Connect with us

Accounting

IRS revises corporate AMT guidance

Published

on

The Internal Revenue Service issued guidance on the corporate alternative minimum tax in response to comments it received.

The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 created the CAMT, which imposes a 15% minimum tax on the adjusted financial statement income of large corporations for taxable years beginning after Dec. 31, 2022. The CAMT generally applies to large corporations with an average annual AFSI exceeding $1 billion.  The IRS and the Treasury Department issued a set of proposed regulations last September and technical corrections last December under the Biden administration. However, in June, under the Trump administration, the IRS and the Treasury partially withdrew the proposed regulations and issued revised proposed regulations in Notice 2025-49.

On Tuesday, the IRS released Notice 2025-49 provides interim guidance regarding the application of the CAMT. The proposed regulations address the application of the CAMT and technical corrections to those regulations. Sections 3-10 of Notice 2025-49 provide rules for certain adjustments to adjusted financial statement income and rules for proposed applicability dates and reliance on the CAMT proposed regulations.

“These notices contain numerous rules that will be welcomed by taxpayers,” said Monisha Santamaria, a principal in the Washington national tax – passthrough group at KPMG LLP, in a statement. “Taxpayers can use Notice guidance for the 2024 tax year if desired — certain taxpayers may need to quickly rethink their 2024 CAMT positions and the support for such positions. The notices provide for many elections and options and taxpayers facing CAMT liabilities will be well served by modeling out various notice options.”

Some of the changes were made in response to comments on the proposed regulations. Some commenters pointed out that having different applicability dates for the specified regulations and non-specified regulations was confusing and inappropriately burdened taxpayers by proposing that certain complex rules contained in the specified regulations would apply based on the date the CAMT proposed regulations were published in the Federal Register as opposed to the date final regulations are published in the Federal Register.  

In addition, some commenters said the rules for relying on the CAMT proposed regulations, which, among other requirements, generally prohibit a taxpayer from relying on a particular section of the CAMT proposed regulations unless the taxpayer also applies all of the specified regulations, impose additional compliance burdens and costs on taxpayers seeking to apply relevant sections of the CAMT proposed regulations for taxable years ending on or before final regulations are published in the Federal Register. Commenters also asked for guidance providing that, for taxable years ending on or before the date the final regulations are published in the Federal Register, a taxpayer may rely on any section of the CAMT proposed regulations without also being required to apply the specified regulations or any additional sections of the CAMT proposed regulations, as applicable.

“Taxpayers are generally allowed to pick-and-choose which sections of the September 2024 CAMT proposed regulation to apply,” said Santamaria. “However, there are certain constraints on the ability to pick-and-choose Proposed Regulation sections. Treasury appears to have heeded a number of industry specific asks.  For example, the notice contains special rules for the shipping industry, regulated utilities and non-life insurance companies. Taxpayers with large mark-to-market inclusions may be able to breathe a sigh of relief.  Notice 2025-49 allows for the exclusion, or deferral, of certain mark-to-market amounts (including with respect to digital assets and real estate).  However, the favorable treatment does not apply to all mark-to-market amounts (e.g., it does not apply to certain partnership and stock investments).”

Some commenters also recommended that an adjustment to adjusted financial statement income be allowed for certain repair or maintenance costs of CAMT entities with regulated operations because those CAMT entities are subject to special financial accounting rules under U.S. GAAP. The IRS noted that ASC 980 contains the Financial Accounting Standards Board’s rules and principles applicable to regulated operations. 

“Notice 2025-49 allows for AFSI to be adjusted for the amortization of certain goodwill,” said Santamaria.  “This may be beneficial for some taxpayers. Not all notice provisions are necessarily good news for taxpayers — the CAMT regime remains exceedingly complex, with the need to track CAMT basis and apply both tax and financial accounting rules to make ‘simple’ determinations, as well as differing calculations for scope AFSI versus liability AFSI.”

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

Accounting

Modernizing Internal Controls: Machine Learning and Continuous Monitoring in Auditing

Published

on

Internal audit departments and corporate risk managers are modernizing internal control frameworks by shifting from periodic sampling techniques to continuous monitoring and machine learning analytics. As operational data volumes increase across enterprise organizations, automated control testing ensures financial integrity, prevents corporate fraud, and streamlines annual audit engagements.

