Connect with us

Accounting

Congress considers how to fix the Corporate Transparency Act

Published

on

The Corporate Transparency Act passed both Houses of Congress with bipartisan support in 2021 and went into effect on Jan. 1, 2024. Since then, it has been declared unconstitutional by one court and is the subject of lawsuits in at least three other courts. 

While it did not garner much awareness at the beginning, the American Institute of CPAs, the National Association of Enrolled Agents, and a number of preparer organizations have been speaking out against its filing requirements and the effect they have on small businesses and those who assist them. 

And at a congressional hearing held Tuesday to kick off Small Business Week, Roger Harris, president of Padgett Business Services, predicted massive noncompliance with the act’s beneficial ownership information filing requirements if the rules remain as they currently are.

capitol-mall.jpg

The CTA requires “reporting companies” — defined as corporations, limited liability companies, or other similar entities registered to do business in the U.S. — to file a beneficial ownership information report with the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. Beginning Jan. 1, 2024, reporting companies created or registered to do business in the United States before Jan. 1, 2024, must file by Jan. 1, 2025. Reporting companies created or registered to do business in the United States in 2024 have 90 calendar days to file after receiving actual or public notice that their company’s creation or registration is effective. 

The 23 exemptions from the filing requirement include tax-exempt entities, credit unions, and public utilities, with the major exemption for large operating companies. A large operating company is one which employs more than 20 full-time employees in the U.S.; filed a federal income tax return showing more than $5 million in in gross receipts or sales, including receipts or sales of other entities owned by the entity and through which the entity operates; and has an operating presence at a physical location in the U.S. 

FinCEN estimates there will be approximately 32 million reporting companies in the first year of the reporting requirement and approximately 5 million new reporting companies each year thereafter. 

While individually they are small, collectively they represent a major portion of the American economy, according to Harris, who estimated that the 61.6 million small business employees in the U.S. comprise nearly 46% of employees nationwide. 

“These are the businesses and entities that will primarily be impacted by the BOI reporting requirement,” he said — and the majority of these small businesses do not have the internal capacity to track and follow the many regulations and compliance requirements that fall on their businesses. 

“Small-business owners who get into the business to do the one thing they love are also required to do 99 other things they hate,” he remarked in testimony before the House Committee on Small Business on Tuesday. And while most legislation has small-business exceptions, the CTA specifically targets small businesses.

Harris pointed out that the act’s requirements do not reflect the reality of businesses’ relationship with their tax professionals and other third-party service providers. They will likely have annual or slightly more often communication with them, but will not interact with them on a weekly or monthly basis. 

“If a beneficial owner’s driver’s license is renewed, has a name change, or a change in residential address, the requirement to notify FinCEN within 30 days will not be top of mind and would lead to rampant noncompliance,” Harris warned. “Furthermore, third-party service providers are not privy to those changes or made aware of them on a regular basis.”

“While FinCEN argued in its final rule that the reporting company is ultimately responsible for the filing and third parties will be certifying on their behalf, the reality is that the third party may also be subject to the penalties and additional protection is needed to encourage third parties to help,” he said.

Harris suggested that FinCEN work more closely with the Internal Revenue Service to better understand how to educate the tax professional industry, as well as to provide joint guidance and examples, as is common with more complicated tax rules that help empower tax pros to be part of the solution. 

Among the examples of where more clarity is needed, Harris cited substantial control of family members, business closers, and changes in number of employees that cause a business to move in and out of the BOI requirements. 

“I was encouraged by members on both sides of the aisle,” Harris said after the hearing. “They recognized that something has to change, and hopefully it will lead to a better bill to make it work for everybody. As I left, someone handed me a text of a bill introduced this morning to repeal the CTA. It’s uncertain how far it will go, but it’s an indication that the attitude toward the CTA is changing.”

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