Connect with us

Accounting

BEPS debriefed: Reshaping financial reporting today, redefining tomorrow

Published

on

All market leaders and financial teams are subject to various regulatory standards. Despite this, regulation was cited as a top industry challenge by CFOs across all sectors. Most businesses have not been affected by BEPS Pillar One, yet the subsets of BEPS, namely Pillar Two and 2.0, are a different story. While strategic tax planning is already a complicated undertaking, it’s about to get even more complex for multinational companies facing upcoming changes to tax law under new Base Erosion and Profit Shifting guidelines, or BEPS for short.

BEPS 2.0 Pillar Two took effect in early 2024, imposing new data reporting requirements and additional global tax compliance rules for every multinational business with a turnover greater than 750 million euros. This legislation increases the pressure surrounding already over-stretched tax teams that will now have to collect more data from multiple sources and across departments. Companies that are currently doing business in multiple countries should already be preparing for the new complexities BEPS 2.0 Pillar Two will pose to the tax and reporting process. 

Decoding BEPS, the evolution of global tax compliance 

BEPS is a set of rules and standards established by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and subsequently adopted by numerous countries around the world. The primary purpose of BEPS is to establish a minimum baseline for corporate taxation such that multinational businesses are no longer incentivized to shift profits from higher-tax countries to low-tax nations.

BEPS consists of two broadly defined provisions, which the designers refer to as “pillars.” Pillar One pertains to the allocation of business profits to various countries based on actual business activities in each of those nations. In essence, this rewrites the rules pertaining to nexus, opting instead to allocate profits based on the jurisdictions where a company’s goods or services are used or consumed. Initially, Pillar One will apply to companies with worldwide revenues of €20 billion or more. Over the next seven years, that threshold will be reduced such that businesses with €10 billion or more in revenue will also be included.

BEPS Pillar Two will affect a significant number of companies. Pillar Two is aimed at establishing an effective global minimum tax rate of 15%. Under BEPS Pillar Two, companies will first calculate taxes for each country in which they operate. If their effective tax rate for any of those jurisdictions falls below 15%, then they will be liable for paying that 15% minimum in those respective countries.

Fundamentally, BEPS is a set of nonbinding rules. Its creator, the OECD, has no statutory authority to set tax rates or regulations for the 139 member countries. However, BEPS is available as a common standard that nations may choose to adopt through legislation. The general framework of the rules has been agreed upon, but the formal adoption of the rules is still being negotiated and clarified. 

Although there may be some minor adjustments, business leaders still need to be cognizant of the effects BEPS 2.0 Pillar Two will have on organizations. 

Outlining its challenges — assessing the impact of BEPS

BEPS 2.0 Pillar Two is anticipated to make tax planning more complicated than ever before, with tighter deadlines and more stringent audits applying increased pressure on already strained tax professionals. As a result, many of these employees will likely struggle to work strategically if ill-prepared.

Research indicates that while 90% of respondents say BEPS 2.0 Pillar Two will have a moderate or significant impact on their business, just 30% have completed an impact analysis. As the new regulations start being implemented progressively around the globe, organizations must start preparing their teams. 

Tax leaders must move quickly to assess the potential impacts, advise senior executives and other stakeholders on the upcoming changes, and determine what needs to be done to comply with the new rules and manage their implications. 

Beyond being adequately prepared, BEPS 2.0 Pillar Two will introduce new complexities into the tax forecasting and reporting processes, potentially with powerful implications for corporate structuring and transfer pricing decisions. Specifically, challenges around consolidating, cleansing and analyzing tax data from across the organization will be magnified. 

For example, organizations relying on spreadsheets to support their tax forecasting and reporting processes may find the shifting landscape under these new regulations will create new challenges that may be difficult to manage, including the introduction of inconsistent data integrity that could lead to errors in tax reporting and forecasting. This can result in enormous financial and legal costs for organizations. 

It’s generally agreed that the plan will result in higher corporate taxes for most global companies, but the reality is that BEPS constitutes a radical shift in the way taxes are levied on multinational companies. For organizations to be successful with upcoming changes to BEPS, they need to understand how these soon-to-be-imposed data and reporting regulations will transform the industry.

What BEPS means for the future of financial reporting 

BEPS already requires companies to itemize their revenues by country, and as taxation bodies develop more sophisticated models that compare BEPS data with corporate tax return data, there may be an increase in investigations. This reinforces the growing need to ensure tax and accounting teams have a foundational understanding of the implications coming from BEPS changes.

