Connect with us

Accounting

The accounting profession’s role in ESG reporting

Published

2 years ago

on

As the concerns over climate change, depletion of natural resources (i.e., deforestation and water scarcity), and health and safety issues are reaching new levels, there has been growing sentiment among business leaders, investors, consumers and regulators that innovative business strategies and risk management practices are necessary to sustain profitability. Here are a few eye-opening statistics:

  • A global study published in February by the Association of International Certified Professional Accountants and the International Federation of Accountants found that 98% (99% in the U.S.) of companies publicly disclosed some level of environmental, social and governance information. And 69% (88% in the U.S.) have obtained some level of assurance.
  • The CDP Global Supply Chain Report in 2021, a study of over 200 supply chain members with $5.5 trillion in procurement spending, shows that over 90% of companies are engaging suppliers on environmental performance, representing over 41% in year-over-year disclosures.
  • A recent study by another large accounting firm indicates 74% of M&A participants have ESG considerations as part of their agenda; a similar survey by another firm stated that 57% of inventors view sustainability information as “critical” in evaluating investments.

These trends demonstrate the momentum in measuring and reporting information around sustainability, specifically how sustainability strategies translate into longer-term financial performance and cash flows, new products and technologies, and ethical business practices.
What standards are companies using to report its sustainability or ESG information? ESG reporting has had a long history of inconsistency. The above-referenced AICPA and IFAC survey shows that 87% (93% in U,S.) of companies reported under multiple ESG reporting frameworks. However, the past few years have seen a flurry of consolidation, standardization, and alignment in this space that has paved the way for regulations to come into play. Again, this activity is driven by the need for consistent, accurate and relevant data that can be used by stakeholders in making decisions. 

Importantly, ESG reporting is investor-driven. The International Sustainability Standards Board, established in November of 2021, has consolidated international frameworks and standards for ESG reporting and passed its first two rules in June 2023. The European Union formally adopted the European Sustainability Reporting Standards that inform the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive rule in July 2023 that allows for interoperability with the ISSB’s new standards.

In the U.S., the Securities and Exchange Commission passed its climate disclosure rule in March 2024, requiring publicly traded companies to report on Scope 1 and 2 emissions, when material. California passed two sets of regulations for greenhouse gas emissions reporting and ESG reporting in October 2023. Illinois, New York, Colorado, Vermont and Maine all have regulations pending in various stages of approval related to ESG reporting and compliance.

Many technology solutions have entered the market to make data aggregation and ESG reporting achievable.

In the coming months and years there are sure to be challenges to ESG reporting regulations in the United States. It is likely that lawsuits will argue claims related to a state’s extraterritorial authority (e.g., requiring Scope 3 emissions from a company’s value stream outside of a state’s jurisdiction). The SEC rule has already been met with significant legal challenges, and the SEC has voluntarily issued a stay pending judicial review. And many are awaiting for the results of the upcoming elections to act. But what is clear in this space is that standardization and consolidation of frameworks have increased significantly, and as a result of this alignment, regulations are being promulgated across the globe and are here to stay. Furthermore, these regulations impact U.S. companies.

 The EU’s ESRS are already effective and apply to multinational companies with significant EU operations. These requirements are expected to affect over 3,000 companies in the U.S. The related assurance requirements begin to rollout in 2025.

Regardless of what happens with the SEC standards, there remains a strong desire from many stakeholders in the United States to formalize regulations for GHG emissions and ESG reporting modeled after the ISSB framework and standards. Many expect the state regulations will fill the gap left by less stringent national regulations, but perhaps at a cost to more complicated, fractured reporting requirements.

The importance of assurance 

To ensure stakeholder’s confidence in the ESG data being disclosed, many companies have started engaging third-party firms to provide assurance on the ESG information. As referenced above, 88% of U.S. companies reporting ESG information obtained some level of third-party assurance. The trend toward greater assurance is evident; however, the high percentage does not tell the full story. For one, 82% of assurance was provided in the form of “limited assurance”. Limited assurance, or review engagements, are much less rigorous than audits. As the use of ESG information continues to increase we should start to see a move from limited to “reasonable” assurance. 

To date most assurance has been voluntary; however, that trend will likely start shifting to mandatory in the coming years as new sustainability reporting standards require assurance. We are already seeing this in Europe with the ESRS. The recent SEC and California regulations also have assurance requirements.

