Connect with us

Accounting

IRS processing more ERC claims, moves moratorium date to Jan. 31, 2024

Published

on

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.

werfel-danny-irs-aicpa-tax-conference.jpg

IRS Commissioner Danny Werfel speaking at the AICPA & CIMA National Tax and Sophisticated Tax Conference in Washington, D.C.

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.”

The IRS recently added five new warning sign indicators about potentially improper claims, to add to seven other common red flags the agency previously highlighted. 

“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.”

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

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

Trending