Connect with us

Accounting

Opportunity zones and other gain deferral strategies save on taxes

Published

on

Stocks, real estate and alternative assets are near their all-time highs amid an election year with an uncertain tax landscape looming. Investors are calling and seeking last-minute tax mitigation strategies. For clients who have big gains from appreciated assets, I often recommend the federal opportunity zone program because it’s the most flexible and most impactful tax deferral program I’ve seen in my 40-plus year career. 

As of now, the OZ program is set to begin winding down in 2026. Absent pending legislation, September 2027 will be the last chance for your clients to roll over their calendar 2026 capital gains and to participate in the OZ program. But there are still plenty of reasons to consider opportunity zone investing for tax deferral (and ultimately tax exemption) purposes.

In a nutshell, the OZ program allows investors to defer their capital gains from sales of appreciated real estate, stocks, businesses, personal residences, collectibles and even crypto through 2026. They do so by investing in one of 8,700 distressed areas of the United States via a Qualified Opportunity Fund (QOF). They just need to make their investment within 180 days of the gain reporting date. If the gain is coming through a K-1, the start of the 180-day period can be delayed until March 15 of the year following the gain date. The QOF then deploys those gains into qualifying real estate or an operating business located within one of the 8,700 designated OZ census tracts. By keeping their invested gains in place, your clients won’t pay tax on those gains until at least April of 2027. Further, if they hold the investment for 10 years, all post-reinvestment appreciation from their original QOF investment will be excluded at the federal level — and at the state level in all but six states. 

Bipartisan support

The OZ program has always had bipartisan support because it’s designed to spur economic growth in underserved areas. QOFs have raised an estimated $150 billion in equity since the program began in 2018 — far surpassing the most optimistic projections. Further, bipartisan legislation is pending to push out the gain deferral period from 2026 to Dec. 31, 2028. Proposed legislation would also bring back the basis step-ups of 10% and 5% that were part of the original program, but with shorter holding periods to qualify for the step-up — five years for the 5% step up and six years for the 10% step up.

Advantages of doing business in an opportunity zone

People typically associate OZ funds with real estate development, but about 25% of our OZ work involves operating businesses located within opportunity zone census tracts throughout the U.S. For your clients that are startups or existing businesses, there are many advantages to relocating to opportunity zones, such as more affordable real estate, rental rates and operating costs to help businesses save money. 

To become a Qualified Opportunity Zone Business (QOZB), a business must meet the 50% Gross Income Test. There are three “safe harbors” within the regulations and the business must meet only one of them:​

  • At least 50% of the services performed (based on hours) by its employees or contractors are performed within the Qualified Opportunity Zone.
  • At least 50% of the compensation paid to QOZ-based employees and independent contractors is performed in the QOZ.
  • The core operations and facilities responsible for generating half of the business’s gross revenue are located within a QOZ.

Our firm works with many serial entrepreneurs, including tech gurus and engineers, who sell their family businesses, rental real estate or personal real estate, and then roll the gains into a QOF where they start one or multiple businesses within the QOZ. Many entrepreneurs are using a combination of real estate entities and operating businesses in their OZ Funds.
OZ for homeowners with big gains 

In today’s real estate market, many homeowners are joyfully selling their residences for substantially more than they paid for their properties years or even decades ago. But after closing, they’re surprised to receive hefty capital gains tax bills on the appreciation over their first $500,000 in basis (married) or first $250,000 in basis (single). For instance, a married couple that bought their house for $200,000 30 years ago and sells it for $1 million today would have an $800,000 gain and would have to pay capital gains tax on $300,000, after claiming the $500,000 primary residence exemption ($1 million – $200,000 – $500,000). That’s a tax bill of $45,000 to $60,000 federal alone. 

If the homeowners are in good health, then reinvesting the capital gain into a QOF can offer substantial tax savings. In the above example, they still have $700,000 in cash after making the QOF investment, assuming there was no mortgage.

OZ vs. 1031 exchange

The OZ program differs from a 1031 exchange in several ways. A 1031 exchange can only be used for real estate assets, whereas with the OZ program, the gain from the sale of any type of asset — real estate, stocks, bonds, collectibles, crypto, etc. — can be placed into a QOF and receive the tax benefits. Remember, the OZ program only requires your client’s gain to be placed into the QOF (not the full market value of the investment) to defer 100% of the gain. Then the QOF or a subsidiary QOZB invests in the property. Your client cannot invest in the property directly. Example: Let’s say you had $300,000 basis on a piece of land, and you sold it for $1 million (i.e., a $700,000 gain). To get the full deferral under a 1031, you’d generally have to buy a $1 million dollar piece of property. In the OZ world, you would only have to reinvest $700,000 to eliminate 100% of your gain.

Also, under the OZ program, all the depreciation you claim, including cost segregation and everything in the interim period never gets recaptured when you dispose of it after 10 years. That ends up boosting your ROI another 2% to 3% per year. Also, your clients have time to do a ground-up build in an OZ fund using deferred tax dollars. By contrast, with a 1031 they generally can’t do a ground-up build since they must purchase real estate with an equal or higher value to defer all their 1031 gain.

Installment sales

If your clients don’t want the complexity of an OZ fund, they can simply do an installment sale. They simply sell their land with a building on it and take back a seller note for part of it. Many people overlook the fact that even if they don’t collect $1 on the note in the year of sale, they are still stuck with 100% of the recapture that they have on the depreciation they’ve previously claimed. Therefore, they must be sure to collect enough to pay the tax on the depreciation recapture. The good news is they can defer the rest of the gain until the cash is collected. Their tax basis is allocated to each tranche of collections that they receive. Also, they run the risk that capital gain rates could be higher, and that’s also a risk in the OZ world. Vice President Harris just announced plans for a 28% capital gain rate (up from 20%) for taxpayers with incomes above $1 million. We don’t know the outcome of the upcoming presidential election, so we don’t know what the 2026 tax rates are going to be. Remember, the OZ program defers the capital gain reporting — not the tax.

Delaware statutory trust

The Delaware statutory trust is another vehicle enabling investors to move or shelter their capital gains. DSTs are essentially pre-packaged 1031s that allow multiple investors to pool their money and invest in actual real estate properties (not funds) without the headache of managing the properties, which are often institutional-grade assets such as apartment buildings, office buildings and shopping centers. This collaboration allows your clients to diversify their portfolios and potentially earn higher after-tax returns on their investments.

Regardless of which party wins the White House in November, tax rates are likely to be worrisome for many of your successful clients. It will become more concerning for them in a few years when the multi-trillion-dollar U.S. debt load can no longer be ignored. If your client has gains of $1 million or more from any type of appreciated asset, the OZ program — or one of the other tactics explained above — should be on your short-list of strategies for them to consider. Doing good for others while doing well for your clients and their families. That’s a win-win all around — exactly the intention of the bipartisan drafters of the OZ program.

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