To that point, BEPS represents a change in global taxation, but it isn’t the only change. Other elements of change include IFRS 16/17 and parallel modifications to lease accounting under U.S. GAAP, political uncertainty, a push toward higher tax rates and increased enforcement, and rising inflation in 2024. In response, organizations must remain vigilant in reviewing the latest legislation and analyzing recent changes within the business. As new rules are put into practice for BEPS, there is little doubt that fine-tuning the system will require some changes. This should include bringing operations together under one roof. To do this, automation will be crucial, especially to ease tax compliance, reduce data silos, and deliver better analytical insights. 

With that said, organizations should look for purpose-built tax planning and tax reporting solutions that can automate these processes by collecting and collating information from source accounting systems, modeling scenarios, and predicting the likely tax implications, as well as serving as a foundation for documentation and compliance transfer pricing decisions. Many companies may struggle to perform tax forecasting and reporting with manual processes, spreadsheets and a disjointed collection of tools. Fortunately, tax reporting technology can bring it all together under one central location to, effectively streamline and simplify processes while also managing operational transfer pricing, and improving accuracy. 

Finance and accounting leaders are often unable to see their group company’s effective tax rate until it’s too late for them to do anything about managing it. Under BEPS, that lack of visibility will become even more of a liability. Companies that want to clearly understand their options should put systems in place — as soon as possible — to reap the full benefits of smart corporate tax planning strategies. Collaboration and automation through the right tools will be critical to staying agile and successfully navigating the looming presence of BEPS 2.0 adoption. 

Ultimately, the next few years will be a pivotal time for finance and accounting departments at multinational companies. For tax professionals in particular, this is an opportunity to demonstrate the strategic value of tax accounting to others in the organization.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Tax Fraud Blotter: Crooks R Us

Published

on

The shadow knows; body of evidence; make a Note of it; and other highlights of recent tax cases.

Newark, New Jersey: Thomas Nicholas Salzano, a.k.a. Nicholas Salzano, of Secaucus, New Jersey, the shadow CEO of National Realty Investment Advisors, has been sentenced to 12 years in prison for orchestrating a $658 million Ponzi scheme and conspiring to evade millions in taxes.

Salzano previously pleaded guilty to securities fraud, conspiracy to commit wire fraud and conspiracy to defraud the U.S., admitting that he made numerous misrepresentations to investors while he secretly ran National Realty. From February 2018 through January 2022, Salzano and others defrauded investors and potential investors of NRIA Partners Portfolio Fund I, a real estate fund operated by National Realty, of $650 million.

Salzano and his conspirators executed their scheme through an aggressive multiyear, nationwide marketing campaign that involved thousands of emails to investors, advertisements, and meetings and presentations to investors. Salzano led and directed the marketing campaign that was intended to mislead investors into believing that NRIA generated significant profits. It in fact generated little to no profits and operated as a Ponzi scheme.

Salzano stole millions of dollars of investor money to support his lavish lifestyle, including expensive dinners, extravagant birthday parties, and payments to family and associates who did not work at NRIA. He also orchestrated a separate, related conspiracy to avoid paying taxes on his stolen funds.

He was also sentenced to three years of supervised release and agreed to a forfeiture money judgment of $8.52 million, full restitution of $507.4 million to the victims of his offenses and $6.46 million to the IRS.

Marina del Rey, California: Tax preparer Lidiya Gessese has been sentenced to 41 months in prison for preparing and filing false returns for her clients and for not reporting her income.

Gessese owned and operated Tax We R/Tax R Us and Insurance Services from 2013 through 2019 and charged clients $300 to $800. Gessese would then prepare returns that included claims to deductions and credits she knew her clients were not entitled to, including falsely claiming dependents, earned income credits, the American Opportunity Credit, Child Tax Credits, business deductions, education expenses or unreimbursed employee business expenses. The illegitimate claims led to some $1,135,554.64 issued by the IRS for 2010 through 2018.

She failed to report, or underreported, her own income for 2010 through 2018, some of which included improperly diverted funds from clients’ inflated or fraudulent refunds, causing a tax loss of $488,276.

Gessese, who pleaded guilty in April, was also ordered to pay $1,096,034.01 to the IRS and $53,526.95 to her other victims.

Fullerton, California: In Chun Jung of Anaheim, California, owner of an auto repair business, has pleaded guilty to filing false returns for 2015 to 2022, underreporting his income by at least $1,184,914.

He owned and operated JY JBMT INC., d.b.a. JY Auto Body, which was registered as a subchapter S corp. Jung was the 100% shareholder.

