The Internal Revenue Service is paying out more claims for the Employee Retention Credit program even as it gives the claims greater scrutiny, and is moving the moratorium on processing new claims from Sept. 14, 2023 to Jan. 31, 2024.
The IRS is continuing to issue denials of improper ERC claims, while intensifying its audits and pursuing civil and criminal investigations of potential fraud and abuse. The findings of an IRS review, announced in June, confirmed concerns raised by tax professionals and others that there was an extremely high rate of improper ERC claims in the current inventory of ERC claims.
In recent weeks, the IRS has sent out 28,000 disallowance letters to businesses whose claims showed a high risk of being incorrect. The IRS estimates these disallowances will prevent up to $5 billion in improper payments. Thousands of audits are underway, and 460 criminal cases have been initiated. The IRS has also identified 50,000 valid ERC claims and is quickly moving them into the pipeline for payment processing in the weeks ahead. These payments are part of a so-called low-risk group of claims.
Given the complexity of the ERC and to reduce the risk of improper payments, the IRS emphasized it is moving methodically and deliberately on both the disallowances as well as additional payments to balance the needs of businesses with legitimate claims against the promoter-fueled wave of improper claims that came into the agency.
“The Employee Retention Credit is one of the most complex tax provisions ever administered by the IRS,” said IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel during a press call Thursday. “It’s technically detailed and resource intensive, and our challenges grew exponentially with the flood of promoter claims that came pouring in well after the pandemic ended. Our teams have been working hard to navigate this complex landscape. We’ve been focused on balancing our efforts to protect taxpayers from improper claims while also working to speed more payments to qualifying businesses. It has been a time-consuming process to separate valid claims from invalid ones. By no means has this been a simple situation.”
He noted these are not simple 1040 forms that can be quickly reviewed and paid out by the IRS. “These claims span multiple tax law changes, multiple calendar year quarters and have differing payment amounts,” said Werfel. “These have to be worked individually, claim by claim, and they all come in on paper, adding even further to the complexity of sorting valid claims from invalid ones. During the past year, we maintained a slow, judicious cadence of both ERC approvals and disapprovals, but we are now taking important steps forward to intensify our pace and begin reducing the overall inventory of pending ERC claims. Today, we are moving forward with our long held plans to continue to deny claims when they appear improper, and also moving to pay out more legitimate claims. We’re doing this by moving a substantial group of claims into both categories.”
He pointed out that the Employee Retention Credit was created by Congress to help businesses weather the pandemic. “It served as a lifeline for struggling businesses trying to get through this unprecedented period, and as members of Congress have noted, the program worked as intended during the crisis period,” said Werfel. “But then aggressive promoters moved in. Last year, promoters intensified their marketing, bombarding the airwaves with ads and aggressive marketing. You couldn’t turn on the TV or radio without coming across an ERC ad. These promoters urged people to file what they called risk-free claims with the IRS for the ERC. At the same time, they charged a hefty percentage on the potential payouts. The program turned into a gold rush for promoters. These promoters and the taxpayers they pulled in swamped the IRS with incoming applications, clogging our processing centers and harming small businesses filing legitimate claims. Tax professionals sounded the alarm bells to me and others on this, sharing that the marketers were pulling in taxpayers that clearly didn’t qualify under the intricate program rules.”
To counter this torrent of activity, last fall he announced the IRS was putting in place a moratorium on processing new ERC claims filed after Sept. 14, 2023. “The moratorium has been without a doubt a success,” said Werfel. “It slowed the number of claims coming in, and the marketing on TV and radio dropped dramatically. It gave us time to focus on our compliance work, and importantly, it gave us time to analyze the massive inventory of ERC claims that came in. The moratorium has now been in place for almost a year. The goal of this moratorium was in part to protect taxpayers and small businesses from bad claims worth tens of billions of dollars.”
During this period, the IRS learned valuable information that will help guide the program down the tracks in the months ahead.
Faster pace
“Going forward, we will proceed at a faster pace on both approvals and denials than before. But it will remain a measured and responsible pace that won’t go off the rails, protecting both taxpayers and revenue,” said Werfel. “As we move ahead, we’re going to continue protecting taxpayers from improper claims. In the last few weeks, we’ve had about 28,000 letters go out, disallowing claims up to potentially $5 billion.”
However, the IRS has also heard concerns from some tax professionals that it may be disallowing legitimate ERC claims.
