Peloubet also provoked accounting thought and debate through his writings, speeches, and testimonies. As evidence, the AIA awarded Peloubet the Gold Medal Award of Distinction in 1946. This award "recognizes a person whose influence on...
morePeloubet also provoked accounting thought and debate through his writings, speeches, and testimonies. As evidence, the AIA awarded Peloubet the Gold Medal Award of Distinction in 1946. This award "recognizes a person whose influence on the accounting profession as a whole is especially notable in comparison to other industry leaders" (AICPA 2019). Several leaders in the development of accounting thought and theory also confirm Peloubet's standing in the field. Maurice Moonitz and A. C. Littleton included two of his works in their Significant Accounting Essays. His 1935 article, "Is Value an Accounting Concept," was included because "it is a clear-cut statement of the views of a respected leader of the profession" (Moonitz and Littleton 1965, 95). And his 1938 testimony before the Senate Finance Committee was included, because it is probably the first extended public explanation of the need for the last-in, first-out method of pricing inventories and of determining cost of goods sold. It also represents one of the few cases where a group of prominent accountants in practice lobbied openly, persistently, and successfully for a change in the income tax law. (Moonitz and Littleton 1965, 450) Carman Blough, as AICPA Director of Research in 1958, referred to Peloubet as "a well-known and highly regarded member of our profession, for whose views we have the highest respect" (Peloubet and Blough 1958, 73). And over the course of his career, the elite institutions of Columbia, Harvard, New York University, Temple, Wheaton, and Rutgers invited Peloubet to lecture (World Who's Who in Commerce and Industry 1965, 1020). Peloubet was not afraid to discuss difficult questions in his writings, which promoted the evolution of the profession. In his 1935 article "Is Value an Accounting Concept?", which followed on the heels of the 1934 Securities Act, Peloubet sought to clarify the accountant's duties in his role as auditor. Asset valuation was a hot topic at the time, as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) conducted a Congressionally mandated investigation from 1928 to 1934 into the corrupt practices of public utility holding companies including asset value write-ups (Zeff 2007b, 49-50). In his paper, Peloubet discusses the myriad of definitions for value and concludes that "value" is an opinion and that an "accountant cannot make valuations," as he does not have the requisite expertise, but he does have enough knowledge to critique them (208). He states: We are not required by the securities and exchange commission to do more than to disclose the basis on which assets are stated in the accounts. I do not think the accountant has any responsibility under the securities and exchange act for anything further than this, and I do not believe that periodical reappraisal, which is the only logical result of the assumption that accounts should show some sort of value, will be welcomed with much enthusiasm by the commission. (204) Shortly after the Accounting Principles Board was formed in 1959 and charged with the task to issue pronouncements on GAAP and form a research program, Peloubet wrote the paper, "Is Further Uniformity Desirable or Possible?" as a rebuttal to Leonard Spacek's paper, "Are Accounting Principles Generally Accepted?". Both papers were presented at the 1960 annual meeting of the AICPA and published in the Journal of Accountancy the following year. While Peloubet lauds the need for "uniformity of practice and enforcement of these generally accepted principles," he warns that uniformity does not insure absolute comparability between companies due to "the fact that physical and financial conditions and management policies are different, and this must be reflected differently in the accounts" (Peloubet 1961, 36, 39). Whereas in Spacek's paper, he frets over the lack of uniformity of accounting principles and argues for more narrowly defined principles (Spacek 1961). One of the biggest issues leading to these arguments was the Mina's background seems humble, as her father's occupation is listed as "Billiard Marker 1 " on a 1901 census and as "Traveller" (or travelling salesman) on his daughter's marriage certificate