Category: Uncategorized

Can You and Should You “Plead the Fifth” In Professional License Proceedings?

Posted on by Louis Fine

As you know from years of watching TV courtroom dramas or the travails of real-life politicians, people under criminal investigation or who are facing charges often “plead the Fifth” -that is, refuse to provide statements or testimony – because they fear that what they say can and will be used against them in those proceedings.

Similarly, many physicians or other professionals licensed by the Illinois Department of Professional Regulation (IDFPR) can find themselves under investigation or facing disciplinary action by the Department for acts which could also be the basis for criminal prosecution. For example, a doctor who improperly prescribes medication could face the loss or suspension of his or her license and also be charged with a crime for such conduct.

In such situations, can or should the respondent in an IDFPR proceeding exercise their rights under the Fifth Amendment when their answers could result in criminal liability?

Fifth Amendment Applies in Disciplinary Proceedings

The Fifth Amendment provides that “No person shall be… compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself…” This privilege has also been incorporated in the Illinois Constitution. (See Ill. Const. 1970, art. I, § 10.) The privilege essentially means that no person, without proper immunity, can be required to implicate himself in a crime.

Although by its literal terms applicable only in criminal proceedings, the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination has long been held to be properly asserted by parties in civil proceedings.

The logic behind applying the privilege in civil cases also applies to administrative actions such as IDFPR investigations and disciplinary proceedings, and can be asserted not only at a hearing, but during the investigation and discovery stage as well.  As the U.S. Supreme Court has stated:

“A witness’ privilege against self-incrimination `not only protects the individual against being involuntarily called as a witness against himself in a criminal prosecution but also privileges him not to answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding, civil or criminal, formal or informal, where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings.'”

As such, you can “plead the Fifth” before the IDFPR. The question of whether you should exercise your right against self-incrimination is a more complicated question.

A Tough Decision

Anybody faced with this choice faces a variation of the same dilemma. As the Supreme Court put it: a party must weigh “the advantage of the privilege against self-incrimination against the advantage of putting forward his version of the facts[.]” Accordingly, a “party who asserts the privilege against self-incrimination must bear the consequence of lack of evidence.” 

What makes the choice even trickier is that, unlike in criminal proceedings, IDFPR hearing officers can draw an adverse inference from the professional’s refusal to testify and hold it against the professional so long as there is other sufficient evidence to support their findings.

The gravity and implications of exercising your Fifth Amendment rights in an IDFPR proceeding require careful thought and a consideration of all of the possible consequences. It is a decision that will be based on the specific circumstances of your disciplinary matter as well as the possible criminal repercussions of the acts under investigation. It is a decision that should only be made in consultation with your lawyer.

Louis Fine: Chicago Professional License Defense Attorney

The moment you are contacted by IDFPR or learn that you are under investigation is the moment that you should contact me. I will immediately begin communicating with IDFPR prosecutors and work with you to develop the strategy best suited to achieving the goal of an efficient, cost-effective outcome that avoids any adverse action. Together, we will get you back to you clients and your career.

Please give me a call at (312) 236-2433 or fill out my online form to arrange for your free initial consultation. I look forward to meeting with you.

New CPA Licensure Model Looks to “Future-Proof” the Profession

Posted on by Louis Fine

The Internal Revenue Code contains three times as many pages as it did in 1980. There are four times more accounting standards and five times more auditing standards than there were the year Ronald Reagan was elected president, according to the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). During that same 40-year span, technology has fundamentally changed not only the accounting profession but every business and industry that it serves. Nevertheless, CPA licensure standards and requirements have barely changed since the time when fax machines were the epitome of cutting-edge technology.

That appears poised to change. Working with the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy (NASBA), the AICPA has proposed a dramatic reconceiving of what new members of the profession need to know, understand, and demonstrate competence in.

Part of the groups’ CPA Evolution initiative, the proposed standards come after they received over 2,000 comments throughout the latter half of 2019 in response to their release of five guiding principles to inform the creation of a new licensure model last summer. Those comments overwhelmingly supported a rethinking of CPA licensure, including the need for a regime that put a larger emphasis on technology skills and knowledge and required new CPAs to demonstrate strong core competencies in the basics of the profession.

Core + Disciplines

The proposed standards are based on a “core + disciplines” licensure model. The core consists of deep and strong training and testing in accounting, auditing, tax, and technology that all candidates would be required to complete. Each CPA candidate would then select a specific discipline in which they demonstrate even deeper skills and knowledge. Those disciplines include:

  • Tax compliance and planning
  • Business reporting and analysis
  • Information systems and controls

Regardless of which discipline a candidate chooses, the new model will result in full CPA licensure, with the same rights and privileges as any other CPA.

