Why fewer CPAs are into public practice
- Christian Fev Cendaña
- Aug 6
- 3 min read
AN accountancy graduate’s goal is to pass the Certified Public Accountant Licensure Exam (CPALE). But what comes after?
This ambition is often driven by the title’s prestige, rather than a clear understanding of one’s desired path.
In truth, it is only through the actual practice — sometimes through job-hopping — that a certified public accountant (CPA) discerns the specialization that resonates most.
Under Republic Act (RA) 9298, the practice of accountancy spans four recognized sectors: public practice; commerce and industry; government; and the academe.
Yet despite growing demand for both CPA and non-CPA professionals, the number of practitioners in public practice continues to shrink. This trend raises a crucial question: Why does public practice seem less attractive, and what is lost as it fades?
What makes public practice essential? The answer is embedded in the very designation: certified public accountant. “Public” implies accountability to the greater society — covering all professions under the Professional Regulation Commission.
I recall a CPALE review material that emphasized attestation as the hallmark of a CPA. Attestation appears in various forms across all the practice sectors: from a government CPA upholding public trust through exercise of integrity in its dealings with the general public (e.g., Bureau of Internal Revenue officers enforcing faithful tax compliance, or Commission on Audit officers courageously disclosing regulatory lapses), to a CPA enhancing various stakeholders’ confidence through objectivity in financial reporting (e.g., a corporate finance officer attesting to the fair presentation of an unaudited financial statement), to an academic CPA concerning itself with the furtherance of future generations.
But among all the aforementioned sectors, I believe it is through public practice that one can arguably make the most direct and profound impact.
RA 9298 lists financial statement audits and client representation in tax cases among the traditional functions in public practice. Today, however, the scope has expanded significantly — including systems implementation, quasi-legal services, and, most recently, under the sustainability realm: extended producer responsibility (EPR) audits.
As this scope broadens, the consequences of declining participation become more serious, as key public interest tasks risk being sidelined for lack of capable practitioners.
But why are fewer CPAs entering the public practice?
Foreign BPOs not to blame
Contrary to common opinion, the foreign business process outsourcing (BPO) sector — now further amplified by the rise of freelancing — is not to blame for the decline in public practitioners.
BPOs, in reality, do not kill public practice but rather elevate it.
We know the usual reasons professionals opt for foreign BPOs doing business in the Philippines, or overseas work: better pay, more structured systems, and exposure to global standards.
Rather than denying this reality, local CPA firms should evolve, especially now that learning opportunities are no longer unique to audit firms, and since many foreign BPOs now offer strong training and career development even to entry-level professionals.
The goal, then, is not to compete by lamenting, but by adapting, and local firms should aim to meet industry compensation benchmarks.
Once salary ceases to be the defining difference, choosing between local public practice and foreign BPOs becomes a matter of personal and professional calling — not survival.
In fact, local CPA firms hold a unique position. They can serve as gateways for foreign businesses entering the Philippine market, opening up cross-border exposure while staying rooted in public practice, blending local service with global experience.
It is also only through public practice that a CPA can have the opportunity to immerse concurrently in the other sectors by engaging with a private or government clientele, and being actively involved in the firm’s knowledge-sharing sessions that mirror the experience in the academe.
The old dichotomy — foreign BPOs or local public practice — no longer reflects the present landscape. The traditional trajectory of gaining experience from the “Big 4,” or other audit firms, then transitioning to commerce and industry, and finally to a different career or work abroad, is no longer the career picture being painted now.
The professional Filipino workforce has been gaining ground in the global arena, with processes, tools, and work ethics now easily accessible more than ever, regardless of educational background or previous work experience.
Economic incentives are clearer elsewhere, and even non-CPAs can now justify bypassing licensure.
But instead of viewing this as a threat, we can view it as an opportunity: to involve non-CPAs meaningfully as well in public practice. It is time to reimagine public practice as a distinct discipline with its own value, not just as a stepping stone or training ground, but a place a Filipino CPA can finally settle with.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The author is a managing partner of Caparros, Cendaña, and Co. (Pasig City), and a founding member of Acpapp Rizal.
Comments