“With these recent disallowance letters going out, the IRS is aware of concerns raised by tax professionals about potential errors,” said Werfel. “While the IRS is still evaluating the results of this first significant wave of disallowances in 2024, our early indications show these errors appear to be isolated. The concerns flagged, which we are currently looking into, impact less than 10% of the disallowance letters sent. We are closely watching this, and it’s important to keep in mind, there was a wide range of businesses and claims that came in due to the heavy marketing. It’s a big sea of claims from a diverse set of taxpayers. Even then, it’s not surprising, given the complexity of this credit, that there are some questions. That’s why we’re not rushing to push out large volumes of these denials immediately. This is uncharted territory for the IRS, and we are navigating the landscape carefully.”
He pledged to continue to work with tax professionals. “As part of this, the IRS will stay in contact with the tax community,” said Werfel. “We will monitor the situation involving disallowances and make any adjustments to minimize burden on businesses and their representatives. Where we need to, the IRS will adjust its processes and filters for determining an invalid claim following each wave of disallowances. This is a responsible and judicious way of administering this complex tax law, and we need to be measured and not just rush to resolve claims.”
He noted that in cases where claims can be proven to have been improperly denied, the agency will work with taxpayers to get it right. The IRS is also reminding businesses that when they receive a denial of an ERC claim, they have options available to to file an administrative appeal with the IRS independent Office of Appeals.
“At the same time, we are announcing today that we’re sending 50,000 more claims out into processing for payment in the next few weeks,” said Werfel. “These claims will total up to $5 billion. This means more low-risk ERC claims will be paid out quickly. There are a couple of steps for the payments to go through. We have moved these claims into the processing pipeline, and after that, they will go into the payment process. The IRS projects the first of this group of payments will begin in September, with additional payments going out in subsequent weeks. As the IRS begins to process additional claims, the agency reminds businesses that they may receive payments for some valid tax periods, generally quarters, while the IRS continues to review other periods for eligibility.”
Moratorium update
Werfel also provided an update on the processing moratorium on new ERC claims. Previously, the agency was not processing claims filed after Sept. 14, 2023. As the agency moves forward, it will now start judiciously processing claims filed between Sept. 14, 2023, and Jan. 31, 2024. Like the rest of the ERC inventory, work will focus on the highest and lowest risk claims at the top and bottom end of the spectrum. This means there will be instances where the agency will start taking actions on claims submitted in this time period when the agency has seen a sound basis to pay or deny a refund claim.
“Of course, we will also be working older claims during this period as well,” Werfel added. “For any of these claims, whether the older ones or the ones covered by the new moratorium date, here’s what we will do. When we identify a claim as low risk, we will be taking steps to pay it, and when we see a high-risk claim, we will deny it. We will have more to say on ERC in the coming weeks. The IRS also continues to urge employers with pending ERC claims or ones with questions about previously approved claims to review eligibility requirements to make sure they meet the specific criteria.”
“Businesses with claims that show these red flags should review eligibility requirements and talk to a trusted tax professional about their claim,” said Werfel. “For businesses with concerns about pending claims, the IRS encourages them to consider the ERC claim withdrawal program. This allows them to remove a pending ERC claim, one the IRS has not processed yet they would. They can withdraw the claim and pay no interest or penalty.”
Already the claim withdrawal process for those with unprocessed ERC claims has led to more than 7,300 entities withdrawing $677 million worth of claims, he noted.
“Unfortunately, this route forward was made much more complicated by the flood of marketers and promoters pushing businesses to claim these credits,” said Werfel. “This created a perfect storm that added risk of improper payments for taxpayers and the government, while complicating processing for the IRS and slowing claims to legitimate businesses. Today, the tide is starting to turn on the Employee Retention Credit program. For the good of businesses with legitimate claims, and for the good of administering our nation’s tax laws, it’s critical we move forward to resolve this pandemic era program. This effort will continue and intensify in the months ahead.”
The year-end CPE cram. It’s as cyclical as the busy season and as predictable as a client giving you the supporting documents you requested one day before the deadline while asking, “Do you think you can get this done in time?”
With all of these circumstances, we know the event is coming. We’ve been here before. We’re ready for it. Yet, like the Same-As-Last-Year accountants we are, we rarely change any behavior, simply chalking it up to “it is what it is.”
But what if it didn’t have to be that way?
