Accounting
Accounting profs. adapt to AI amid cheating concerns, other challenges
Published
1 year agoon
The rise of generative AI in society has also given rise to
Generative AI is known not for its skill with numbers but words, which makes it an unfortunately ideal cheating tool for humanities courses that use written essays as major components of their programs. However, while accounting is not exactly 19th century romantic literature, language and writing are not entirely irrelevant. An accounting student may not need to analyze the major themes in Ulysses, but they may be called upon to interpret an accounting standard, tax regulation or audit document, which can be just as dense and confusing. So while there are not as many opportunities for AI-guided cheating as in other fields, students are still finding places where bots can do their work for them, much to the chagrin of their professors.
“This is definitely something I have heard quite a bit about from my colleagues in the humanities and other fields, but is becoming an issue for accounting/finance classes as well. Students still need to understand the implications of ASU’s, disclosures, etc, and if they rely entirely on AI for assignment completion that knowledge will fade away,” said Sean Stein Smith, a professor at Lehman College who teaches intermediate accounting, cost accounting, advanced accounting and forensic accounting. He also leads Lehman’s development of AI business courses, as well its crypto/blockchain content.

filins – stock.adobe.com
He added that he has seen AI-guided cheating first-hand, especially for short-form essay assignments as well as when he requires students to perform financial analyses using specific ratios.
Douglas Carmichael, former chief auditor of the PCAOB and currently a professor at Baruch College where he teaches auditing, noted that while he does not himself give any writing assignments that a student could use generative AI to cheat on, this doesn’t mean they’re still not using AI to undermine the purpose of an assignment, though once students realized he was on to them it has become less of an issue.
“I do ask students to submit at least one question before class on something in the text or recorded lectures they found difficult to understand or want additional information about. My experience in prior semesters was that about half of the students submitted a question that seemed suspicious to me given the language used and generality of the issue. The lack of specific reference to the topic in the text or recorded lecture was also apparent. These kinds of questions did not earn any credit and as word got out about that use of ChatGPT is infrequent,” he said.
But even if students are not out and out cheating, some have observed an unhealthy reliance on generative AI starting to form. Jack Castonguay, vice president of learning and development with Surgent as well as a Hofstra University professor who teaches advanced courses in accounting and auditing theory, has seen students struggling with understanding and communicating core concepts at least in part due to their reliance on generative AI.
“We see the reliance significantly when they have to give a presentation or take an in-person exam. It’s clear they have gotten to that point by using AI and can’t apply the logic on their own. Maybe in 3-10 years (given the speed of the improvement in LLMs) they won’t have to do it on their own, but it’s a large problem now for client relationships and having conversations with this in practice. They need to look up everything and use AI as a crutch. Seminar discussions are like pulling teeth oftentimes for me,” he said.
With this in mind, accounting educators — much like those in other fields — are currently in conversation about how to respond to this issue. Richard C. Jones, a Hofstra University accounting professor and former technical staff member at the Financial Accounting Standards Board, said this is a major topic of debate and discussion among college faculty and administrators, noting that it seems to be brought up in nearly every meeting. It is obvious, he said, that students will use LLMs on assignments, and so therefore the challenge for faculty is to assign projects and papers that require students to actually demonstrate their knowledge versus just handing in a paper or presentation.
“Fortunately, I teach classes that require the application of accounting rather than accounting theory. Therefore, my exams and other assessments are specific to case information provided and application of the accounting rules in providing the journal entries and the related disclosure information. So, my students do not have as much of an opportunity to use LLMs to answer the questions,” he said.
Additionally, he mentioned that educators are trying to find ways to work AI into their assignments, considering how quickly accounting firms themselves have taken to it.
Tracey Niemotko — a Marist University professor who teaches accounting and auditing as well as sustainability, taxation and forensic accounting — said that she views AI as more of a tool than a cheating mechanism, pointing out how models can be used to expedite audit procedures or clear away the busy work that eats up the day of many professionals. Consequently, she is a little more sanguine about AI-guided cheating, noting that even if students do use AI in their assignments, the nature of the work makes cheating difficult.
