Connect with us

Accounting

Chicago payroll tax draws opposition from city’s business heads

Published

on

A group backed by financier Michael Sacks has started funding ads against Chicago’s plan to bring back a tax on large corporate payrolls, drawing the ire of Mayor Brandon Johnson.

Common Ground Collective, which has raised $11 million to drive change at City Hall years before the next mayoral election, is financing six-figure digital and streaming ads, including one that characterizes the proposed levy as $100 million in new taxes. The group is backed by Sacks, chairman of asset management firm GCM Grosvenor and a prominent Democratic donor, and has more than 100 contributors. 

Johnson, who is struggling to pass a budget before the Dec. 31 deadline, has proposed charging companies with at least 100 employees a tax of $21 per worker per month. The tax, once dubbed a “job killer,” would raise $100 million for community-safety programs.

“Frankly I think it’s beneath these so-called business leaders to lie to the public about the community safety surcharge,” Johnson said at a press conference this week, naming Sacks specifically. “My challenge to them is to just explain their reasoning and debate the pros and cons of this proposal.”

Johnson said the proposed tax would affect only the top 3% of large corporations in Chicago.

Sacks declined to comment. Common Ground Collective said in a statement that it stands by the facts it presented and that it has budget documents to prove that the so-called Community Safety Fund makes no new or additional investments in public safety or youth.

Common Ground Collective isn’t alone in opposing the levy. The One Future Illinois political action committee, a group whose leaders have had ties to Rahm Emanuel, is also funding its own ads against the levy. The former Chicago mayor previously called the tax a “job killer.”

Michael Ruemmler, president of One Future Illinois and former adviser to both Emanuel and Barack Obama, didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Other business and political leaders have also previously opposed the plan. Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, a billionaire Democrat, said in October that the proposed levy would repel major employers. Restaurant owners including McDonald’s Corp. have also said it would discourage jobs in the city. 

In a statement to Bloomberg News last month, the fast food chain said franchisees in Chicago “would experience negative impacts on their businesses due to the head tax.”

Craig Donohue, chief executive officer of options powerhouse Cboe Global Markets Inc., expressed his concerns in an interview last month. 

“I always want to see people creating an environment where companies want to be here, they want to hire here, talented people want to live here and they want to work here,” he said. “Anything that has the potential even to get in the way of that, I think undermines our long-term success.”

Budget gap

This isn’t the first time Johnson has tried to pit the city’s wealthy against its financially struggling residents. The progressive mayor last year sought to increase the real estate transfer tax for properties that sell for over $1 million, a proposal that failed.

Chicago is facing a $1.2 billion fiscal gap in its main operating fund as pandemic-era aid winds down while salary, material and pension costs increase. Johnson, who has been reluctant to cut spending, is also not finding support from members of the city council, which needs to sign off on the budget to approve it.

Last month, the city council’s finance committee rejected Johnson’s proposed revenue ordinance, which included the head tax. On Dec. 2, two dozen aldermen put forth an alternative budget that included eliminating the proposed head tax.

“Charging businesses for every employee they hire sends the wrong message at a critical time,” according to the aldermen’s proposed budget. “It’s a tax on the employment Chicagoans need.”

The city’s real estate leaders have also challenged the tax because it would apply only to employees who work 50% or more of their hours inside city limits. 

“The head tax penalizes employers for creating jobs and for bringing workers into the city,” said Amy Masters, the director of government and external affairs at the Building Owners and Managers Association in Chicago. “It risks slowing Chicago’s downtown revitalization.”

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