If you haven’t picked up on the transformation that the accounting industry is undergoing, you probably haven’t been reading any articles here, or anywhere on the internet for that matter, which have been published regarding all of the shifts finally catching up to the profession.
Look, let’s call a spade a spade. We understand our personalities. We aren’t going to be the folks who dive head first into a pond with murky water. It’s this risk averse nature that makes us the ultimate professional skeptics, with maximum reliability to the public and stakeholders, focused on attention to detail, and ideal most trusted financial advisors.
However, it’s this same risk averse nature that stereotypes us as a boring, backward-looking, and late to the game profession. We were quick to tell clients that they should be moving to the cloud, but how long did it take most of our large firms to make that move?
This piece isn’t to bash our hesitancy to move forward with innovation; in fact, I would argue that our steady and cautious nature is a superpower of sorts, as we don’t just follow the untested trends that every other industry jumps on and hopes for the best. All that being said, it feels like we are making great positive strides to change in necessary ways that can catch us up to speed, so we aren’t lagging as far behind other professions in advancement.
We’ve got the 150-credit hours rule going through an evolution due to necessary adaptation, to make earning the CPA license more feasible and practical (let’s be real: work experience is where you learn the job, not in a classroom). Accounting software companies seem to be trending among the venture capitalists, as money pours into building technology solutions that address the various needs accounting departments face, and have faced for years without a non-burnout-inducing option. Even the business structure of public accounting firms is shifting, as private equity money floods these traditional partnerships. Even the CPA exam, with CPA Evolution, has transformed to address the vastly different economy and career routes that exist for accounting professionals.
So don’t you think it’s only natural that the continuing professional education, which is supposed to be how we develop our professionals, evolves and adapts too?
If you never try, you’ll never know
Yes, that’s lyrics from Coldplay’s “Fix You,” but it also leans into this proposition.
What if instead of being a tedious, burdensome, annual maintenance chore, continuing professional education was, like a college degree or technical credential, something that enabled you to advance in your career?
The thing is, it already can be. That just isn’t how we as a profession have been using it, and now we’re in this unique predicament: Is most CPE content not good because nobody cares enough to make investing in it worthwhile, or does nobody care about CPE because nobody has invested in making the content good enough to consume?
Don’t get me wrong — there is a lot of CPE content out in the market that provides immense value, whether it’s live webinars, self-study courses or in-person conferences. The issue is we haven’t embraced the shift to experiential learning in the way that only the top educators have.
The content needs to be more relevant, more directly applicable and offer a better experience. But most importantly, we need to tell a better story. The technical topics are not something that should be overshadowed in pursuit of more fun topics, but the way these courses are marketed and how they are delivered needs to improve.
There are plenty of ways to do this, but if organizations don’t try to consciously work on making better content, most professionals will rarely feel compelled to really prioritize their professional learning and development.
Some more ambitiously innovative aspirations
Anybody who knows me is aware that I have no shortage of innovative ideas. Back when I was working at Grant Thornton on the Northeast regions innovation council, our regional managing partner had the small elite task force read “The Innovators DNA” — I took that book to heart.
So while these may not be practical in the short term, these are some aspirations I have for the potential future of CPE.
Learning tracks that issue a certificate or credential of some sort upon completion and passing of an exam, which isn’t just something you click through irrelevant polling questions in order to get credit for.
Continuous learning, where it isn’t a year-end cram, but something you can do at a manageable pace. This is also a more conducive learning experience anyway.
Applied learning experiences, or something where you are performing in real world situations that allow learning to not be a lecture, but an experience.
The MasterClassof CPE. People all over the world are fascinated by the teachings on a variety of topics, from exciting to dull, that MasterClass provides. Let’s not forget that professional education is anything that can help us in our career development and make us better industry professionals, meaning this isn’t isolated to just “accounting” topics. Realistically, a lot of the master classes could be made CPE eligible if issued by an accredited entity.
NASBA is working on so many accounting pipeline crisis matters, but let’s not forget about the existing base of industry professionals, who I would argue can make for the strongest ambassadors of the accounting profession’s brand.
Where are we at now?
The discussion is just getting going. CPE platforms like Earmark, which is providing a variety of CPE in more listener friendly formats, and FloQademy, which is experimenting with never-used-before content types for free, are convenient options for knocking out the requirements. Naturally, these came out of CPAs who were frustrated with how things were done.