“Even with electronic testing in the classroom, I do not see cheating as a concern overall. I think the accounting students are perhaps a bit more disciplined than most students, so I don’t think they have the mindset to cheat. Even for writing assignments in my upper-level accounting courses, students may use AI to assist them, but they are required to write ‘in their own words.’ Overall, the majority do their own written work but may use AI as a tool to help them develop an outline or get them started,” she said.
Abigail Zhang Parker, a University of Texas at San Antonio professor whose research specialty is AI in accounting, has also directly worked AI into her classes. For example, her Accounting Information Systems courses include hands-on workshops where students learn to operate different accounting software solutions. She noted that AI can be a useful tool for finding relevant information and understanding difficult concepts.
Therefore, her overall philosophy is that students can use generative AI to help with assignments but not on exams, as that is when they’re tested on their actual understanding of the topic. So long as it is only used for assignments versus exams, she does not consider using AI to be cheating. She added it would be impractical to prevent the use of AI entirely anyway, it’s better for educators to find ways to use it too. However, she noted that teaching students proper use of AI can, itself, present a challenge.
“Perhaps we need to guide them how to use it properly. This is not easy. One method that came to my mind is to make the parts that demonstrate students’ own skills take a greater portion in the grading components. … For example, there are three exams throughout the semester, and they take 60% of the total grade, while assignments take 10%. For classes where students need to submit a report and make a presentation, maybe the report itself will not take up a high portion of the grade, but the in-person presentation will, as it better reflects students’ true understanding of the subject. And once students know that they will be mainly graded on their own performance, they are more incentivized to think through the problem than simply over-relying on AI,” she said.
Another reason to learn AI in the classroom is that, once students are working as professional accountants, clients will likely be using AI as well, and they will need to understand and explain what is missing from the AI’s answers. However, Castonguay, from Hofstra, voiced concerns that over-reliance on AI is eroding the critical thinking and reasoning skills needed to properly evaluate these answers in the first place. He does an exercise in class where students have ChatGPT summarize a FASB ASU and review its findings. Some, he said, don’t even know where to start as they have obviously been relying on ChatGPT to understand it at all.
“My bigger concern is [that] by such a reliance on AI they will lack the critical thinking and synthesizing skills that are still valued even with AI. To use a sports analogy, they are only bowling with gutter guards – what happens when those aren’t there?” he said.
Smith, from Lehman, said these kinds of things underscores the need to teach responsible AI usage in a way that does not degrade the human skills that they’ll be relying on in the professional world. He felt, unfortunately, that this could be an uphill battle.
“I do think that as AI becomes more integrated into the classroom and profession, we are going to have to really double-down on making sure students still have the ability to think critically. Especially in cases where questions or data may change on-the-fly, students are seeming to have a harder time pivoting and adapting to analyze said data on the spot. It’s a growing problem with no cookie-cutter or easy solution, but is definitely something I know is being talked about in pretty much every accounting department/School of Business,” he said.
You may like
Accounting
Are you ready for it? 4 steps to successfully integrate AI into your operations
Published
1 month agoon
May 7, 2026

Over the last few years, AI has gone from being a novelty to a mission-critical business strategy for many accountants. Innovative, forward-thinking firms are using these tools to streamline manual tasks, ensure compliance and provide the best possible service to their clients. According to the 2025 Intuit QuickBooks
Processing Content
However, AI adoption is at varying levels across the industry. While nearly every firm has begun experimenting with basic AI tools, many remain in a sandbox phase, hesitant to move toward full-scale integration due to perceived complexity or costs.No matter where you may fall on the integration spectrum, the fact remains: AI is rapidly reshaping the accounting industry. If you’ve delayed AI adoption in your business, you’ll want to create a focused plan to catch up.
Time is of the essence, but don’t sacrifice strategy for speed
Firms that are ready to take the leap from casual use to deep integration may find themselves in need of accelerated adoption, but speed should not come at the cost of strategy. Identify tangible, practical ways that easy-to-use tools can impact your business through automation. Having a strong strategic focus allows firms to implement workflow changes to streamline manual tasks, ensure compliance and provide excellent service to your clients.
