Connect with us

Accounting

First-time penalty abatement will soon be automatic

Published

on

The IRS’s First-Time Abatement program is a key penalty relief tool for taxpayers with a clean compliance history. For tax professionals, it offers the most direct way to resolve failure-to-file, failure-to-pay and failure-to-deposit penalties for otherwise compliant clients. 

At a recent AICPA tax conference, Erin Collins, National Taxpayer Advocate at the IRS, stated that beginning in 2026, the IRS will automatically apply First-Time Abatement to all qualifying taxpayers. Once fully implemented, this shift eases administrative burdens and lets practitioners address more complex matters. 

Understanding the authority, eligibility criteria and automation advantages will be essential for firms representing clients before the IRS.

Background and authority

The First Time Abatement program was introduced in 2001 as part of the IRS’s broader effort to promote voluntary compliance. The authority derives from the Internal Revenue Manual, principally IRM 20.1.1.3.6.1, which provides an administrative waiver for taxpayers with a good filing and payment history. It is not based on statute; it is a discretionary administrative practice used by the IRS to incentivize compliant behavior and assist taxpayers who have otherwise maintained good compliance but make an isolated mistake.

The program was designed to decrease the volume of penalty appeals and to acknowledge that compliant taxpayers sometimes miss a filing or payment deadline. The IRS’s goal was to expedite such cases, without requiring taxpayers to assert reasonable cause or go through extended correspondence cycles.

Penalties eligible for First-Time Abatement

First Time Abatement applies to three common noncompliance penalties.

  • Failure to file on time;
  • Failure to pay on time; and
  • Failure to deposit payroll taxes on time.

These penalties often arise from simple oversight, cash flow problems or disruptions in a business’s administrative processes. Since they can quickly add up and, in some cases, outstrip the underlying tax liability, the availability of a simple abatement process is particularly important to both individual and business taxpayers.

“Understanding that First Time Abatement has no dollar cap makes it particularly valuable when payroll tax deposits are missed,” notes Mary Lundstedt, partner at the law firm Hall Lundstedt. “A single quarter’s failure-to-deposit penalty can exceed the underlying tax liability, making this administrative waiver essential for business clients facing potential cash flow issues.”

Eligibility requirements

Although First Time Abatement is simple in concept, eligibility must be met exactly. There are three criteria considered by the IRS:

1. Filing compliance: The taxpayer must have filed the necessary returns for the last three years or have valid extensions on file. The IRS will not allow a First Time Abatement if the taxpayer has unfiled returns.

2. Compliance payment: All taxes due must be paid, or the taxpayer must be in an approved payment arrangement. An installment agreement is acceptable provided the taxpayer is current.

3. Clean penalty history: The taxpayer must not have had any penalties of the same type for the three previous tax years. The IRS interprets this rule very strictly. A penalty abated for reasonable cause is considered a prior penalty. A penalty abated under First Time Abatement is not considered a prior penalty.

When each of these conditions is satisfied, the IRS considers the taxpayer eligible.

Abatement requested

Historically, First Time Abatement was requested by calling the IRS Practitioner Priority Service, filing Form 843, or responding to a penalty notice. Many practitioners routinely ask the IRS to check for First Time Abatement before considering reasonable cause or other penalty relief options.

The IRS would check the compliance history, payment status and eligibility. If the taxpayer was qualified, the IRS granted approval for an abatement during the call or within a few weeks via correspondence. While this process was straightforward, it nevertheless involved both practitioner time and IRS resources. It also generated inconsistent results when IRS staff applied the rules unevenly.

Automatic abatement

IRS officials, including National Taxpayer Advocate Erin Collins, have announced that the agency will automatically grant the First Time Abatement whenever a taxpayer qualifies. The development shows improvements in IRS data systems and a broader trend toward automatic penalty reductions for compliant taxpayers.

When fully implemented, the automated waiver process should grant eligible taxpayers relief without requiring an application. This automation minimizes the need for calls, letters and follow-up inquiries, and reduces disputes over process, timing and eligibility.

Automatic application offers several benefits: it eliminates obstacles for taxpayers unaware of available relief, reduces the volume of calls to already overburdened IRS phone lines, minimizes errors from manual reviews, and ensures equal treatment for similarly situated taxpayers.