Jung accepted check payments from customers that he and his co-schemers then cashed at multiple area check cashing services; the cashed checks totaled some $1,157,462. Jung withheld the business receipts and income from his tax preparer and omitted them on his returns.

He will pay $300,145 in taxes due to the IRS and faces a $250,000 penalty and up to three years in prison. Sentencing is Jan. 31.

jail2-fotolia.jpg

Tucson, Arizona: Tax preparer Nour Abubakr Nour, 34, has been sentenced to 30 months in prison.

Nour, who pleaded guilty a year ago, operated the tax prep business Skyman Tax and for tax years 2016 through 2018 prepared and filed at least 27 false individual federal income tax returns for clients.

These returns included falsely claimed business income that inflated refunds so that he could pay himself large prep fees. Nour’s clients had no knowledge that he was filing false tax returns under their names.

Nour was also ordered to pay $150,154 in restitution to the United States for the false tax refunds.

Farmington, Connecticut: Tax preparer Mark Legowski, 60, has been sentenced to eight months in prison, to be followed by a year of supervised release, for filing false returns.

From January 2015 through December 2017, Legowski was a self-employed accountant and tax preparer doing business as Legowski & Co. Inc. He prepared income tax returns for some 400 to 500 individual clients and some 50 to 60 businesses.

To reduce his personal income tax liability for 2015 through 2017, Legowski underreported his practice’s gross receipts by excluding some client payment checks. He then filed false personal income tax returns that failed to report more than $1.4 million in business income, which resulted in a loss to the IRS of $499,289.

Legowski, who pleaded guilty earlier this year, has paid the IRS that amount in back taxes but must still pay penalties and interest. He has also been ordered to pay a $10,000 fine.

Wheeling, West Virginia: Dr. Nitesh Ratnakar, 48, has been convicted of failing to pay nearly $2.5 million in payroll taxes.

Ratnakar, who was found guilty of 41 counts of tax fraud, owned and operated a gastroenterology practice and a medical equipment manufacturer in Elkins, West Virginia. He withheld payroll taxes from employees’ paychecks and failed to make $2,419,560 in required payments to the IRS. Ratnakar also filed false tax returns in 2020, 2021 and 2022.

He faces up to five years in prison for each of the first 38 tax fraud counts and up to three years for the remaining counts.

Orlando, Florida: Two men have been sentenced for their involvement in the “Note Program,” a tax fraud.

Jasen Harvey, of Tampa, Florida, was sentenced to four years in prison and Christopher Johnson, of Orlando, was sentenced to 37 months for conspiring to defraud the U.S.

From 2015 to 2018, they promoted a scheme in which Harvey and others prepared returns for clients that claimed that large, nonexistent income tax withholdings had been paid to the IRS and sought large refunds based on those purported withholdings. The conspirators charged fees and required the clients to pay a share of the fraudulently obtained refunds to them.

Overall, the defendants claimed more than $3 million in fraudulent refunds on clients’ returns, of which the IRS paid about $1.5 million.

Both were also ordered to serve three years of supervised release. Johnson was also ordered to pay $864,117.42 in restitution to the United States; Harvey was ordered to pay $785,858.42 in restitution. Co-defendant Arthur Grimes will be sentenced on Jan. 13.

Ft. Lauderdale, Florida: Tax preparer Jean Volvick Moise, 39, has been sentenced to three years in prison for filing false income tax returns.

Moise prepared false returns for clients to inflate refunds. He prepared returns which included, among other things, false dependents, false 1099 withholdings, false educational credits and false Schedule C expenses, often for businesses which did not exist. Moise’s fee was larger than the typical one charged by a tax preparer.

Moise filed hundreds of false returns that caused the IRS to issue more than $574,000 in fraudulent refunds.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Accounting in 2025: The year ahead in numbers

Published

on

With 2025 almost upon us, it’s worth thinking about what the new year will bring, and what accounting firms expect their next 12 months to look like.

With that in mind, Accounting Today conducted its annual Year Ahead survey in the late fall to find out firms’ expectations for 2025, including their growth expectations, their hiring plans, their growth expectations, how they think tax season will play out and much more. The overall theme: Thing are going well, but there are elements of friction holding them back, particularly when it comes to moving to more of a focus on advisory services.

You can see the full report here; a selection of key data points are presented below.

Continue Reading

Accounting

On the move: Withum marks over a decade of Withum Week of Caring

Published

on


Citrin Cooperman appoints CIO; PKF O’Connor Davies opens new Fort Lauderdale office; and more news from across the profession.

Continue Reading

Trending