To begin your AI journey, here is a four-step plan that firms can use to transition from experimentation to execution, in a safe, practical manner:
Step 1: Kick off your first AI project
As is the case with many things, getting started is often the most challenging step. While enthusiasm is high, uncertainty with implementation risks can cause hesitation. The key is to lower risk by embracing AI and implementing an intentional, phased approach. Begin by weaving AI tools into high-impact, low-risk tasks, such as summarizing meeting notes, drafting client or firm-wide memos, or translating complex concepts into easy-to-understand ideas. Monitor results carefully and, if these initial attempts need adjustment, be prepared to pivot to the next use case until you can clearly demonstrate that AI systems are delivering a measurable impact on your operations. From there, you can learn from early experiences, adapt strategy, and scale appropriately to complete more complex projects.
Step 2: Dig into your AI toolkit
The marketplace is crowded with AI-powered tools that promise to do everything from enhancing your workflows to improving the customer experience. It can be hard to know which ones are worth investing your time and money. Find a trusted source like a respected peer, or leverage your professional network to help discuss the tools that may be the best fit for achieving your business goals. You can also look within the tools you’re already using to see if they offer AI-powered features, which can help ease into the transition. Additionally, look for free high-quality education to upskill your team. For example, Anthropic offers a Claude AI University that provides excellent foundational resources for moving beyond basic prompts.
Step 3: Review an AI security checklist
An important element in AI implementation is security. With AI tools needing access to firm and client data to function, it leads to questions of how the data will be protected. This makes the right AI and cybersecurity strategy critical. Firms must proactively ensure that client data remains protected from today’s increasingly sophisticated threats by embracing an established cybersecurity framework such as
Step 4: Openly discuss AI usage with your clients
Once you’ve established the best way to use AI tools that meet your firm’s needs, you’ll want to communicate all of the advantages afforded by these tools to your clients. Make sure you highlight the benefits and simultaneously ensure you are addressing any potential concerns. It’s also important to get explicit consent from all clients if you’re sharing their information with the third-party tools you may use. While this might seem like an extra step, it will go a long way toward fostering a greater level of transparency and deepen trust between you and your clients.
Don’t get left behind
Adopting AI does not have to be intimidating, expensive or overly complex. Think of it as a strategic business move that will not only keep you competitive, but will potentially free you up to focus on keeping clients happy and growing your practice. By strategically focusing on these best practices, identifying AI use cases in a phased approach, evaluating the right tools for your business, ensuring client information is secure and clearly communicating your AI strategy, you’ll be AI-ready in no time.

The Financial Accounting Standards Board met this week to discuss its projects on accounting for transfers of cryptocurrency assets and enhancing the disclosures around certain digital assets, such as stablecoins.
Processing Content
During Wednesday’s meeting, FASB’s board made certain tentative decisions, according to a
At a future meeting, the board plans to consider clarifying the derecognition guidance for crypto transfer arrangements to assess whether the control of a crypto asset has been transferred.
FASB also began deliberations on the
The board decided to provide illustrative examples in Topic 230, Statement of Cash Flows, to clarify whether certain digital assets such as stablecoins can meet the definition of cash equivalents. It also decided to include the following concepts in the illustrative examples:
- Interpretive explanations that link to the current cash equivalents definition;
- The amount and composition of reserve assets; and,
- The nature of qualifying on-demand, contractual cash redemption rights directly with the issuer.
FASB plans to clarify that an entity should consider compliance with relevant laws and regulations when it’s creating a policy concerning which assets that satisfy the Master Glossary definition of the term “cash equivalents“ will be treated as cash equivalents.
“I agree with the staff suggestion to look at examples,” said FASB vice chair Hillary Salo. “From my perspective, I think that is going to help level the playing field. People have been making reasonable judgments. I agree with that. And I think that this is really going to help show those goalposts or guardrails of what types of stablecoins would be in the scope of cash equivalents, and which ones would not be in the scope of cash equivalents. I certainly appreciate that approach, and I think it has the least potential impact of unintended consequences, because I do agree with my fellow board members that we shouldn’t be changing the definition of cash equivalents, and it’s a high bar to get into the cash equivalent definition.”
“I’m definitely supportive of not changing the definition of cash equivalents,” said FASB chair Richard Jones. “I believe that’s settled GAAP in a way, and we’re not really seeing a call to change it for broader issues. I am supportive of the example-based approach. The challenge with examples, though, is everybody’s going to want their exact pattern, but that’s not what we’re doing.”
