am reminded again of that student from 24 years ago.

Every September, the results of the second round of the CPA exam are announced. Successful candidates apply for entry-level accountant positions at accounting firms, where they are assigned to a training institution. For these students, passing the CPA exam is likely the greatest achievement they have accomplished on their own in life. Joining an accounting firm for their training marks their first step into society as professionals.

However, since last year, the joy of passing has been fleeting, quickly replaced by the frustration of not being assigned to a training institution. This year, out of 1,200 successful candidates, 592 have not been assigned to a training institution. With such a large number of unassigned candidates, it is unreasonable to attribute their disappointment to a lack of individual competence.

After passing the second round of the CPA exam, candidates must complete two years of practical training at an accounting firm before they can fully function as certified professionals. The profession of a CPA, as indicated by the weight of the word “certified,” is distinct from other licensed professions. While other certifications typically require about six months of practical training, CPAs are required to undergo a minimum of two years (at an accounting firm) or three years (at a general company) of training.

Some argue that successful CPA candidates should not limit their training to accounting firms but should also enter various fields such as corporations, public institutions, and nonprofit organizations. On the surface, this seems reasonable. However, successful CPA candidates lack practical experience. Without undergoing the training period at an accounting firm, they would enter these organizations without any real-world accounting experience. While it is welcome for CPAs to move into these organizations after gaining practical experience at an accounting firm, it is not advisable for them to join immediately after passing the exam.

I am aware that there have been several protests recently by successful CPA candidates demanding the “normalization of selection numbers.” While there may be various perspectives on youth protests, the fact that half of this year’s 1,200 successful candidates are gathering early in the morning to protest on their way to work clearly demonstrates that the current supply and demand for personnel is abnormal.

It is regrettable that, after dedicating years of their youth to preparing for the CPA exam, successful candidates find that protesting is their only option to secure a training institution. I hope the current government, which emphasizes youth employment and has even made the enactment of the “Basic Accounting Act” a national agenda, recognizes that the “oversupply of CPAs” is a much more serious issue in practice.

For the sake of the CPA industry and to give hope to our future generation of young people, the number of CPA candidates selected should be reconsidered. We must ensure that no young person experiences the joy of passing the CPA exam for only a single day. This is also the earnest wish of an ordinary university professor who hopes that no student will fall into despair after passing the CPA exam.

Jeon Gyuan, Professor of Accounting at Soongsil University