A further look at the firms providing assurance is noteworthy. Most of the assurance service providers in the U.S. are not CPA firms, but rather boutique, engineering and consulting firms. In fact, only 23% of the firms providing assurance in the U.S. were traditional CPA firms. This presents a significant opportunity for the accounting profession.

Similar to sustainability reporting standards, a global baseline for assurance has not existed. That is about to change with the expected issuance of International Standard on Sustainability Assurance 5000 expected to be issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board by the end of the year.

All of these factors point to the need for the accounting profession to prepare for the increasing demand for assurance services. 

The role of the accountant

What does this all mean for the accounting profession? The evolving landscape of ESG reporting, coupled with the increasing global demand for high-quality, accurate sustainability information, means a significant opportunity for CPAs and accountants to add value to business. CPA firms are perfectly positioned to provide advisory and assurance services, given their infrastructure around audit quality, independence requirements, and professional development. 

The technical training accountants receive in enterprise risk management, internal controls and financial reporting are essential building blocks to the skills needed to implement a successful sustainability reporting program. Just as important are the critical thinking and communication skills needed to influence change across an organization. One of the keys to implementing a successful ESG reporting infrastructure and providing quality assurance services is applying the concept of materiality to business risks and opportunities; this has also been one of greatest challenges to ESG reporting. This is another area CPAs are familiar with.

There is no question that CPA firms will need to invest in cross-functional capacity building and training around the evolving ESG reporting and assurance standards to meet the demands of stakeholders. Firms will also need to establish relationships with subject matter specialists that may not reside within the firm. Many tools have developed in recent years to assist firms in this regard. 

As ESG reporting and assurance requirements expand, companies, investors and other stakeholders will turn to the trusted accounting profession. Those CPA firms that focus now will be best prepared to meet the demand expected in the next few years.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Accounting

AI-Driven Automation and Continuous Accounting Frameworks

Published

5 days ago

on

August 15, 2026

By

The accounting profession is undergoing a fundamental structural transition as enterprise finance departments shift from periodic month-end closes toward automated continuous accounting models. By integrating specialized machine learning algorithms directly into enterprise resource planning (ERP) platforms, chief accounting officers are transforming financial reporting from a retrospective exercise into a real-time operational asset.

The Shift from Periodic Close to Continuous Financial Reporting
Traditional accounting workflows heavily relied on manual data reconciliation, spreadsheet calculations, and multi-week closing cycles at the end of each fiscal period. In contrast, continuous accounting frameworks utilize automated software agents to process, validate, and post transactional data in real time as business activities occur.

Automated bank reconciliation tools cross-reference incoming bank feeds, invoice records, and purchase orders automatically. By resolving transactional variances instantly throughout the month, corporate accounting teams eliminate the traditional workload spikes associated with quarterly and annual closes.

Machine Learning in Audit Trails and Anomaly Detection
Advanced natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning tools are redefining internal audit and financial control environments. Automated systems analyze 100% of general ledger entries, identifying anomalous transactions, duplicate payments, and unauthorized journal entries in real time.

Rather than relying on random statistical sampling, corporate internal auditors can focus their attention on high-risk flags automatically surfaced by algorithmic monitoring platforms. This continuous risk assessment strengthens internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR) and significantly reduces fraud risk.

Evolving Roles for Accounting Professionals
As routine data entry and manual reconciliation tasks become fully automated, the skill set required for accounting professionals is shifting toward data analysis, system design, and strategic business advisory.
– Systems Governance: Accountants are increasingly responsible for monitoring algorithmic accuracy and managing data integration pipelines.
– Business Partnership: Finance professionals leverage real-time financial dashboards to advise operational leaders on margin management and working capital allocation.
– Regulatory Compliance Management: Accounting teams utilize automated platforms to ensure compliance with dynamic tax codes and international accounting standards.

Core Implementation Recommendations
1. Deploy Automated Reconciliation Tools: Integrate continuous transaction processing modules into existing enterprise ERP architectures.
2. Establish Algorithmic Governance Controls: Implement strict internal testing protocols to ensure automated accounting rules comply with GAAP/IFRS standards.
3. Reskill Accounting Teams: Invest in training finance staff on data analytics, workflow automation, and predictive financial modeling.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Global ESG Reporting Standards and Double Materiality Compliance

Published

2 weeks ago

on

August 9, 2026

By

Corporate accounting departments face expanding reporting expectations as international sustainability disclosure standards achieve regulatory enforcement across major global jurisdictions. Chief Accounting Officers (CAOs) and corporate controllers are establishing rigorous internal accounting controls to treat Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) metrics with the same data precision, auditability, and governance as traditional financial statements.