The NASBA and the AICPA believe that the new licensure standards will “future-proof” CPAs as the profession and the technology that it utilizes continue to evolve. The groups expect to finalize the new model this summer, followed by a sustained multi-year effort to implement the new licensure standard across the country. If the proposed core + disciplines model is ultimately adopted, it likely will result in changes to the Uniform Accountancy Act and Model Rules, implementation of new professional education requirements, and the creation of a new Uniform CPA Examination.

We will keep abreast of the progress of this initiative and provide updates as events warrant.

Louis Fine: Chicago CPA License Defense Attorney

As a former Chief Prosecuting Attorney and administrative law judge for IDFPR, I have seen the serious consequences that an adverse enforcement decision can have on accountants and other professionals who suddenly find their future in disarray. I understand how and why the Department decides to pursue investigations, how it handles negotiations, and how to approach formal proceedings in a way that gives my clients the best possible chance of a positive and expeditious outcome.

Please give me a call at (312) 236-2433 or fill out my online form to arrange for your free initial consultation. Together, we will get you back to your clients and your career.

Silence Isn’t Golden: Can a Failure to Report a Colleague’s Sexual Misconduct Cost You Your Professional License?

Posted on by Louis Fine

From Hollywood to Washington, D.C., from major corporations to small businesses, from universities to the military, decades of sexual harassment and misconduct are being uncovered and those responsible are finally being called to account. But the harsh light of justice isn’t just being shone on the perpetrators of these acts. The Harvey Weinstein and Larry Nasser cases are prime examples of how others who may have been aware of misconduct turned away or failed to take action which could have prevented further abuses and spared other victims.

The failure to report a colleague’s misconduct – sexual or otherwise – is not just a moral failure, it can be a breach of professional ethics as well.

Ethical Obligation to Report Misconduct

The duty to report misconduct within one’s profession is often the only way such transgressions can get the attention of professional licensing boards such as the Illinois Department of Professional Regulation (IDFPR) as well as law enforcement. As the Federation of State Medical Boards put it: “The duty to report is a fundamental way in which physicians and others can fulfill duties of beneficence by removing potentially harmful conditions.”

Similarly, the Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs of the American Medical Association admonishes that, “A physician should expose, without fear or favor, incompetent or corrupt, dishonest or unethical conduct on the part of members of the profession.”

However, while the Illinois Medical Practice Act allows for physician reporting of a colleague’s unethical behavior, it neither requires it nor makes a failure to report a basis for disciplinary action.  It provides that licensed physicians “may report to the Disciplinary Board any information the physician… may have that appears to show that a physician is or may be in violation of any of the Act’s provisions.”

But just because reporting sexual misconduct is not mandated under the Act doesn’t mean that failing to report physician sexual misconduct isn’t an ethical violation. “The obligation to report incompetent or unethical conduct that may put patients at risk is recognized in… the ethical standards of the profession” according to the AMA.

AMA Reporting Guidelines

As such, the AMA has set forth guidelines for how physicians should respond to and report information about a fellow doctor’s patient misconduct. Physicians who become aware of or strongly suspect that conduct threatens patient welfare or otherwise appears to violate ethical or legal standards should:

  • Report the conduct to appropriate clinical authorities in the first instance so that the possible impact on patient welfare can be assessed and remedial action taken.
  • Report directly to the state licensing board when the conduct in question poses an immediate threat to the health and safety of patients or violates state licensing provisions.
  • Report to a higher authority if the conduct continues unchanged despite initial reporting.
  • Protect the privacy of any patients who may be involved to the greatest extent possible, consistent with due process.
  • Report the suspected violation to appropriate authorities.

Regardless of the language contained or not contained in licensing statutes, professionals of all stripes should seize the moment and no longer remain silent when they become aware of harassment or misconduct. While the damage done to victims of sexual misconduct is exponentially greater, the damage to your professional reputation and career could be catastrophic if it is discovered that you were tacitly complicit in allowing such misconduct to continue.

Louis Fine: Chicago Professional License Defense Attorney

As a former Chief Prosecuting Attorney and administrative law judge for IDFPR, I have seen the serious consequences that an adverse enforcement decision can have on professionals who suddenly find their future in disarray. I understand how and why the Department decides to pursue investigations, how it handles negotiations, and how to approach formal proceedings in a way that gives my clients the best possible chance of a positive and expeditious outcome.

Please give me a call at (312) 236-2433 or fill out my online form to arrange for your free initial consultation. Together, we will get you back to your clients and your career.