CRO Electronic Filing Agent, What's the point?

v638sg7k1a92bx

I started working for a family member in their accountancy practice after a 7 years in a different industry. I'm not a qualified accountant but worked for him before.

I see that accountants can submit returns on behalf of clients if they register as Electronic Filing Agent (EFA). I don't see where then benefit of this is since you still need to get an original signature from the client for the overall certification page.

So the question is, what's the point of submitting a B1 as EFA when you still need to get an original signature, why not just send them a regular B1 to sign? What am I missing here?

Stratvs

You can't send them a regular B1 to sign. The B1 must be filed electronically. The financial statements must also be filed electronically.
You can avoid the necessity for a signature page by use of ROS digital certs for the relevant directors signing.

v638sg7k1a92bx

Stratvs wrote: »

You can't send them a regular B1 to sign. The B1 must be filed electronically. The financial statements must also be filed electronically.
You can avoid the necessity for a signature page by use of ROS digital certs for the relevant directors signing.

Yes but the electronic B1 produces a signature page that needs a “wet” so either way you need “wet” signatures whether you file as EFA or submit an electronic B1.

For example, you have two choices:

1. File an electronic B1 which produces a signature page that needs to be signed with an original wet signature and posted to the CRO

2. File a B1 as an EFA which produces a cover page which then needs to be submitted to the CRO with an overall certification page that requires an original wet signature.

So in both cases, the CRO require an original wet signature! So where is the advantage of filing as an EFA?

Synode

The answer is above. You've no choice any more. They have to be filed electronically. The advantage is on CROs side as they now get everything electronically, bar the sig page. It's also far easier completing an almost full, pre populated form. Use to hate having to write out new ones each time

v638sg7k1a92bx

Synode wrote: »

The answer is above. You've no choice any more. They have to be filed electronically. The advantage is on CROs side as they now get everything electronically, bar the sig page. It's also far easier completing an almost full, pre populated form. Use to hate having to write out new ones each time

That’s not the point I’m trying to make. B1’s are all filed electronically now, everybody accepts that.

The point is, what is the advantage of filing a B1 as an EFA as opposed to filing a regular B1 (both electronically) if you still need to get a signature from the client whichever way you do it?

Synode

Apologies. I've never signed one using a ROS cert. Always better to get a signature as approval on these things imo. They're the relevant person's responsibility so they should sign off on them.

Stratvs

I get your point now which I misunderstood at first. The issue here seems to be the financial statements certification not the B1 as such. As an EFA can’t certify the FS the director certification is needed. So either you do that as you say on the B1 normal signature page and send that in or separately on a FS certification page.

https://www.cro.ie/Services/E-Filing/EFA-Electronic-Filing-Agent

I have also always insisted that directors sign the B1 certification page and submitted that to the CRO. Having the B1 largely pre-populated is useful though. I suppose it’s electronic filing Irish style!