Usana’s CPA explanation doesn’t wash

Here’s why Usana’s explanation of the non-existent CPA licenses for two board members described in SEC filings as “Certified Public Accountants” does not wash:

1. The law in Utah is clear. They cannot refer to themselves as Certified Public Accountants without licenses, which is exactly what they did.

2. The listing of the officers as Certified Public Accountants was meant to infer credibility to these two men. The CPA designation is a credential neither possessed, yet Usana was trying to gain credibility by falsely listing that credential.

I’m sorry, but Usana’s pathetic excuse for the false information in the SEC filings is just that… pathetic.

Related posts:

1. I’m presenting at the NACVA 2006 National Conference
2. Problems at the AICPA?
3. State Officials Encouraging Illegal Immigrants to Skirt the Laws
4. Wall Street Journal story reveals another Usana executive with falsified credentials
5. A Tale of Two Usanas