The Limitation of Periodic Audit Sampling
Historically, internal and external auditors evaluated internal controls by reviewing random samples of financial transactions—often analyzing less than five percent of total ledger entries. In complex enterprise environments, periodic sampling methods carry inherent risks of overlooking localized financial misstatements, unauthorized disbursements, or operational control breakdowns.

In 2026, progressive internal audit functions are utilizing automated continuous monitoring platforms that evaluate one hundred percent of financial transactions in real time. Continuous control auditing systems continuously monitor general ledger entries, procurement approvals, and expense reimbursements across all operating subsidiaries.

AI-Powered Fraud Detection and Anomaly Identification
Machine learning models trained on historical corporate financial data excel at identifying subtle transactional anomalies that indicate potential fraud or operational error. Automated systems instantly flag duplicate invoice payments, unapproved vendor creation, unusual journal entry timing, and unauthorized override of authority thresholds.

When an anomaly is detected, the automated auditing platform generates an instant risk alert, allowing internal audit teams to investigate root causes immediately. Early detection prevents minor operational errors from escalating into material weaknesses in financial reporting.

Streamlining External Audit Preparation
Continuous internal control monitoring delivers significant benefits during annual external financial audits. External audit firms can review continuous audit logs and automated control testing documentation, reducing the time required for manual field testing.

This integrated approach lowers overall audit compliance fees, reduces administrative burdens on corporate accounting staff, and provides senior management and audit committees with real-time visibility into the organization’s overall risk profile.

Core Implementation Guidelines
1. Transition to 100% Data Testing: Replace legacy sampling methods with automated continuous audit monitoring systems.
2. Deploy Anomaly Detection Algorithms: Implement machine learning models to identify unauthorized transactions and operational control overrides.
3. Align Internal and External Audit Workflows: Coordinate continuous control testing protocols with external auditors to optimize annual compliance cycles.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Automated Tax Compliance and Global Regulatory Harmonization in 2026

Published

on

Corporate tax accounting departments are navigating an era of unprecedented regulatory complexity as global tax harmonization frameworks take full effect alongside real-time digital tax reporting mandates. Tax directors and accounting teams are adopting cloud-based tax compliance automation tools to manage multi-jurisdictional tax liabilities and satisfy stringent reporting rules across international jurisdictions.

Implementation of Global Minimum Tax Provisions
The implementation of international tax reform agreements—notably the Pillar Two global minimum tax framework—has reshaped multinational corporate tax planning. Multinational enterprises with consolidated revenues exceeding established thresholds must ensure an effective tax rate of at least 15% across every jurisdiction in which they operate.

Accounting teams are implementing specialized tax calculation modules integrated directly into enterprise resource planning (ERP) platforms. These automated tools calculate effective tax rates per country, identify top-up tax liabilities, and generate standardized compliance documentation required by national tax authorities.

Real-Time Digital Invoicing and E-Reporting Mandates
Tax authorities across Europe, Latin America, and Asia-Pacific have enacted mandatory electronic invoicing (e-invoicing) and continuous transaction controls (CTC). Under these systems, corporate transaction data must be submitted electronically to government portals in real time at the point of sale or invoice issuance.

This shift toward continuous digital tax reporting eliminates traditional annual tax audits in favor of ongoing automated compliance monitoring. Accounting departments are upgrading invoicing software to ensure seamless XML data formatting, digital signature authentication, and real-time validation against tax authority databases.

Automation and Data Analytics in Corporate Tax Strategy
To keep pace with dynamic tax legislation, tax departments are transitioning from reactive compliance teams to proactive strategic advisors. Machine learning algorithms analyze corporate transactional data to identify tax credits, research and development (R&D) incentives, and cross-border transfer pricing adjustments.

By automating routine tax return filings and calculations, corporate tax directors can focus on long-term capital structuring, evaluating the tax implications of corporate mergers, and optimizing international supply chain networks.

Strategic Priorities for Tax Executives
1. ERP System Upgrades: Ensure enterprise software is capable of generating real-time, granular tax data required for global minimum tax compliance.
2. E-Invoicing Integration: Implement scalable e-invoicing platforms to satisfy regional continuous transaction control regulations.
3. Strategic Tax Analytics: Utilize predictive tax modeling tools to evaluate structural changes in corporate operations and cross-border trade.

Continue Reading

Trending