That feeling of satisfaction and accomplishment that accountants feel at the end of a successful tax season can be shattered by a phone call from a dissatisfied client or a summons and complaint asserting a liability claim, and the risk factors for that kind of unfortunate event vary from year to year.
The issues facing tax practitioners are a little different this year, according to Stephen Vono, senior vice president at McGowanPro. “Some of the exposures are new, and some are perennial exposures that are ongoing,” he said.
For instance, there is a continued focus by the Internal Revenue Service on Employee Retention Credit submissions. Accountants had to reflect the ERC in the amended return, and the IRS delayed the ERC payment, so the returns are amended, but the clients are not getting their money back — and claims rise.
Vono recommended amending returns quickly and keeping track of expiration dates for statutes of limitations. The accountant needs to communicate with the client regularly, and ask them if they received their payment, or any other communication from the IRS.
A new area of concern involves tax planning resulting from to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Practitioners need to be aware that planning is essential for their clients, according to Vono: “At least advise that they need to plan. Again, communication is essential. The bill is far-reaching, so it touches everyone. The top exposure to tax preparers will likely occur by not staying current with all of the changes derived from the OBBBA.”
Specifically, preparers may face the following new exposures in the filing season ahead, according to Vono:
Not obtaining the maximum deductions available for their clients. Preparers should be alert for deductions involving tips and overtime, and to maximize deductions for seniors.
Not advising clients to make the necessary financial decisions that may impact their taxable burden. Preparers should take advantage of car loan interest deduction; ensure that their client is aware of the caps for tip and overtime earning; and watch for expired clean energy credits.
Not properly following the new tax provisions that will lead to filing errors.
Multiple state filings are fraught with tax claims, according to Vono. Continued residency audits by the state and local tax authorities are a risk that preparers should be aware of. These will uncover nexus issues, such as clients who claim they live in Florida, but they have property and their family doctor is in New York. Among the perennial issues that Vono thinks tax pros may face again this year:
Failure to detect fraud is an on-going exposure. Preparers need to verify information from the source when possible and have their “skeptics hat” on at all times.
Accountants taking on engagements over their head, or outside of their skill set. “Have designations where applicable,” Vono suggested. “For example, valuation services should have a CVA on the accounting team.”
Hackers seeking to access client files to obtain refunds or or to engage in any number of other shenanigans. Tax preparers should have full information security protocols in place and train staff far more than annually.
Family disputes impacting the firm’s ability to perform its services, or difficult, uncooperative, or low-integrity clients. Vono recommended considering early disengagement if information is not provided in a timely manner.
Rogue firm partners or employees evading quality control policies/procedures.
Concerning tax services, overlooked elections and missed filing deadlines continue to cause claims. “Always have a second set of eyes on an engagement and make the calendar your friend,” he said.
Relying on tax software only. “Complex returns need to be checked and reviewed,” Vono warned. “The argument that it was a tax software error is not a good defense.”
The penalty for not paying enough estimated tax than was owed in the previous year can be a rare trap for the unwary. Bill Nemeth, a Georgia practitioner, occasionally tells a client subject to the penalty that he has good news and bad news: The good news is that they’re getting a refund from the IRS, and the bad news is they will be penalized because their refund is not big enough.
Although this might happen “once in a blue moon,” according to Nemeth, it is due to a quirk in the Tax Code that practitioners should be aware of.
Deb Rood, risk control consulting director at CNA, underwriter for the AICPA professional liability program, pointed out some risks with the e-file signature authorization on Forms 8878 and 8879.
“The IRS requires the CPA firm to have a signed Form 8878 for the CPA to file an extension and a Form 8879 to file a tax return,” she explained. “According to our claims group, all too frequently, the CPA does not receive this before electronically filing the tax return. That’s bad.”
“What happens if the client changes their mind about filing?” she asked. “For example, we had a claim with a voluntary disclosure where the client’s attorney assured the CPA that the client could provide the e-file permission slip when they returned from a foreign trip, so the CPA filed the returns. The claim arose because the client changed their mind and stopped the voluntary disclosure process. However, the return had already been filed. Not good.”
On the flip side, she noted that her team is often asked if the CPA can wait to file a tax return for which they have an e-file permission slip until the client pays its outstanding invoices — but the IRS requires that the CPA must electronically transmit the return within three days of receipt of the e-file permission slip.
“But it is too late to demand payment now if you already have the permission slip,” she said. “We recommend that the CPA receive payment and a signed engagement letter before sending the e–file permission slip and finalizing the tax return.”
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.
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.
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.