Regulatory Harmonization Under Global Sustainability Frameworks
The implementation of standardized sustainability reporting frameworks—notably rules established by international sustainability accounting boards—has created unified expectations for public and large private enterprises. Corporations must report standardized metrics covering greenhouse gas emissions (Scope 1, 2, and material Scope 3), energy utilization, workforce demographics, and supply chain governance.

In Europe and other participating international jurisdictions, double materiality principles are mandatory. Under double materiality, organizations must report both how external sustainability risks impact corporate financial performance, and how internal corporate operations affect surrounding environmental and social structures.

Integrating Sustainability Metrics into Core ERP Systems
To provide auditable non-financial data, enterprise organizations are integrating specialized carbon accounting and ESG management platforms directly into core ERP systems. Automated data collectors capture energy utility invoices, logistics fuel consumption metrics, and vendor compliance records in real time.

Establishing automated, traceable data pipelines ensures that non-financial reporting is supported by clear audit trails. This structured approach allows external financial auditors to provide reasonable assurance on sustainability disclosures during annual corporate reporting cycles.

Financial Impacts and Capital Market Disclosure
Accurate ESG reporting directly influences corporate cost of capital and institutional credit ratings. Commercial lenders and institutional asset managers systematically incorporate sustainability metrics into risk pricing models. Companies that demonstrate transparent, verifiable progress in operational energy efficiency and climate risk mitigation benefit from expanded access to green bond markets and lower debt pricing.

Action Steps for Accounting Leadership
1. Implement Double Materiality Frameworks: Conduct comprehensive assessments to identify material financial and operational sustainability metrics.
2. Build Auditable Non-Financial Data Pipelines: Automate ESG data collection within core accounting software to ensure data integrity.
3. Align Sustainability with Annual Financial Filings: Prepare non-financial disclosures concurrently with financial statements to satisfy regulatory audit expectations.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Modernizing Internal Controls: Machine Learning and Continuous Monitoring in Auditing

Published

2 weeks ago

on

August 5, 2026

By

Internal audit departments and corporate risk managers are modernizing internal control frameworks by shifting from periodic sampling techniques to continuous monitoring and machine learning analytics. As operational data volumes increase across enterprise organizations, automated control testing ensures financial integrity, prevents corporate fraud, and streamlines annual audit engagements.

The Limitation of Periodic Audit Sampling
Historically, internal and external auditors evaluated internal controls by reviewing random samples of financial transactions—often analyzing less than five percent of total ledger entries. In complex enterprise environments, periodic sampling methods carry inherent risks of overlooking localized financial misstatements, unauthorized disbursements, or operational control breakdowns.

In 2026, progressive internal audit functions are utilizing automated continuous monitoring platforms that evaluate one hundred percent of financial transactions in real time. Continuous control auditing systems continuously monitor general ledger entries, procurement approvals, and expense reimbursements across all operating subsidiaries.

AI-Powered Fraud Detection and Anomaly Identification
Machine learning models trained on historical corporate financial data excel at identifying subtle transactional anomalies that indicate potential fraud or operational error. Automated systems instantly flag duplicate invoice payments, unapproved vendor creation, unusual journal entry timing, and unauthorized override of authority thresholds.

When an anomaly is detected, the automated auditing platform generates an instant risk alert, allowing internal audit teams to investigate root causes immediately. Early detection prevents minor operational errors from escalating into material weaknesses in financial reporting.

Streamlining External Audit Preparation
Continuous internal control monitoring delivers significant benefits during annual external financial audits. External audit firms can review continuous audit logs and automated control testing documentation, reducing the time required for manual field testing.

This integrated approach lowers overall audit compliance fees, reduces administrative burdens on corporate accounting staff, and provides senior management and audit committees with real-time visibility into the organization’s overall risk profile.

Core Implementation Guidelines
1. Transition to 100% Data Testing: Replace legacy sampling methods with automated continuous audit monitoring systems.
2. Deploy Anomaly Detection Algorithms: Implement machine learning models to identify unauthorized transactions and operational control overrides.
3. Align Internal and External Audit Workflows: Coordinate continuous control testing protocols with external auditors to optimize annual compliance cycles.

Continue Reading

Trending