1996

NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE, No. 77

(2) breaching the institute’s Code of Ethics 2003
(in particular, the fundamental principles of integrity
and quality performance, and/or Rules 2 and/or
10 and/or 14); and/or
(3) supplying the institute with information which is
false or misleading.

First set of particulars

IN THAT being a chartered accountant in public practice,
and in relation to a complaint, the member:

(a) failed to complete tax returns for the A Family
Trust, the B Family Trust, and the A & B Family Trust
Partnership for the year ended 31 March 2005 (“the tax
returns”) in a timely manner, in breach of the
fundamental principle of quality performance and/or
Rule 10 of the Code of Ethics; and/or

(b) provided false or misleading information to the
complainants as to whether or not the tax returns
had been completed and/or filed with the Inland
Revenue Department, in breach of the fundamental
principle of integrity and/or Rule 2 of the Code of the
Ethics; and/or

(c) provided false or misleading information to the
professional conduct committee in his letters
dated 5 September 2006 and/or 10 October 2006
and/or 23 January 2007 and at his final determination
on 8 February 2007 by stating that the tax returns were
filed in February 2006 when he had previously advised
the institute and his documentation indicates that they
had not been filed as at 31 July 2006, in breach of Rule
21.30(g) of the Rules, and/or the fundamental principle
of integrity; and Rule 2 of the Code of Ethics; and/or

(d) failed to provide copies of completed tax returns to the
complainants in a timely manner despite giving numerous
assurances to the complainants that this would be
done, in breach of the fundamental principle of
integrity, and/or Rules 2 and/or 10 and/or 14 and/or
paragraph 30 of the Code of Ethics; and/or

(e) failed to respond and/or failed to respond in a timely
manner to correspondence dated 7 April 2006 and/or
2 June 2006 and/or 24 July 2006 from the complainants,
in breach of Rules 10 and/or 14 of the Code of Ethics.

Second set of charges

THAT in terms of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of
New Zealand Act 1996, and the Rules made thereunder, and
in particular Rule 21.30, the member is guilty of:

(1) conduct unbecoming an accountant; and/or
(2) negligence and/or incompetence in a professional
capacity, and that this has been of such a degree or
so frequent as to tend to bring the profession into
disrepute; and/or
(3) breaching the Rules (in particular, Rule 21.2) and/or
the institute’s Code of Ethics 2003 (in particular, the
fundamental principles of quality performance
and professional behaviour, and/or Rules 9 and/or
10 and/or 14); and/or
(4) failing to respond promptly to communications from
the institute to the member.

Second set of particulars

IN THAT being a chartered accountant in public practice,
and in relation to a complaint, the member:

(a) failed to meet his personal statutory obligations to the
Inland Revenue Department and as a consequence,
the Inland Revenue Department has applied to the
High Court to adjudge him bankrupt and seek to
recover a debt of approximately $360,000.00 in breach
of the fundamental principles of quality performance

5 JULY 2007

and/or professional behaviour and/or Rules 9 and/or
10; and/or

(b) failed to ensure the statutory obligations of his
accountancy practice to the Inland Revenue Department
were met and as a consequence, the Inland Revenue
Department has applied to the High Court to put his
practice into liquidation and seek to recover a debt of
approximately $90,000.00, in breach of the fundamental
principles of quality performance and/or professional
behaviour and/or Rules 9 and/or 10; and/or

(c) failed to respond and/or failed to respond in a timely
manner to correspondence dated 26 March 2007 and/or
17 April 2007 and/or 26 April 2007 and/or 7 May 2007
from the complainant, in breach of Rule 21.2 of the
Rules and/or Rule 10 and/or 14 of the Code of Ethics.

Reasons

The member has admitted particular (d) in the first set of
particulars, and admitted particulars (a), (b) and (c) in the
second set of particulars.

Particulars (a), (b), (c) and (e) in the first set of particulars
have been found to be proven.

The member has pleaded guilty to charge (4) in the second
set of charges and has been found guilty of charges (1), (2)
and (3) in the first set of charges and charges (1), (2) and (3)
in the second set of charges.

The essence of the charges and particulars are two-fold,
whether the returns in question were filed in February 2006
or not until August 2006 and his persistent failure to respond
to his clients and the professional conduct committee.

In his evidence, the member pointed to his post book
record of the dispatch of the tax returns, the absence of any
late filing fee, the fact that the accounts supplied by the
Inland Revenue Department to the complainants contains a
disclaimer dated February 2006 and that his time records
record no time after January 2006.

The evidence of the three witnesses called by the
professional conduct committee was logical, consistent
and credible while the member’s evidence was inconsistent
to such a degree that the tribunal did not accept his version
of events.

Accordingly, the tribunal found the member guilty of all
charges and all particulars in the first set of charges and
particulars.

In the second set of charges and particulars, the member has
admitted all the particulars and pleaded guilty to charge (4).

Tax practitioners being publicly pursued for substantial
income tax and GST tends to not only bring the profession
into disrepute but also constitutes conduct unbecoming an
accountant.

The member was therefore found guilty of all the charges
in the second set of charges.

Orders of the Tribunal

(a) Pursuant to Rule 21.31(b) of the Rules of the Institute of
Chartered Accountants of New Zealand, the disciplinary
tribunal ordered that Noel Donald Sulzberger be
suspended from membership of the institute for three
years.

(b) Pursuant to Rule 21.31(c) of the Rules of the Institute of
Chartered Accountants of New Zealand, the disciplinary
tribunal ordered that Noel Donald Sulzberger pay a
monetary penalty of $10,000.00.

(c) Pursuant to Rule 21.31(d) of the Rules of the Institute of
Chartered Accountants of New Zealand, the disciplinary
tribunal ordered that the certificate of public practice
held by Noel Donald Sulzberger be suspended for
three years.