Connect with us

Accounting

Protect the CPA profession as traditional firms fade away

Published

on

We’re witnessing the evolution of the “new firm.” 

First, these aren’t audit firms. They are their own unique beast and don’t fit into this new firm model. They are firms:

  1. Where professional services and technology have merged together with a significant investment from venture capital or other outside capital. 
  1. That are merging up into a firm with private equity. They will eventually become public companies when PE won’t be able to get their money out, forcing an IPO. 

What do these new firms have in common? They focus on those services that don’t really need a CPA credential. Things like general accounting and tax, controller services, CAS, etc., can be done by anyone; a CPA is only needed to conduct a public company audit.  

Sound scary? Not really — if we as CPAs are willing to own that space in the marketplace. The CPA brand is significant and something worth having. But what happens when this influx of capital is commonplace and things change? How do we focus on protecting the profession and not the firm? This is key to our future!

The CPA in this evolving industry

Yep, I said it. Industry. Not profession. As certified professionals, CPAs work in a profession. But the new firm is focused on the industry where work is done by a broader group of people who work for a company and not a professionally licensed firm. 

I recently conducted a poll on LinkedIn where I asked if CPA firms will still exist in 2030. With 400 responses, 24% of respondents said they will not. So, if public accounting is evolving into a new business model, then how do we protect the profession within that business model? 

Today, just as the American Institute of CPAs advocates for the CPAs working in professional services firms, they also advocate for those CPAs in industry, working to protect the CPA brand for CFOs, controllers, etc. This could evolve into another group of CPAs. 

Let’s say someone works as a CPA for a technology company, selling services or professional services attached to that technology. They don’t report to the CFO or CEO, right? So, that’s not really an internal CPA. They are public-serving, but not part of a firm either. What do you call this group of CPAs? And how do you make sure the people in this role meet the rigorous standards of their credentials? 

These are the questions we need to be asking. We should be thinking about what that looks like in the future, too. The question then becomes what training or education is needed for these professionals, and what are the requirements that protect the CPA within this new industry. 

The real-time disruption

I’m dating myself here, but when I grew up in firms after graduating in the early 1990s, automation was just starting with computerized tax returns. It wasn’t that much later when I was starting my firm that QuickBooks came onto the scene. When you think about how work was done then compared to how work is done today, you see the real-time aspect the cloud has had on our work — disrupting the way we get things done. 

And that’s the biggest reason why firms haven’t changed. They don’t think about the real-time disruption of cloud accounting. The focus is too often on how a CPA is trained in a firm, where one person does the work and someone else reviews it. It’s all after the fact, right? 

Most firms still have a hard time with the idea of real-time, but if it’s truly a disruptor, then how do you quantify and qualify it? How do you educate around it? How do you maintain professional standards? That’s ultimately the problem to solve to protect the profession. 

Asking the right questions

This might not make a difference if you’re working in a firm or in a company that sells accounting and tax services, but as private equity came into the profession, so did a new firm model and structure. It’s here and we need to adapt.  

We’ve struggled with real-time for the past 20 years, but in today’s day and age, CPAs and accounting professionals are working on things as they happen. When you’re working in real-time, especially with technology and bots, you have to make sure that your output is at a certain standard. What that looks like is something we need to determine. The focus should be on the human element and serving customers, too, as bots can’t deliver either. 

I don’t have all the answers, and I never claim to, but we’re asking the wrong questions. We need to think about protecting the profession and not necessarily the firm. What questions should we be asking? 

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