Accounting
Cryptocurrency CPAs race to prepare clients for end of universal wallet accounting from IRS rule change
Accountants in the cryptocurrency arena have been busy preparing their clients for what they characterize as a seismic shift in digital asset reporting before the safe harbor provision ends in January.
“You’re talking about going from the universal wallet concept–which is imperfect without a doubt but something we can handle today–to what is, in essence, specific IDs, where every wallet needs to be treated as its own universe for tax purposes. This is a huge change, and considering how a lot of these reporting infrastructures, even on the transactional level, were built out, it’s not ideal,” he said.
To illustrate, according to Gordon, consider an entity that runs a trading algorithm with many microtransactions, hundreds or even thousands per day and possibly millions per year. Accountants will need to capture all of those transactions, trace their paths through specific wallets, and identify what is and is not taxable through it all, which theoretically can be a very time consuming process.
The degree of ease or difficulty of helping a client through this, said Gordon, comes down largely to their overall due diligence or “wallet hygiene,” which could best be thought of as maintaining certain habits to security, privacy and effectiveness of one’s accounts. This could include tracking things like which wallets serve which purpose, which assets are held in those wallets, who has custody of them and who controls them. While these things are often on a public blockchain, and so technically auditable, it won’t always be easy.
Pat Camuso, founder of digital asset-focused accounting firm Camuso CPA, noted that assisting clients through this change is basically a matter of tracking and tracing assets through identifying the relevant data and drilling down at the transaction level on an asset-by-asset basis. This allows them to track the flow of funds so as to, ultimately, map the client’s accounts, everything in them, and what assets are inbound and outbound. He said it’s kind of like being a forensic accountant.
“It takes a lot of digging, a lot of piecing together, just a tangled mess of a puzzle every time. And now this revenue procedure requires that whole tangled mess to be accurate,” he said, noting that today most just try to determine gains or losses and move on.
If someone has already been practicing proper wallet hygiene, these engagements won’t be that difficult to get through. Unfortunately, many do not. For instance, both Gordon and Camuso noted that it’s not just possible but common for people to literally forget about a wallet and lose track of just how many they have.
“I was just looking at an account from before, we’ve been doing their accounting since 2017, and there was a painful reconciliation process that covered maybe 12-13 wallets they didn’t tell us about, and several exchanges as well,” he said.
Because the new rules increase complexity, the engagements will become more complex, which means they will take longer and cost more. But given the difficulty of navigating the labyrinth of assets held by some clients, Camuso said there’s not much other choice.
“[You’ll need to be] going asset by asset, down a whole list, and ensuring that everything is allocated right. You may have 25 lots of Ethereum and now we have to snapshot your wallets and allocate them appropriately to each wallet, so with that level of complication, yes, that will increase fees,” he said. As for ongoing maintenance, “it has always been that tangled mess and fees have always reflected that as a result, because there is no way around that.”
Gordon, from Red Five, noted that even just scoping these engagements out have become a little more challenging—while many CPAs are moving away from the billable hour, he said it can sometimes be a struggle to determine a fair estimate for this work. However, he said he is less concerned about the economics of the matter than he is about the timing, as there’s a lot to do and not much more time to do it.
“It seems like everything takes way longer. There’s way more stuff to do and the deeper you get the more challenging it gets to come up with the right answer. It depends on the platform. There’s the large institutional ones, and they’re going to be okay, they will figure out a way to make sure we’re ramped up and ready to go, but there’s some of the newer [blockchains] out there, the newer platforms are working hard but these standards are very hard to maintain,” he said.
Camuso added that many of the accounting solutions used for cryptocurrency have been coded with the universal wallet methodology in mind, and many of them have not yet adjusted to the new rules, with a few exceptions.
Ledgible, a cryptocurrency solutions provider, is one. CEO Kell Canty noted that users have always been able to select either a universal wallet or account-by-account approach, meaning that the only real change that had to happen was disabling the former option. Making the shift, though, may not necessarily be as easy as clicking a button. Canty said that the difficulty and complexity of the operation depends entirely on the user, there is no one size fits all. Some have exhaustive books and records and rules on how they document and approach allocations, and so won’t have much difficulty; others are a little less fastidious, and so may have a more difficult time.
Canty added that another major challenge is that there are a lot of people, some of whom may not be as sophisticated as others, who either know very little about the change or don’t even know about it at all. Something as big as this, he said, you’d think they’d be more aware, but many don’t really think much about taxes and how they’re calculated until around April or October. It’s been a tumultuous year and people’s attention is being pulled in a lot of direction, he said, and this is a very intricate and complex change, so those who aren’t professionals won’t necessarily know to look into the implications of this.
“It will be an education process. Not just among our own users but universally for the [professionals] and platforms to educate what it will mean on a going forward basis and how the safe harbor only exists up until January 1,” he said.
As for Ledgible itself, he said they’re gearing up for customer service because they think they will soon be getting a lot of requests from users who suddenly become aware of the change. He noted this is more complex for the average used, and what’s more they’ll have to learn about it in a compressed timeframe, which he said might cause more confusion. Ledgible is also planning for an information campaign to help users understand what is happening and why.
“It’s a little difficult to get casual users interested in the intricacies of tax regulations, but we will try,” he said.
