Connect with us

Accounting

Builder.ai ex-CFO subpoenaed in US for auditor communications

Published

on

U.S. investigators are advancing a criminal probe into Builder.ai, demanding a former executive’s communications with the firm’s U.K. auditor and with others involved in the financial reporting for the artificial intelligence startup ahead of its June bankruptcy.

Federal Bureau of Investigation officers served former Builder.ai Chief Financial Officer Andres Elizondo at a Dallas area airport in August with a subpoena, said people familiar with the matter, asking not to be identified because the information isn’t public. Prosecutors sought information related to alleged violations of laws relating to wire fraud, securities fraud and conspiracy, according to the subpoena reviewed by Bloomberg, without naming the exact target of the probe. The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Manhattan has been looking into Builder.ai’s financial practices and previously demanded the company turn over documents, Bloomberg News reported in May. 

Investigators ordered Elizondo to turn over communications with investors, creditors and other accounting firms that did business with the company, according to the subpoena. They specifically asked for his exchanges with Builder.ai founder Sachin Dev Duggal and Paul Goldwin, a partner at accounting firm PKF Littlejohn who had signed off on a Builder.ai affiliate’s U.K. accounts.

The specific demands from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York, which haven’t been previously reported, signal the investigation of the startup once valued at $1.5 billion is moving forward. Builder.ai collapsed after investors learned it had vastly inflated sales, leading to the biggest bankruptcy of an AI company since the start of the ChatGPT era. Its implosion has served as a cautionary tale for investors pouring vast sums into the technology.

The prosecutors asked for all communications and documents related to “Builder.ai/Engineer.ai” and defined that entity as all corporate affiliates and subsidiaries, including Engineer.ai Global Limited, which is the U.K. entity that Goldwin audited. Builder.ai was founded under the name Engineer.ai, and the original name is still used with some corporate affiliates.

In a statement, PKF Littlejohn said it and Goldwin did not provide any services to Builder.ai, which it described as “the US entity within the group that is under scrutiny.”

“We acted solely as auditors of Engineer.ai Global Limited, the U.K. entity,” a spokesman for the firm said in a statement. “We have not received a subpoena and have no visibility regarding its contents. We will review any requests for information in line with our professional obligations.”

An attorney for PKF Littlejohn added that their understanding is that the firm and Goldwin are not under investigation themselves. Elizondo, who received the subpoena, is not a suspect or target of the investigation either, a person familiar with his situation said, asking not to be identified discussing private matters.

Prosecutors also broadly requested communications with “current, former, or potential accounting firms,” the subpoena reviewed by Bloomberg shows. While it identifies 10 accounting firms by name, Builder.ai founder Duggal and PKF Littlejohn’s Goldwin are the only two individuals specifically named. Communications with them are the first two requests made in the subpoena issued to Elizondo. 

Prosecutors haven’t said that they’re charging anyone in connection with the London-based company’s collapse, and it’s unclear whether anyone will be.

Elizondo’s lawyer, Adam Katz, declined to comment on the subpoena. A spokesperson for Duggal didn’t provide comment, and a spokesperson for Builder.ai didn’t respond to a request for comment. The FBI and the Manhattan U.S. Attorney’s Office also didn’t provide comment. 

Builder.ai pitched software that would utilize AI to help users create apps with minimal coding experience. A flood of venture capital money and backing from Microsoft Corp. propelled the company to a $1.5 billion valuation in 2023, making it one of the U.K.’s biggest AI startups. Duggal became a fixture of the technology conference circuit. 

But behind the scenes, the company was using a web of complex transactions to exaggerate revenue, Bloomberg reported previously, citing documents. Builder.ai’s audit committee found it had inflated 2024 sales by nearly 300%, leading creditors to seize most of its available funds and force it into bankruptcy. 

In recent months, U.S. investigators gained extensive access to the company’s digital records, the people familiar with the situation said. Additional information demands were sent to some of Builder.ai’s investors, including the Qatar Investment Authority, one of the people said. 

A spokesperson for QIA declined to comment. 

Goldwin has a lengthy history with Duggal. Before founding Engineer.ai in 2016, Duggal was the chief executive officer of SMX Corp., a U.K. firm that resold computer hardware and software. Goldwin became a director at SMX in 2010 and signed off on its financial statements in that capacity for several years, according to U.K. corporate filings. 