The examples will explain the rationale for how digital assets such as stablecoins do or do not qualify as cash equivalents and give a roadmap for other types of digital assets with varying fact patterns to be able to apply.
“We really don’t want to be as a board facing a situation where something was a cash equivalent and then no longer is at a later date,” said Jones. “That’s not good for anyone, so keeping it as a high bar with certain rigid criteria, I think, is fine.”
Stablecoins are supposed to be pegged to fiat currencies such as U.S. dollars and thus provide more stability to investors. “In my view, while a stablecoin may meet the accounting definition established for cash equivalents, not every one of those stablecoins in the cash equivalent classification represents the same level of risk,” said FASB member Joyce Joseph.
She noted that the capital markets recognize the distinctions and have established a Stablecoin Stability Assessment Framework to evaluate a stablecoin’s ability to maintain its peg to a fiat currency. Such assessments look at the legal and regulatory framework associated with the stablecoin, and provide investors with information that could enable them to do forward-looking assessments about the stability of the stablecoin.
“However, for an investor to consider and utilize such information for a company analysis the financial statement disclosures would need to include information about the stablecoin itself,” Joseph added. “In outreach, the staff learned that investors supported classifying certain stablecoins as cash equivalents when transparent information is available about the entities at which the reserve assets are held. Therefore, in my view, taking all of this into consideration a relevant and informative company disclosure would include providing investors with the name of the stablecoin and the amount of the stablecoin that is classified as a cash equivalent, so investors can independently assess the liquidity risks more meaningfully and more comprehensively by utilizing broader information that is available in the capital markets and its emerging information.”
Such information could include the issuer, reserves, governance and management, she noted, so investors would get a more holistic look at the risks that holding the stablecoin would entail for a given company.
The board decided to require all entities to disclose the significant classes and related amounts of cash equivalents on an annual basis for each period that a statement of financial position is presented.
Entities should apply the amendments related to the classification of certain digital assets as cash equivalents on a modified prospective basis as of the beginning of the annual reporting period in the year of adoption.
FASB decided that entities should apply the amendments related to the disclosure of the significant classes and amounts of cash equivalents on a prospective basis as of the date of the most recent statement of financial position presented in the period of adoption.
The board will allow early adoption in both interim and annual reporting periods in which financial statements have not been issued or made available for issuance.
FASB also decided to permit entities to adopt the amendments to be illustrated in the examples related to the classification of certain digital assets as cash equivalents without the need to perform a preferability assessment as described in Topic 250, Accounting Changes and Error Corrections.
The board directed the staff to draft a proposed accounting standards update to be voted on by written ballot. The proposed update will have a 90-day comment period.
Accounting
Lawmakers propose tax and IRS bills as filing season ends
Published
2 months agoon
April 17, 2026

Senators introduced several pieces of tax-related legislation this week, including measures aimed at improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service, cracking down on tax evasion and curbing the carried interest tax break, in addition to efforts in the House to repeal the Corporate Transparency Act.
Processing Content
Senators Bill Cassidy, R-Louisiana, and Mark Warner, D-Virginia, teamed up on introducing a bipartisan bill, the
The bill would establish a dashboard to inform taxpayers of backlogs and wait times; expand electronic access to information and refunds; expand callback technology and online accounts; and inform individuals facing economic hardship about collection alternatives.
“Taxpayers deserve a simple, stress-free experience when dealing with the IRS,” Cassidy said in a statement Wednesday. “This bill makes the process quicker and easier for taxpayers to get the information they need.”
He also mentioned the bill during a
“I’m happy to meet with the team … and do all I can to make it as good as you want it to be,” said Bisignano.
“My bill would equip the IRS with the legislative mandate to create an online dashboard so that taxpayers can monitor average call wait time and budget time accordingly,” said Cassidy. He noted that the bill would allow a callback for taxpayers that might need to wait longer than five minutes to speak to a representative, and establish a program to identify and support taxpayers struggling to make ends meet by providing information about alternative payment methods, such as installments, partial payments and offers in compromise.
