Connect with us

Accounting

Practice Profile: Art appreciation at LMC

Published

on

LMC art practice partners Steven Goldglit and Michael Young

LMC partners Steven Goldglit (left) and Michael Young

New York-based Regional Leader firm LMC advises some of the world’s largest art galleries and artists, including some “one-percenters,” according to partner Michael Young — but the firm also prepares taxes for “starving artists.”

With Young, fellow art practice partner Steven Goldglit and their team on the case, these artists don’t always stay famished for long, as Young illustrated with the story of one particular client. “We had an artist approach us, and they said, ‘I’d like to hire you as my accountant,'” he recalled. The artist had been referred by another gallery, but when Young asked to look at their tax returns, “They said, ‘I haven’t filed a tax return in five years.’ I said, ‘Why not?’ and they said, ‘I didn’t make enough money.'”

Young told the artist the firm was willing to take them on, but warned them that they could find a lower-priced firm, to which they said, “‘I anticipate making good money in the coming years.'”

“The first year they engaged us they made half a million dollars,” he recounted. “The next year, $2.5 million. The third year, $4 million. They literally went from starving artist to multimillionaire in a few years.”

It’s a trajectory that Young and Goldglit witness in serving LMC’s fastest-growing speciality, and that both were familiar with before at both of their respective firms, which also specialized in art clients and were acquired by LMC, which itself is a member firm of private equity-backed platform Ascend.

Young’s previous firm was merged into LMC six years ago to create LMC’s first art practice, and Goldglit’s was added last August. Both came with a large roster of clients and years of experience in the industry.

Goldglit grew up in the New York City art scene, with his father’s firm that began in the 1960s and 1970s working with clients like influential art dealer Leo Castelli, known as “the godfather of the contemporary art world” and his gallery artists like Roy Lichtenstein and Andy Warhol.

After a tenure at Big Four firm PwC, Goldglit joined his father’s firm. “I grew up living the arts, being involved, going to museums and galleries,” Goldglit said. “It’s a really enjoyable aspect of accounting for me.”

LMC provides full-service accounting, tax, CAS, bookkeeping, and family office services, including back-office work that artists in particular need, according to Young, and the firm currently advises between 200 and 300 artists, and another 70 to 100 galleries.

These clients range from “galleries that can hardly break even to the most important galleries in the world,” Goldglit said. “My philosophy is always to work with artists, to never turn artists away,” he continued. “Starving artists — we’re always happy to work with them and help file tax returns and [show them] how to interact with galleries on the financial level. We have a broad spectrum of clients. The art community is quite large, and most people don’t know about it.”

The current art market

The community comes with unique challenges, especially in today’s climate. “The art market is challenging right now; the economy is in a little bit of a shift,” Goldglit shared. “The art market has gone really quiet. We’ve gotten calls from gallery clients: ‘What’s happening in the market? What are other gallerists doing? You have your finger on the market, are other galleries selling, or quiet?’ We know how to answer that, and continue to be supportive. A couple years ago, the art market was raging. Now, it’s a lot harder work to help manage finances more effectively.”

Tariffs are also a new hurdle. “Tariffs — not only now, but in 2019, in the first term of the Trump administration, there is always something new, something unexpected,” Young shared. “When the topic comes up to address, we have experts we can connect with.”

Goldglit and Young have witnessed many market fluctuations in their years serving the industry.

“Most of the galleries you know today — megasellers — there were not megasellers back then,” Young explained. “Typically a gallery in New York City [was run by] an entrepreneur. It’s a very small circle in the art world, everyone knows everybody. By word of mouth, I happened to engage one of the main galleries. My firm had seven of the top 10 galleries in New York City, or the world, 25 to 30 years ago. Some continued on from the 1990s, some merged. To this day, I still maintain a few of the galleries I had, legacy galleries from the 1990s.”

Still, the overall outlook is positive for the industry, they shared. “There is continuing growth in the industry, more galleries than ever before… and there is an opportunity for everyone,” reported Goldglit.

