Accounting
Gen AI will upgrade you not replace you: KPMG
As the AI revolution continues apace, data has confirmed that generative AI is making some workers more productive and some companies more profitable, though this does not mean it’s a good idea to start cutting staff.
During a virtual roundtable hosted by KPMG last week, Pär Edin, the US AI go-to-market leader for the Big Four firm, said that there is hard data showing that, for at least some workers, generative AI has been paying dividends in terms of productivity, referencing research from last year finding that, on average, the technology has introduced
He referenced KPMG’s own research on top of this, which found that—after analyzing 10,000 companies—generative AI has a EBITA impact ranging from 3 to 17%, which is calculated as time freed up multiplied by the labor cost of that time, which he felt was a highly significant impact. Effectively, he said, generative AI has created an entirely new driver for productivity.
Kitreel – stock.adobe.com
“It varies by sector and company, but those are really, really huge numbers. This is an additional lever that didn’t exist 18 months ago. Now any company can pursue single-digit or low double-digit percentage points of improvement. Not overnight, but within a 12-36 month period using existing tools,” he said.
While all this does mean companies can do more with less, Edin warned that this does not mean companies should start reducing headcount. In fact, he said, generative AI is pretty terrible at fully replacing people, at least right now. While AI is often touted for its automation capabilities, he said over the past few years companies have found this was a flawed conception. The promise of generative AI, he said, isn’t so much in replacing people but augmenting them.
“It’s not a headcount-reduction tool in the sense some may have thought about. [Instead, it’s] really a task augmentation tool. We talked about how to get those numbers–you need to break down the entire workforce. I don’t mean headcount but tasks and activities. For every one of those, there are some pretty interesting benchmarks on how much time could be freed up by using better tools. Think of it more as a power tool for the mind than an automation factory,” he said.
He understands that this might not be what certain business leaders want to hear. Edin noted that he has had many conversations with finance and accounting leaders that basically come down to ROI. This isn’t always the easiest to measure, especially when it comes to AI tools, and so sometimes it can be difficult to communicate the benefits. If it’s not reducing the cost of labor, some wonder, what’s the point? Edin, though, felt that focusing on the cost of labor was missing the point entirely.
“The most likely case we discussed was not labor cost or headcount reduction but gradual market expansion. So, think of it as companies continuing to grow at the same or greater pace on the top line while not growing labor costs and headcount at the same rate—or even keeping them steady,” he said.
Given that, by definition, this is more about supporting future growth than directly creating it, he conceded it can be difficult to quickly make back the investment. This has led to a push and pull for accounting and finance leaders between wanting to implement AI for its productivity benefits while, at the same time, wanting to spend only on that which has a direct business case.
“There is a tug-of-war between wanting to fund this as much as possible, because it does drive productivity, but at the same time not being too overblown about what it will do when explaining this to the board or an investor. This is a balancing act between wanting to do it and being fiscally responsible,” he said.
It may be easier to directly communicate the need to adopt AI in the future. Edin broke AI development down into three phases: retooling, reengineering and reimagining. The first phase, retooling, is about doing the same job with the same person and role but just more efficiently than before. He noted most companies are in this phase, rolling out pilots and training their staff. The second phase, reengineering, is where workflows themselves are changed to include AI, which he said serves to free up time and enhance efficiency by not just doing the same job but faster but doing a better job overall. Some companies, he said, are just entering this phase. Finally, reimagining is something few to no companies are doing now: thinking about AI as it applies to the entire business model.
“This is when you think about disruption. Will your entire business model be wiped out? Or will you disrupt others? You might go lower in the value stack, or even enter a different market entirely using this technology,” he said. “These phases are somewhat sequential but are happening in parallel depending on the company. Most companies sit somewhere between the first two phases.”
Agentic AI—where bots are given limited autonomy and initiative—may place companies between the second and third phase, but even then he said it will not mean the end of human involvement.
“There will be many types of tools. Even in an automated factory, you still have wrenches and screwdrivers. It will be an ecosystem. We’ll continue to use many different tools. The AIs are great because they’re flexible—they can do things they weren’t originally designed to do, and they can get better,” he said.
The International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board is proposing to tailor some of its standards to align with recent additions to the International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants’ International Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants when it comes to using the work of an external expert.
The
- ISA 620, Using the Work of an Auditor’s Expert;
- ISRE 2400 (Revised), Engagements to Review Historical Financial Statements;
- ISAE 3000 (Revised), Assurance Engagements Other than Audits or Reviews of Historical Financial Information;
- ISRS 4400 (Revised), Agreed-upon Procedures Engagements.
The IAASB is asking for comments via a digital response template that can be found on the
In December 2023, the IESBA approved an exposure draft for proposed revisions to the IESBA’s Code of Ethics related to using the work of an external expert. The proposals included three new sections to the Code of Ethics, including provisions for professional accountants in public practice; professional accountants in business and sustainability assurance practitioners. The IESBA approved the provisions on using the work of an external expert at its December 2024 meeting, establishing an ethical framework to guide accountants and sustainability assurance practitioners in evaluating whether an external expert has the necessary competence, capabilities and objectivity to use their work, as well as provisions on applying the Ethics Code’s conceptual framework when using the work of an outside expert.
