1) Major Current Legal Topics
Noel L. Allen, Esq.
2) Major Current Legal Topics
Noel L. Allen, NASBA Legal Counsel
Annual Meeting
October 2015
3) Major Current Legal Topics
Marijuana
Legalization &
Accountancy
Regulation
Use of Title &
Deceptive
Credentials
• The legal landscape
• The UAA
• State agency policies on
legalization
• Relevant court decisions
• Regulatory challenges
• Recent credential
litigation
N.C. Dental
Board v. FTC
• State executive and
legislative responses
• Case updates
• The future
4) Marijuana Legalization & Accountancy Regulation
Marijuana laws
State agency responses
Regulatory challenges
• Medical and/or recreational marijuana sale/use has been decriminalized or
legalized in over 20 states.
• At least 10 states require marijuana businesses to undergo annual audits.
• Federal law has not decriminalized or legalized marijuana.
• Board of accountancy policies on CPAs providing services to marijuana
businesses pursuant to state laws.
• Other state agencies’ responses to licensees using marijuana or providing
services to marijuana businesses pursuant to state laws.
• What is the effect on good moral character?
• Considerations in states where marijuana sale and use continues to be illegal.
• What if the federal enforcement policy changes?
5) Use of Title & Deceptive Credentials
Court decisions
• Ibanez v. Florida Dept. of Bus.
And Prof. Regulation, et al.
• Stuart v. American Express Tax &
Business Services, Inc.
• Volin v. Mass. Bd. of Public
Accountancy
• Moore v. Cal. State Bd. of
Accountants
• Carberry v. Cal. State Bd. of
Accountants
• Tx. State Bd. of Accountancy v.
American Express
• More recent decisions
The UAA
UAA §2: Prohibits the “use of titles
that have a capacity or tendency to
deceive the public as to the status
or competence of the persons ..”
UAA §14(h)(2) : Non-CPA cannot
use “any title or designation that
includes the words ‘accountant,’
‘auditor,’ or ‘accounting,’ in
connection with any other language
...that implies that such person or
firm has special competence as an
accountant or auditor.”
See also: UAA § § 14(c), 14(g),
14(h)(2)
Recent litigation
• AICPA v. IRS
• CPA Australia v. CAANZ
• N.C. Dental Board v. FTC:
“Nothing in this Order prohibits
the Board from” investigating,
suing, or bringing administrative
proceedings against
nonlicensees for violations.
• Other interesting pending
litigation
6) NC State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC: Key Outcomes
How do licensee-controlled state
boards qualify for state action
immunity?
What constitutes active
supervision?
What does the FTC Order permit
the Dental Board to still do?
• Act pursuant to a clearly articulated state law, and
• Demonstrate active state supervision.
• State supervisor must review the substance of the anticompetitive
decision, not merely the procedures.
• State supervisor must have the power to veto or modify decisions to
ensure they accord with state policy.
• Mere potential for state supervision is not an adequate substitute.
• State supervisor may not itself be an active market participant.
• Investigate unauthorized practice;
• Seek an injunction in court against an unlicensed party; and
• Pursue administrative remedies against a licensee.
7) Active Supervision - What is Not Required by the Court?
Justice Kennedy, writing for the 6-3 majority, stated:
“Active supervision need not entail day-to-day involvement in an agency’s
operations or micromanagement of its every decision. Rather the question
is whether the State’s review mechanisms provide ‘realistic assurance’ that
the nonsovereign’s actor’s anticompetitive conduct ‘promotes state policy,
rather than merely the party’s individual interests.”’
8) States Begin to Respond at All Levels
State boards taking a close look at
practices & procedures
Governors & Attorneys General
weigh in
State legislatures are beginning to
take notice
• Enforcement and rulemaking;
• Informal enforcement efforts; and
• Communications with non-licensees.
• Several states’ AGs have issued their interpretation or an official AG
opinion of how their state should respond.
• Some states have proposed the creation of a new body to oversee
certain proposed board actions.
• When 2016 sessions begin, some states will see bills directly relating to
the NC Dental Board case.
• Each state will have to chart its own path with an eye towards how the
case is being interpreted by the federal courts
9) Post-Dental Board Cases Against State Boards
Teladoc, Inc. v.
TX Medical Bd.
Axcess Medical v. MS State Bd.
of Medical Licensure
Coestervms.com, Inc. v. VA
Real Estate Appraiser Bd.
Express Lien, Inc. v.
Cleveland Metropolitan Bar
Association
LegalZoom.com, Inc. v.
NC State Bar
Rodgers v. LA State Bd. of
Nursing
Patel v. TX Dept. of
Licensing & Regulation
NC State Bd. of
Dental Examiners
v. FTC
Petri v. VA Bd. of Medicine
Robb v. CT Bd. of Veterinary
Medicine
Murphy-Dubay v. MI Dept. of
Licensing & Regulatory Affairs
10) Post-Dental Board Cases Against State Agencies
Who is being sued?
• Medical, Nursing, Vet, & Real Estate Appraisers Boards, Umbrellas;
• Board members in their individual and official capacities; and
• In at least one case, the national association was alleged to have
colluded with its member board.
What is the conduct at issue?
• Enforcement, rulemaking, and licensure denial.
• The most notable cases involve enforcement and rulemaking where the
restraint of trade involves non-licensees.
What do the plaintiffs seek?
• Declaratory judgments,
• Injunctive relief, and
• In some cases, monetary relief including treble damages