“New York City is the place to be,” added Young. “They typically started in New York, even those based overseas. If they decide to come stateside, New York is their first choice.”

With the growing international art market, LMC is poised to offer help with changing tax reporting standards, and everything from revenue recognition to foreign sales to IC-DISC (Interest Charge Domestic International Sales Corporation) federal income tax reporting and savings.

For LMC’s few clients in “really high-end art, the one-percenters,” explained Young, “they have very discreet transactions, and are very sophisticated purely in the dollar value of the paintings they are acquiring. These clients have residences all over the world, and sometimes purchase and maintain in the [United States]. They’re dealing with a lot of international tax issues, international accounting issues, there are a lot of taxes: sales tax, VAT … . Any type of scenario is likely to come up, and it keeps you on your toes.”

The firm’s practice must keep these clients up to date on all tax implications, Goldglit explained: “How to set up a gallery in the most tax-advantageous way without exposing clients to international tax problems. Sales tax is a big issue.”

While these emerging issues keep Goldglit and Young in constant communication with their clients, both also serve on boards and regularly attend events at galleries and museums.

Goldglit noted a dinner with one gallery on Wednesday and two art openings on Thursday when examining his calendar for the week. “I go to museums all the time,” he shared. “A number of artists’ museum shows, one at the Whitney, one at the Met. I’m on the board of a few artist-endowed foundations to support artists’ legacies … I’m a big fan of giving back as much as I can give.”

And while he reflected there were more openings and parties happening when he took over his father’s business in the early 1990s, they are still “a great way to grow the practice.”

He also finds them — and his work — to be a satisfying merger of two worlds. “The left brain, the right brain — [artists] are so creative, amazingly creative. I have no idea how they do it,” Goldglit marveled. “But a balance sheet — they can have no idea what that means.”

Continue Reading

Accounting

Embedded AI and Automated Anomaly Detection Reshape Modern Corporate Accounting Frameworks

Published

on

Embedded AI and Automated Anomaly Detection Reshape Modern Corporate Accounting Frameworks

The accounting and audit landscape in 2026

The accounting and audit landscape in 2026 is defined by the full integration of artificial intelligence directly into core enterprise software platforms. Rather than operating as standalone third-party tools, generative AI, automated reconciliation, and continuous anomaly detection are now natively embedded within major ERP engines including SAP, Oracle, Microsoft Dynamics, QuickBooks, and Sage. This technology integration is transforming daily financial operations, internal reporting controls, and external audit workflows.

Recent industry benchmark surveys reveal a widening performance gap

Recent industry benchmark surveys reveal a widening performance gap between finance teams utilizing integrated AI automation and those relying on legacy manual processes. Organizations actively leveraging embedded AI report up to 37% higher revenue per employee, driven by automated invoice matching, instant ledger entries, and predictive cash flow modeling. Routine, high-volume transactional tasks that once required manual intervention are now executed in real time with continuous digital audit trails.

AI introduces new governance and control responsibilities

However, the widespread deployment of embedded AI introduces new governance and control responsibilities for accounting professionals. Auditing standards now mandate strict verification protocols for algorithmically generated journal entries and financial commentary. External auditors are evaluating enterprise AI governance frameworks, reviewing automated rule sets, testing data ingestion pipelines, and ensuring that financial controllers maintain human-in-the-loop oversight over automated system outputs.

Furthermore, cloud governance and data security have become core operational skills for modern CPAs and controllers. As financial ledgers and client data stream through interconnected cloud ecosystem APIs, accounting teams must implement multi-factor access controls, continuous data encryption, and strict data privacy compliance to protect sensitive financial records from cyber vulnerabilities.

The embedding of AI into enterprise accounting software redefines internal financial controls and career requirements for accounting professionals. Business owners and finance leaders must update governance protocols, invest in staff digital literacy, and ensure accounting systems maintain rigorous audit compliance to capture productivity gains safely.

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

Trending