“While automation represents a significant advancement in penalty administration, practitioners should verify transcript entries carefully during the transition period,” advises Ashlee Hall, founding partner at Hall Lundstedt. “System limitations in the early stages could result in eligible penalties being overlooked, and proactive account review remains essential to protect client interests.”

Benefits for taxpayers and practitioners

First-time abatement has great value due to its predictability and simple administration compared to reasonable cause arguments. It does not need evidence, detailed narratives or proof of facts. It is entirely based on compliance history and status when requested.

Taxpayer benefits include:

1. Reduced financial burden: These penalties can be substantial. Avoiding these penalties creates cash stability for the taxpayer, particularly when the penalty exceeds the underlying tax.

2. Faster resolution: Clients and firms avoid lengthy correspondence cycles and multi-month delays.

3. Recognition of prior compliance: Taxpayers with a long record of timely compliance receive practical acknowledgement of this behavior.

This is a significant change, as taxpayers will receive relief automatically. In firms, automation enables staff to focus on higher-value advisory work. Rather than spending time on penalty calls, teams will concentrate on planning, representation, and resolving substantive issues.

Issues in practice management

First-time abatement review should be added to tax professionals’ standard penalty intake procedures. Even with automatic approval, firms should continue to review account transcripts to confirm the application and identify any penalties that were not removed as anticipated. Firms should also educate clients on the importance of maintaining a clean compliance history. A single failure-to-file penalty in the lookback period will eliminate eligibility for three years.

First Time Abatement remains one of the IRS’s most effective administrative relief programs. It delivers predictable, rule-driven relief for compliant taxpayers and reduces unnecessary administrative burden for both practitioners and the IRS. As the IRS adopts automated approval, tax professionals will experience fewer penalty disputes and swifter resolutions for eligible clients.

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

Accounting

AI-Driven Automation and Continuous Accounting Frameworks

Published

on

The accounting profession is undergoing a fundamental structural transition as enterprise finance departments shift from periodic month-end closes toward automated continuous accounting models. By integrating specialized machine learning algorithms directly into enterprise resource planning (ERP) platforms, chief accounting officers are transforming financial reporting from a retrospective exercise into a real-time operational asset.

The Shift from Periodic Close to Continuous Financial Reporting
Traditional accounting workflows heavily relied on manual data reconciliation, spreadsheet calculations, and multi-week closing cycles at the end of each fiscal period. In contrast, continuous accounting frameworks utilize automated software agents to process, validate, and post transactional data in real time as business activities occur.

Automated bank reconciliation tools cross-reference incoming bank feeds, invoice records, and purchase orders automatically. By resolving transactional variances instantly throughout the month, corporate accounting teams eliminate the traditional workload spikes associated with quarterly and annual closes.

Machine Learning in Audit Trails and Anomaly Detection
Advanced natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning tools are redefining internal audit and financial control environments. Automated systems analyze 100% of general ledger entries, identifying anomalous transactions, duplicate payments, and unauthorized journal entries in real time.

Rather than relying on random statistical sampling, corporate internal auditors can focus their attention on high-risk flags automatically surfaced by algorithmic monitoring platforms. This continuous risk assessment strengthens internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR) and significantly reduces fraud risk.

Evolving Roles for Accounting Professionals
As routine data entry and manual reconciliation tasks become fully automated, the skill set required for accounting professionals is shifting toward data analysis, system design, and strategic business advisory.
– Systems Governance: Accountants are increasingly responsible for monitoring algorithmic accuracy and managing data integration pipelines.
– Business Partnership: Finance professionals leverage real-time financial dashboards to advise operational leaders on margin management and working capital allocation.
– Regulatory Compliance Management: Accounting teams utilize automated platforms to ensure compliance with dynamic tax codes and international accounting standards.

Core Implementation Recommendations
1. Deploy Automated Reconciliation Tools: Integrate continuous transaction processing modules into existing enterprise ERP architectures.
2. Establish Algorithmic Governance Controls: Implement strict internal testing protocols to ensure automated accounting rules comply with GAAP/IFRS standards.
3. Reskill Accounting Teams: Invest in training finance staff on data analytics, workflow automation, and predictive financial modeling.

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

Trending