There is no doubt that elements from other industries, platforms and educational institutions will start to make their way into the world of CPE. As a CPA, I am personally excited for the opportunity to use my required learning time to truly enhance my depth of knowledge.
While CPE is definitely not on the top of the list for “things the accounting profession needs to address ASAP,” I would argue that the conversation starts now, or at least should, if we want to see it progress in a timely manner. Think about it — we talked about burnout for decades before it really started being taken seriously. Cloud accounting took nearly a score of years to be fully adopted. Remote work was always chatted about, but took a global crisis to really take the leap of faith.
I don’t expect CPE to change overnight, but thinking about it in the context of the future of the accounting pipeline, and how we provide a sense of “knowledge security” from the ever-daunting A.I. conversation is never too soon to start being discussed.
Can a CPE course get CPAs as hyped up as a MasterClass? I’ll be anxiously waiting to find out!
The 2025 GRT provides updates for accounting standards, including disaggregation of income statement expenses, profits interest and similar awards, and induced conversions of convertible debt instruments, and other recommended improvements.
The 2025 EBPT includes updates from the 2024 EBPT for elements specifically created for SEC Release Nos. 33–11070; 34–95025 which includes requirements for XBRL tagging of annual reports for employee stock purchase, savings and similar plans filing SEC Form 11-K.
The 2025 SRT offers improvements for elements whose underlying recognition and measurement are not specified by GAAP but are commonly used by GAAP filers and for SEC schedules related to supplemental information provided by insurance underwriters.
The DQCRT is structured from the typical design of XBRL taxonomies because it is narrowly focused on conveying the XBRL US Data Quality Committee’s validation rules, predominantly for regulator use. It isn’t intended to be used in SEC filers’ extension taxonomies. The DQCRT contains a subset of the DQC rules. The FASB Taxonomy staff evaluates the validation rules for inclusion in the DQCRT that have been available for use for more than a year, with consideration for how the DQC addressed any feedback received on a validation rule.
The 2025 MMT includes relationships focusing on accounting model information, which are viewed as helpful information for constituents. The objectives of the relationships in the MMT are to help preparers identify the proper elements for tagging their filings, assist data users in the consumption of data with additional relationship information, and assist in writing business rules that leverage the extra relationship information to help with the proper element selection and identification.
The 2025 GRT, 2025 SRT and 2025 EBPT are expected to be accepted as final by the SEC in early 2025. The FASB Taxonomies are available on the FASB Taxonomies Page and through these links:
A federal appeals court has reversed itself, reinstating an injunction on beneficial ownership information reporting by businesses only days after lifting it.
On Monday, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit granted a stay of a preliminary injunction by a federal district court in Texas that had temporarily paused a requirement for filing BOI reports with FinCEN under the Corporate Transparency Act of 2019 in the case of Texas Top Cop Shop Inc. v. Garland. The plaintiffs petitioned the full appeals court for an en banc rehearing to consider additional issues in the case. They argued that the panel’s decision conflicted with a 2012 Supreme Court decision in the case of National Federation of Independent Businesses v. Sebelius, ignored potential violations of the First and Fourth Amendments, and improperly discounted serious harms that the plaintiffs and the public would suffer. They also argued that the decision to reinstate the Jan. 1 reporting deadline, which was only a few days away, disregarded the interests of millions of entities subject to the CTA. The law aims to deter criminals from using shell companies for illicit purposes such as money laundering and terrorism financing.
The appeals court issued an order Thursday reinstating the injunction, and noted the original order had expedited the appeal to the next available oral argument panel, which has yet to be scheduled.
“The merits panel now has the appeal, which remains expedited, and a briefing schedule will issue forthwith,” said the court. “However, in order to preserve the constitutional status quo while the merits panel considers the parties’ weighty substantive arguments, that part of the motions-panel order granting the Government’s motion to stay the district court’s preliminary injunction enjoining enforcement of the CTA and the Reporting Rule is VACATED.”
Earlier this week, after the appeals court panel initially lifted the injunction, the Treasury Department announced an extension of time for businesses to file to meet the beneficial ownership information reporting deadline. Reporting companies that were created or registered prior to Jan. 1, 2024, were given until Jan. 13, 2025, to file their initial beneficial ownership information reports with the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, as opposed to the Jan. 1, 2025, deadline. The American Institute of CPAs and state CPA societies have been asking FinCEN to delay the BOI reporting requirements. Now the full appeals court appears to have delayed the reporting requirement indefinitely.