President Donald Trump’s tariffs would effectively cause a tax increase for low-income families that is more than three times higher than what wealthier Americans would pay, according to an
The report from the progressive think tank outlined the outcomes for Americans of all backgrounds if the tariffs currently in effect remain in place next year. Those making $28,600 or less would have to spend 6.2% more of their income due to higher prices, while the richest Americans with income of at least $914,900 are expected to spend 1.7% more. Middle-income families making between $55,100 and $94,100 would pay 5% more of their earnings.
Trump has
Economists have warned that costs from tariff increases would ultimately be passed on to U.S. consumers. And while prices will rise for everyone, lower-income families are expected to lose a larger portion of their budgets because they tend to spend more of their earnings on goods, including food and other necessities, compared to wealthier individuals.
Food prices could rise by 2.6% in the short run due to tariffs, according to an
The Yale Budget Lab projected that the tariffs would result in a loss of $4,700 a year on average for American households.
Artificial intelligence is just getting started in the accounting world, but it is already helping firms like technology specialist
Schellman CEO Avani Desai said there have definitely been some shifts in headcount at the Top 100 Firm, though she stressed it was nothing dramatic, as it mostly reflects natural attrition combined with being more selective with hiring. She said the firm has already made an internal decision to not reduce headcount in force, as that just indicates they didn’t hire properly the first time.
“It hasn’t been about reducing roles but evolving how we do work, so there wasn’t one specific date where we ‘started’ the reduction. It’s been more case by case. We’ve held back on refilling certain roles when we saw opportunities to streamline, especially with the use of new technologies like AI,” she said.
One area where the firm has found such opportunities has been in the testing of certain cybersecurity controls, particularly within the SOC framework. The firm examined all the controls it tests on the service side and asked which ones require human judgment or deep expertise. The answer was a lot of them. But for the ones that don’t, AI algorithms have been able to significantly lighten the load.
“[If] we don’t refill a role, it’s because the need actually has changed, or the process has improved so significantly [that] the workload is lighter or shared across the smarter system. So that’s what’s happening,” said Desai.
Outside of client services like SOC control testing and reporting, the firm has found efficiencies in administrative functions as well as certain internal operational processes. On the latter point, Desai noted that Schellman’s engineers, including the chief information officer, have been using AI to help develop code, which means they’re not relying as much on outside expertise on the internal service delivery side of things. There are still people in the development process, but their roles are changing: They’re writing less code, and doing more reviewing of code before it gets pushed into production, saving time and creating efficiencies.
“The best way for me to say this is, to us, this has been intentional. We paused hiring in a few areas where we saw overlaps, where technology was really working,” said Desai.
However, even in an age awash with AI, Schellman acknowledges there are certain jobs that need a human, at least for now. For example, the firm does assessments for the FedRAMP program, which is needed for cloud service providers to contract with certain government agencies. These assessments, even in the most stable of times, can be long and complex engagements, to say nothing of the less predictable nature of the current government. As such, it does not make as much sense to reduce human staff in this area.
“The way it is right now for us to do FedRAMP engagements, it’s a very manual process. There’s a lot of back and forth between us and a third party, the government, and we don’t see a lot of overall application or technology help… We’re in the federal space and you can imagine, [with] what’s going on right now, there’s a big changing market condition for clients and their pricing pressure,” said Desai.
As Schellman reduces staff levels in some places, it is increasing them in others. Desai said the firm is actively hiring in certain areas. In particular, it’s adding staff in technical cybersecurity (e.g., penetration testers), the aforementioned FedRAMP engagements, AI assessment (in line with recently becoming an ISO 42001 certification body) and in some client-facing roles like marketing and sales.
“So, to me, this isn’t about doing more with less … It’s about doing more of the right things with the right people,” said Desai.
While these moves have resulted in savings, she said that was never really the point, so whatever the firm has saved from staffing efficiencies it has reinvested in its tech stack to build its service line further. When asked for an example, she said the firm would like to focus more on penetration testing by building a SaaS tool for it. While Schellman has a proof of concept developed, she noted it would take a lot of money and time to deploy a full solution — both of which the firm now has more of because of its efficiency moves.
“What is the ‘why’ behind these decisions? The ‘why’ for us isn’t what I think you traditionally see, which is ‘We need to get profitability high. We need to have less people do more things.’ That’s not what it is like,” said Desai. “I want to be able to focus on quality. And the only way I think I can focus on quality is if my people are not focusing on things that don’t matter … I feel like I’m in a much better place because the smart people that I’ve hired are working on the riskiest and most complicated things.”
These are 3 big things we’re watching in the stock market this week
As Real ID deadline approaches, there are ‘workarounds,’ experts say
These U.S. consumer stocks face higher China risks
New 2023 K-1 instructions stir the CAMT pot for partnerships and corporations
The Essential Practice of Bank and Credit Card Statement Reconciliation
Are American progressives making themselves sad?
-
Personal Finance1 week agoIRS’ free tax filing program is at risk amid Trump scrutiny
-
Blog Post1 week agoDocumenting Bookkeeping Processes and Procedures
-
Economics1 week agoTrump’s approval rating on economy at lowest of presidential career
-
Economics1 week ago‘He should bring them down’
-
Economics7 days agoDonald Trump wants a certain kind of immigrant: the uber-rich
-
Economics7 days agoTrump tariffs could cause summer economic slump: Chicago Fed president
-
Economics1 week agoChecks and Balance newsletter: The Democrats’ future is up for grabs
-
Personal Finance5 days agoConsumers are making different financial choices in response to tariffs