“I know people are kind of desperate and don’t know where to turn for cash, so I think this could really ease anxiety,” he added. “This legislation is bipartisan and is likely to pass this Congress.”
Cassidy and Warner
“Taxpayers shouldn’t have to jump through hoops to get basic answers from the IRS — and in the last year, those challenges have only gotten worse,” Warner said in a statement. “I am glad to reintroduce this bipartisan legislation on Tax Day to ease some of this frustration by increasing clear communication and making IRS resources more readily available.”
Stop CHEATERS Act
Also on Tax Day, a group of Senate Democrats and an independent who usually caucuses with Democrats teamed up to introduce the Stop Corporations and High Earners from Avoiding Taxes and Enforce the Rules Strictly (Stop CHEATERS) Act.
Senate Finance Committee ranking member Ron Wyden, D-Oregon, joined with Senators Angus King, I-Maine, Elizabeth Warren, D-Massachusetts, Tim Kaine, D-Virginia, and Sheldon Whitehouse, D-Rhode Island. The bill would provide additional funding for the IRS to strengthen and expand tax collection services and systems and crack down on tax cheating by the wealthy.
“Wealthy tax cheats and scofflaw corporations are stealing billions and billions from the American people by refusing to pay what they legally owe, and far too many of them are getting a free pass because Republicans gutted the enforcement capacity of the IRS,” Wyden said in a statement. “A rich tax cheat who shelters mountains of cash among a web of shell companies and passthroughs is likelier to be struck by lightning than face an IRS audit, and Republicans want to keep it that way. This bill is about making sure the IRS has the resources it needs to go after wealthy tax cheats while improving customer service for the vast majority of American taxpayers who follow the law every year.”
Earlier this week. Wyden also
The Stop CHEATERS Act would provide the IRS with additional funding for tax enforcement focused upon high-income tax evasion, technology operations support, systems modernization, and taxpayer services like free tax-payer assistance.
“As Congress seeks ways to fund much-needed policy priorities and address our growing national debt, there is one common sense solution that should have unanimous bipartisan support: let’s enforce the tax laws already on the books,” said King in a statement. “Our legislation will make sure the IRS has the resources it needs to confront the gap between taxes owed and taxes paid – while ensuring that our tax enforcement professionals are focused on the high-income earners who account for the most tax evasion. This is a serious problem with an easy solution; let’s pass this legislation and make sure every American pays what they owe in taxes.”
Carried interest
Wyden, King and Whitehouse also teamed up on another bill Thursday to close the carried interest tax break for hedge fund managers that
Carried interest is a form of compensation received by a fund manager in exchange for investment management services, according to a
Under the bill, the
“Our tax code is rigged to favor ultra-wealthy investors who know how to game the system to dodge paying a fair share, and there is no better example of how it works in practice than the carried interest loophole,” Wyden said in a statement. “For several decades now we’ve had a tax system that rewards the accumulation of wealth by the rich while punishing middle-class wage earners, and the effect of that system has been the strangulation of prosperity and opportunity for everybody but the ultra-wealthy. There are a lot of problems to fix to restore fairness and common sense to our tax code, and closing the carried interest loophole is a great place to start.”
Repealing Corporate Transparency Act
The House Financial Services Committee is also planning to markup a bill next Tuesday that would fully repeal the Corporate Transparency Act, which has already been significantly
If enacted, the repeal would eliminate beneficial ownership reporting requirements, removing a transparency measure designed to help law enforcement and national security officials identify who is behind U.S. companies.
“This repeal would turn the United States back into one of the easiest places in the world to set up anonymous shell companies, something Congress worked for years to fix,” said Erica Hanichak, deputy director of the FACT Coalition, in a statement. “These entities are routinely used to facilitate corruption, financial crime, and abuse. Rolling back the CTA doesn’t just weaken transparency, it signals to bad actors around the world that the U.S. is once again open for illicit business.”
Gen X can’t retire on time as inflation outpaces wages, survey finds
Are you ready for it? 4 steps to successfully integrate AI into your operations
What that means for consumer loans
Armanino adds Strategic Accounting Outsourced Solutions
New 2023 K-1 instructions stir the CAMT pot for partnerships and corporations