Compounding the challenge is the fact that while the shift from universal wallet to account-by-account reporting is the most prominent new rule, it’s not the only one. Another big change is
“If you’ve been around this industry long enough, you know that enforcing something like this is challenging because you’re dealing with a lot of unique transactions … For certain groups or individuals, LIFO might make more sense for those who are very detail oriented while specific identification might make more sense [in others],” he said. “FIFO being the law of the land is potentially a big deal and I can see there being pushback from those who are trying to file compliantly, and at the same time there are also potential tax consequences as well.”
Camuso noted that this will also require users with multiple wallets to be more meticulous in how they structure their assets.
“Now in 2025 they’re creating a scenario where you can’t just plug your transactions in and pick the highest cost and call it a day–you must manage funds appropriately and flow of funds must match capital gains calculations. … It is to eliminate this idea of cherry picking the highest cost basis,” he said.
When asked about the best practices they’ve found in helping clients through this situation, both Camuso and Gordon had similar advice: maintaining accurate records, both on the part of the client and the firm. Camuso noted that making sure the calculations are accurate up to that point is really half the battle, if this is covered then the allocations will not be very complex. Meanwhile, Gordon said it’s vital to understand all the wallets involved, what transitions are related to each of them, and making sure records are updated regularly. Preparation, overall, is key. Of course, this might be a tall order in October. Stil, Camuso said it’s important to make clients aware of this and to impress upon them it’s much better to do this before the Jan. 1 deadline.
“To the degree that someone does not follow up with me before Jan. 1, the big thing is that deadline. It’s not even Jan. 15, it’s Jan. 1. If someone is lackadaisical and overlooks that, it won’t be a good sign. Then there becomes the question of what we will do next year,” he said.
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.
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.”
The Internal Revenue Service rarely penalizes taxpayers who have high balances in foreign bank accounts and fail to file the proper forms, according to a new report.
Processing Content
The
Taxpayers with specified foreign financial assets that meet a certain dollar threshold are also required to report the information to the IRS by filing Form 8938. Failure to file the form can result in penalties of up to $60,000. However, TIGTA’s previous reports have demonstrated that the IRS rarely enforces these penalties.
The IRS created an Offshore Private Banking Campaign initiative to address tax noncompliance related to taxpayers’ failure to file Form 8938 and information reporting associated with offshore banking accounts, but it’s had limited success.
Even though the initiative identified hundreds of individual taxpayers with significant foreign bank account deposits who failed to file Forms 8938, the campaign only resulted in relatively few taxpayer examinations and a small number of nonfiling penalties. The campaign identified 405 taxpayers with significant foreign account balances who appeared to be noncompliant with their FATCA reporting requirements.
The IRS used two ways to address the 405 noncompliant taxpayers: referral for examinations and the issuance of letters to them.
- 164 taxpayers (who had an average unreported foreign account balance of $1.3 billion) were referred for possible examination, but only 12 of the 164 were examined, with five having $39.7 million in additional tax and $80,000 in penalties assessed.
- 241 noncompliant taxpayers (who had an average unreported account balance of $377 million) received a combination of 225 educational letters (requiring no response from the taxpayers) and 16 soft letters (requiring taxpayers to respond). None of the 241 taxpayers were assessed the initial $10,000 FATCA nonfiling penalty.
“While taxpayers can hold offshore banking accounts for a number of legitimate reasons, some taxpayers have also used them to hide income and evade taxes,” said the report.
Significant assets and income are factors considered by the IRS when assessing whether taxpayers intentionally evaded their tax responsibilities, the report noted. Given the large size of the average unreported foreign account balances, these taxpayers probably have higher levels of sophistication and an awareness of their obligation to comply with the law.
TIGTA believes the IRS needs to establish specific performance measures to determine the effectiveness of the FATCA program. “If the IRS does not plan to enforce the FATCA provisions even where obvious noncompliance is identified, it should at least quantify the enforcement impact of its efforts,” said the report. “This will ensure that IRS decision makers have the information they need to determine if the FATCA program is worth the investment and improves taxpayer compliance.
TIGTA made three recommendations in the report, including revising Campaign 896 processes to include assessing FATCA failure to file penalties; assessing the viability of using Form 1099 data to identify Form 8938 nonfilers; and implementing additional performance measures to give decision makers comprehensive information about the effectiveness of the FATCA program. The IRS disagreed with two of TIGTA’s recommendations and partially agreed with the remaining recommendation. IRS officials didn’t agree to assess penalties in Campaign 896 or with implementing performance measures to assess the effectiveness of the FATCA program.
“From our perspective, TIGTA’s conclusions regarding IRS Campaign 896 are based, in part, on a misguided premise and overgeneralizations, including the treatment of ‘potential noncompliance’ as tantamount to ‘egregious noncompliance’ that warrants a monetary penalty without contemplating the variety of justifications that may exempt a taxpayer from having to file Form 8938,” wrote Mabeline Baldwin, acting commissioner of the IRS’s Large Business and International Division, in response to the report.
What that means for consumer loans
Checks and Balance newsletter: Of God and MAGA
Why software stocks, 2026’s market dogs, have joined the rally
Armanino adds Strategic Accounting Outsourced Solutions
New 2023 K-1 instructions stir the CAMT pot for partnerships and corporations
