Connect with us

Accounting

Firms on Windows 10 will get more time before support runs out

Published

on

The impending end of support for Windows 10 has been delayed for some users, giving accounting firms still on the operating system—a sizable minority—a little more time to make upgrades before it is officially obsolete. 

Support for Microsoft Windows 10 had been previously scheduled to end on October 14, 2025, which crucially meant no more security updates or monitoring. This led users all over to prepare upgrades, which has, on certain older machines, necessitated new hardware as well; this is particularly the case if the user plans to make heavy use of AI, as the operating system is designed to work with special chips called neural processing units which are made for AI operations. While many have already made the switch, a significant portion of users—including many CPA firms—have not. 

While the clock is still ticking, the hands are moving a little slower after Microsoft announced recently that they will be extending support for certain Windows 10 users by an extra year via a new Extended Security Updates program. Organizations wishing to take advantage of this program need to pay $61 per device and they will continue to receive security updates. This price then doubles every consecutive year for a maximum of three years. This security update-only subscription does not include new features, customer-requested non-security updates, design change requests or general tech support. 

Windows 10 on a laptop screen
Guilherand-Granges, France – October 28, 2020. Notebook with Microsoft Windows 10 logo. Operating systems developed by Microsoft.

Simon Lehmann/PhotoGranary – stock.adobe.com

CPA firms have been making steady, but slow, progress over the years in upgrading. A December 2023 report from the CPA Firm Management Association said Windows 10 remained the most popular operating system, with 47% of accountants saying the vast majority of their work uses it. 

Roman Kepczyk, director of firm technology with accounting-focused cloud services provider Rightworks—who was one of the report authors—said in a followup email that he would estimate that the number of Windows 10 PCs actively being used in accounting firms today is around 25%. However, he caveated by saying that he works mostly with large and mid-size firms, and so for smaller local firms the proportion is likely higher. Still, the recent announcement by Microsoft buys all firms some time. 

“I think the big concern with Windows 10 is that Microsoft slated October 14, 2025, to discontinue support, with security updates being the primary concern. Microsoft has since backtracked and said they would provide security updates beyond that  (no/small fee) so the security push to upgrade to Windows 11 is minimized as long as the Windows 10 user continues to get updates,” he said. 

Whatever reprieve firms can get is likely favorable, as Randy Johnston, co-founder and principal at accounting tech consultancy K2, said a lot of the practices he has observed are “in trouble on this, and may be suffering from the misperception that being in the cloud eliminates the problem.” While he couldn’t name a precise figure for how many firms overall are using Windows 10 right now, he estimated “it is north of 40%.” 

But even as people work to upgrade from Windows 10, more than half of all devices are already using Windows 11, representing about 52% of the market. However, both Kepczyk and Johnston cautioned against concentrating solely on joining them, as Windows 12 is currently in the pipeline. It would not do a firm well to go through all the trouble of migrating to Windows 11 and then immediately have to do it all over again for Windows 12. 

But just as there is now more time to go from 10 to 11, there is probably also more time to go from 11 to 12. Microsoft recently announced that Windows 11 version 25H2 is now available to the Windows Insider community, in advance of broader availability planned for the second half of 2025. While it was anticipated that Windows 12 would be released later this year, perhaps in the fall or late summer, the recent announcement could indicate that Microsoft intends to develop Windows 11 a little bit longer. This in mind, Kepczyk recommended people wait a while before upgrading. 

“With most work being done in the cloud, I am holding off recommending firms upgrade from Windows 10 to 11 as long as security is automatically updated. With Windows 12 being scheduled [soon], we believe it will be even more optimized for AI and the updated NPU hardware, so we anticipate recommending firms buy new PCs with Windows 12 starting May 2026 as long as no significant technical flaws have been identified,” he said. 

Johnston, too, advised accountants on Windows 10 to think in terms of Windows 12 versus 11. 

“Upgrades are needed, and NPU purchases would be wise. For many, this will require hardware purchases. I want them to buy enough to support Windows 12,” he said. 

Continue Reading

Accounting

Embedded AI and Automated Anomaly Detection Reshape Modern Corporate Accounting Frameworks

Published

on

Embedded AI and Automated Anomaly Detection Reshape Modern Corporate Accounting Frameworks

The accounting and audit landscape in 2026

The accounting and audit landscape in 2026 is defined by the full integration of artificial intelligence directly into core enterprise software platforms. Rather than operating as standalone third-party tools, generative AI, automated reconciliation, and continuous anomaly detection are now natively embedded within major ERP engines including SAP, Oracle, Microsoft Dynamics, QuickBooks, and Sage. This technology integration is transforming daily financial operations, internal reporting controls, and external audit workflows.

Recent industry benchmark surveys reveal a widening performance gap

Recent industry benchmark surveys reveal a widening performance gap between finance teams utilizing integrated AI automation and those relying on legacy manual processes. Organizations actively leveraging embedded AI report up to 37% higher revenue per employee, driven by automated invoice matching, instant ledger entries, and predictive cash flow modeling. Routine, high-volume transactional tasks that once required manual intervention are now executed in real time with continuous digital audit trails.

AI introduces new governance and control responsibilities

However, the widespread deployment of embedded AI introduces new governance and control responsibilities for accounting professionals. Auditing standards now mandate strict verification protocols for algorithmically generated journal entries and financial commentary. External auditors are evaluating enterprise AI governance frameworks, reviewing automated rule sets, testing data ingestion pipelines, and ensuring that financial controllers maintain human-in-the-loop oversight over automated system outputs.

