Closer recognition between statutory professional-development systems and HRD Corp’s claim framework could reduce duplicated administration and improve access to technically relevant training.
ACEM has continued to engage on the application of the HRD Corp levy to engineering consultancy practices. The levy is administered under the Pembangunan Sumber Manusia Berhad Act 2001 (Act 612). ACEM’s concern is not with professional development itself—engineering firms already operate within Board-prescribed competency and continuing professional development (CPD) requirements—but with whether the levy and claims framework efficiently supports the specialised training that professional practice requires.
For consulting firms, payroll is a major operating cost and the available courses are often highly technical, discipline-specific or delivered by practising specialists. Where Board-approved CPD is not readily claimable, firms may bear both the levy and the separate cost of meeting professional-development requirements. ACEM has therefore argued for better alignment between the two systems, while also continuing to raise the broader cost implications for smaller practices.
Engagement through regulatory reform channels
The matter was discussed through the Reformasi Kerenah Birokrasi initiative involving the professional Boards and the Malaysia Productivity Corporation at engagements on 11 and 26 August 2026. The Boards emphasised that their respective statutes and regulatory systems already establish professional competency and CPD obligations.
Two longer-term policy options were presented for consideration: exemption of professional firms from the levy framework, or limiting levy application to non-professional employees. Decisions on exemptions fall within the authority of the Ministry of Human Resources; the proposals should therefore be reported as positions advanced by the professional bodies rather than settled policy.
Practical improvements within the present system
Pending consideration of those policy options, ACEM supports administrative measures that would allow firms to use levy funds more effectively:
- recognition of CPD activities approved by the relevant professional Boards as claimable programmes, subject to an agreed verification mechanism;
- a suitable pathway for recognised professional institutions and associations to act as training partners without imposing requirements designed for general commercial training providers;
- a proportionate route for practising subject-matter experts, including appropriate foreign specialists, to deliver advanced technical programmes; and
- consideration of overseas professional courses and conferences where they provide specialist knowledge not reasonably available locally.
HRD Corp indicated that it would consider mutual recognition arrangements, a memorandum of understanding with the Boards, pathways for professional associations and an existing subject-matter-expert route. These matters should be treated as work in progress until the eligibility conditions, documentation and effective dates are formally confirmed.
A well-aligned framework would preserve accountability for levy expenditure while allowing professional firms to direct training resources towards current engineering practice, regulatory competence and emerging technology. ACEM will continue engaging with the Boards, HRD Corp and the Ministry to pursue a workable outcome.