He moved to PKF Littlejohn, a London accounting firm, in 2013 and remained an SMX director for another four years. 

“Mr. Goldwin became a U.K. director only in order to oversee that the accounts were filed on time,” PKF Littlejohn said of his time at SMX in the statement. “Mr. Goldwin did not know Mr. Duggal in a personal capacity.” The firm said Goldwin resigned as an SMX director in January 2017 and that “no auditing services were ever provided.”

Goldwin signed off on Builder.ai’s U.K. accounts as its senior statutory auditor for annual accounts from 2020 to 2023. Its last full-year accounts were filed Aug. 15, 2024, for the year ending March 31, 2023. 

While small companies often turn to familiar auditors, relying on one that sat on the same board as the CEO could be a red flag to prosecutors, according to Simon Osborne, an executive fellow at the London Business School who focuses on corporate governance. “It doesn’t look good,” he said. “It’s always a question of facts and degree.”

There was no trading relationship between SMX and Engineer.ai, according to PKF Littlejohn. “Mr. Goldwin made no management decisions in relation to SMX,” it said in the statement.

The Financial Times earlier reported that Elizondo received a subpoena and, in March, reported on connections between Duggal and Goldwin and other auditors. 

The U.S. Attorney’s subpoena of Elizondo ordered him to appear before a grand jury on Sept. 9 in New York, according to the document reviewed by Bloomberg. But the requirement for him to appear was waived, and he is voluntarily cooperating with the investigation, the person familiar with his situation said.

Elizondo served as CFO from 2021 until 2023. The company didn’t find a replacement for the position before going bankrupt.

Prosecutors and the FBI spoke with at least one other former Builder.ai staffer earlier this year, according to a person familiar with the matter, who asked not to be identified because the information isn’t public. 

Continue Reading

Accounting

Global ESG Reporting Standards and Double Materiality Compliance

Published

on

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

on

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

Accounting

Automated Tax Compliance and Global Regulatory Harmonization in 2026

Published

on

Corporate tax accounting departments are navigating an era of unprecedented regulatory complexity as global tax harmonization frameworks take full effect alongside real-time digital tax reporting mandates. Tax directors and accounting teams are adopting cloud-based tax compliance automation tools to manage multi-jurisdictional tax liabilities and satisfy stringent reporting rules across international jurisdictions.

Implementation of Global Minimum Tax Provisions
The implementation of international tax reform agreements—notably the Pillar Two global minimum tax framework—has reshaped multinational corporate tax planning. Multinational enterprises with consolidated revenues exceeding established thresholds must ensure an effective tax rate of at least 15% across every jurisdiction in which they operate.

Accounting teams are implementing specialized tax calculation modules integrated directly into enterprise resource planning (ERP) platforms. These automated tools calculate effective tax rates per country, identify top-up tax liabilities, and generate standardized compliance documentation required by national tax authorities.

Real-Time Digital Invoicing and E-Reporting Mandates
Tax authorities across Europe, Latin America, and Asia-Pacific have enacted mandatory electronic invoicing (e-invoicing) and continuous transaction controls (CTC). Under these systems, corporate transaction data must be submitted electronically to government portals in real time at the point of sale or invoice issuance.

This shift toward continuous digital tax reporting eliminates traditional annual tax audits in favor of ongoing automated compliance monitoring. Accounting departments are upgrading invoicing software to ensure seamless XML data formatting, digital signature authentication, and real-time validation against tax authority databases.

Automation and Data Analytics in Corporate Tax Strategy
To keep pace with dynamic tax legislation, tax departments are transitioning from reactive compliance teams to proactive strategic advisors. Machine learning algorithms analyze corporate transactional data to identify tax credits, research and development (R&D) incentives, and cross-border transfer pricing adjustments.

By automating routine tax return filings and calculations, corporate tax directors can focus on long-term capital structuring, evaluating the tax implications of corporate mergers, and optimizing international supply chain networks.

Strategic Priorities for Tax Executives
1. ERP System Upgrades: Ensure enterprise software is capable of generating real-time, granular tax data required for global minimum tax compliance.
2. E-Invoicing Integration: Implement scalable e-invoicing platforms to satisfy regional continuous transaction control regulations.
3. Strategic Tax Analytics: Utilize predictive tax modeling tools to evaluate structural changes in corporate operations and cross-border trade.

Continue Reading

Trending