Wm. Dennis Huber, at Capella University professor, wrote an article for the Journal of Forensic and Investigative Accounting in which he explores the possibility of forensic accounting being established as a stand-alone profession, separate for the public accounting distinction. The current status of forensic accounting is as a niche, as defined by Huber, “a specialized market” within public accounting. The premise of the argument lies primarily on the comparison between the development of public accounting as a profession and the current progress of forensic accounting as a “fledgling” profession.

The article makes claims regarding the “dramatic” expansion of degree programs in forensic accounting, but fails to elaborate on what constitutes “dramatic” as well as providing evidence regarding the expansion. I would have liked to have more information on the amounts of schools providing forensic accounting, especially since the issue is current, in order to research deeper into the differential education between programs.

The author initially appears to take an overall neutral stance regarding the defining of forensic accounting as a profession by defining. He elaborates sufficiently on the sociological theories behind what characteristics define a profession, and ultimately identifies the components he uses in his stance. The author goes on further to provide an appendix illustrating the comparisons of the core characteristics of profession theories and how forensic accounting fulfills those requirements. The chart provided in the appendix is adequate in providing an overview of the required traits in order to be defined as a profession within each sociological theory, but it

The an interesting aspect identified is that a CPA license is not necessarily required to be a forensic accountant, and furthermore, some forensic accounting certifications do not require CPA licensure. I found this intriguing because I had previously assumed a CPA license was required due to the complexity of forensic accounting needing GAAP expertise, especially auditing in litigation and investigations. I would be surprised to see a forensic accountant in larger corporations or working in litigation without a CPA licensure. The article clarifies the distinction between a licensure and certification, and in my mine this further solidified the importance of having a CPA license prior to certification in forensic accounting. An example, which provided the opposite response in me than I believe the author intended,  “distinguish[ed] forensic accounting from fraud accounting” by explaining that a fraud auditor is specialized in auditing and fulfills only that specialized role, while forensic accountants may engage in fraud auditing but goes further into other roles, i.e. legal, consultation, etc. At this point, the author’s veiled hostility towards the AICPA is becoming palpable. First, in accusing AICPA of contradicting its Code of Conduct by only providing Certified Financial Forensics (CFF) because, essentially, there is a profit to be gained instead of to provide a service to fulfill a need. Then, he goes on to discuss the restrictive membership policies of the AICPA, as well as their diminishing justifications for requiring a CPA for the CFF. The information presented continues to feel slanted for the entire article, with continued roundabout lighting of the AICPA in a negative light. Huber does not specifically identify any comparing certification corporation as a better selection, which, unfortunately, continues to paint the article in a biased light.

Huber, Wm. Dennis. “Is Forensic Accounting in the United States Becoming a Profession?” Journal of Forensic and Investigative Accounting 4.1                  (2012): 255-84. Print.