Section 5076.

(a) In order to renew its registration in an active status or convert to an active status, a firm, as defined in Section 5035.1, shall have a peer review report of its accounting and auditing practice accepted by a board-recognized peer review program no less frequently than every three years.

(b) For purposes of this article, the following definitions apply:

(1) "Peer review" means a study, appraisal, or review conducted in accordance with professional standards of the professional work of a firm, and may include an evaluation of other factors in accordance with the requirements specified by the board in regulations. The peer review report shall be issued by an individual who has a valid and current license, certificate, or permit to practice public accountancy from this state or another state and is unaffiliated with the firm being reviewed.

(2) "Accounting and auditing practice" includes any services that were performed in the prior three years using professional standards defined by the board in regulations.

(c) The board shall adopt regulations as necessary to implement, interpret, and make specific the peer review requirements in this section, including, but not limited to, regulations specifying the requirements for board recognition of a peer review program, standards for administering a peer review, extensions of time for fulfilling the peer review requirement, exclusions from the peer review program, and document submission.

(d) Nothing in this section shall prohibit the board from initiating an investigation and imposing discipline against a firm or licensee, either as the result of a complaint that alleges violations of statutes, rules, or regulations, or from information contained in a peer review report received by the board.

(e) A firm issued a substandard peer review report, as defined by the board in regulation, shall submit a copy of that report to the board. The board shall establish in regulation the time period that a firm must submit the report to the board. This period shall not exceed 60 days from the time the report is accepted by a board-recognized peer review program provider to the date the report is submitted to the board.

(f) (1) A board-recognized peer review program provider shall file a copy with the board of all substandard peer review reports issued to California-licensed firms. The board shall establish in regulation the time period that a board-recognized peer review program provider shall file the report with the board. This period shall not exceed 60 days from the time the report is accepted by a board-recognized peer review program provider to the date the report is filed with the board. These reports may be filed with the board electronically.

(2) Nothing in this subdivision shall require a board-recognized peer review program provider, when administering peer reviews in another state, to violate the laws of that state.

(g) The board shall, by January 1, 2010, define a substandard peer review report in regulation.

(h) Any requirements imposed by a board-recognized peer review program on a firm in conjunction with the completion of a peer review shall be separate from, and in addition to, any action by the board pursuant to this section.

(i) Any report of a substandard peer review submitted to the board in conjunction with this section shall be collected for investigatory purposes.

(j) Nothing in this section affects the discovery or admissibility of evidence in a civil or criminal action.

(k) Nothing in this section requires any firm to become a member of any professional organization.

(l) A peer reviewer shall not disclose information concerning licensees or their clients obtained during a peer review, unless specifically authorized pursuant to this section, Section 5076.1, or regulations prescribed by the board.

(m) (1) By January 1, 2015, the board shall provide the Legislature and Governor with a report regarding the peer review requirements of this section that includes, without limitation:

(A) The number of peer review reports completed to date and the number of reports which were submitted to the board as required in subdivision (e).

(B) The number of enforcement actions that were initiated as a result of an investigation conducted pursuant to subdivision (i).

(C) The number of firms that were recommended to take corrective actions to improve their practice through the mandatory peer review process, and the number of firms that took corrective actions to improve their practice following recommendations resulting from the mandatory peer review process.

(D) The extent to which mandatory peer review of accounting firms enhances consumer protection.

(E) The cost impact on firms undergoing mandatory peer review and the cost impact of mandatory peer review on the firm's clients.

(F) A recommendation as to whether the mandatory peer review program should continue.

(G) The extent to which mandatory peer review of small firms or sole practitioners that prepare nondisclosure compiled financial statements on an other comprehensive basis of accounting enhances consumer protection.

(H) The impact of peer review required by this section on small firms and sole practitioners that prepare nondisclosure compiled financial statements on an other comprehensive basis of accounting.

(I) The impact of peer review required by this section on small businesses, nonprofit corporations, and other entities that utilize small firms or sole practitioners for the purposes of nondisclosure compiled financial statements prepared on an other comprehensive basis of accounting.

(J) A recommendation as to whether the preparation of nondisclosure compiled financial statements on an other comprehensive basis of accounting should continue to be a part of the mandatory peer review program.

(2) A report to the Legislature pursuant to this section shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code.

(Amended by Stats. 2012, Ch. 661, Sec. 5. Effective January 1, 2013.)