Furthermore, cloud governance and data security have become core operational skills for modern CPAs and controllers. As financial ledgers and client data stream through interconnected cloud ecosystem APIs, accounting teams must implement multi-factor access controls, continuous data encryption, and strict data privacy compliance to protect sensitive financial records from cyber vulnerabilities.

The embedding of AI into enterprise accounting software redefines internal financial controls and career requirements for accounting professionals. Business owners and finance leaders must update governance protocols, invest in staff digital literacy, and ensure accounting systems maintain rigorous audit compliance to capture productivity gains safely.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Mandatory ESG Reporting Standards Demand Standardized Non-Financial Audit Trails

Published

on

Mandatory ESG Reporting Standards Demand Standardized Non-Financial Audit Trails

Corporate accounting departments face an expanded regulatory mandate as mandatory sustainability and Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) reporting frameworks take full effect internationally. Governed by the European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) IFRS S1 and S2 standards, enterprise financial controllers are now legally required to track, verify, and report non-financial data with the same internal controls and auditability as traditional financial statements.

The expansion shifts ESG compliance

This regulatory expansion shifts ESG compliance from marketing departments to corporate accounting offices. Financial managers are now responsible for gathering, consolidating, and verifying carbon emissions metrics, supply chain labor conditions, water usage, and climate risk exposures across multi-tiered corporate structures. These non-financial metrics must be integrated into standardized general ledgers to withstand rigorous third-party audit assurance processes.

To comply with these rigorous reporting mandates, accounting software providers have added dedicated ESG modules designed to aggregate data from IoT sensors, utility platforms, and vendor management systems. Controllers are implementing internal control frameworks—modeled after traditional COSO frameworks—to ensure the completeness, accuracy, and consistency of sustainability disclosures, protecting organizations against greenwashing penalties and litigation risks.

The transition requires significant cross-functional collaboration between accounting teams, legal counsel, and operational directors. Accounting professionals are expanding their technical expertise beyond financial ledgers to master carbon accounting methodologies, lifecycle assessment standards, and non-financial data governance protocols, fundamentally expanding the role of the modern corporate accountant.

Why This Information Matters
Mandatory ESG disclosures require companies to treat environmental and social metrics as audited financial records. Executives, accountants, and board members must institute formal tracking and assurance processes to satisfy legal mandates, maintain investor confidence, and mitigate regulatory non-compliance risks.

Continue Reading

Accounting

SEC’s Semiannual Reporting Proposal Faces Investor Pushback: What CFOs Need to Know

Published

on

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)

A proposal from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to potentially shift some public companies away from quarterly financial reporting toward a semiannual model is drawing significant pushback from investors, even as it continues moving through the regulatory process. The debate has direct implications for corporate finance teams, auditors, and the broader transparency of U.S. capital markets.

What the SEC Proposed

According to a summary published by accounting advisory firm Cohen & Co., the SEC issued a proposed rule on May 19, 2026, aimed at simplifying financial reporting requirements for many U.S. public companies. The proposal would potentially reduce the frequency of certain mandatory disclosures from quarterly to semiannual, a structural change that has not been made to core U.S. reporting requirements in decades.

The proposal follows an extended debate within U.S. policy circles, with proponents arguing that reduced reporting frequency could lower compliance costs and free up management time for longer-term strategic planning rather than quarter-to-quarter results management.

Why Investors Are Pushing Back

Comment letters submitted in response to the proposal have been extensive, and according to Cohen & Co.’s review of the public record, investors “appear to be largely opposed” to the shift, viewing frequent interim reporting as a core benefit of U.S. capital markets relative to other jurisdictions.

Accounting and law firms have taken a more measured position, generally urging any changes to remain aligned with the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), whose existing disclosure requirements and guidance are built around a quarterly reporting cadence. A shift to semiannual reporting without corresponding changes to FASB guidance could create friction between SEC filing requirements and GAAP-based disclosure expectations.

Lessons From the U.K. Experience

The debate is not without precedent. The United Kingdom moved away from mandatory quarterly reporting for listed companies in 2014, returning to a semiannual disclosure requirement. According to Cohen & Co.’s analysis, that experience offers a cautionary data point: there was no measurable increase in capital expenditure or R&D investment following the change, while analyst coverage of affected companies declined as reliable interim information became less available — a particular risk for smaller and newly public companies that rely on analyst coverage to maintain investor visibility.

Practical Implications for Finance Teams

Beyond the debate over disclosure philosophy, the proposal carries practical complications. Many companies have debt covenants and credit agreements structured around quarterly financial delivery; a shift to semiannual reporting could require renegotiating those terms. Reduced reporting frequency would also extend the “window of market silence” between disclosures, a factor that governance and investor-relations teams would need to manage carefully to avoid information asymmetry.

Separately, and unrelated to the reporting-frequency debate, the SEC and FASB have continued finalizing more routine updates this year. New Accounting Standards Updates are taking effect for December 31, 2026, fiscal year-ends covering income tax disclosures, credit loss measurement, induced debt conversions, and stock compensation, according to Eide Bailly’s review of 2026 ASU activity. Additional guidance on paid-in-kind dividends and environmental credits is also on the near-term horizon.

What to Watch Next

The semiannual reporting proposal remains in the comment and review phase, and no final rule has been adopted as of this writing. Finance leaders should monitor the SEC’s regulatory agenda for further movement, while treating the current quarterly reporting requirement as the operative standard until any final rule is issued and an effective date is set.

Given the extent of investor opposition documented in the comment file, a full shift to mandatory semiannual reporting appears more likely to result in either a scaled-back compromise or continued study rather than swift adoption — though the SEC’s ultimate direction remains uncertain.

 

Continue Reading

Trending