The Securities and Exchange Commission has been constantly revising its stance on how public companies should report their climate impact.
These ongoing changes are keeping auditors, companies and investors confused. After proposing ambitious rules in 2022, the SEC adopted a scaled-back version in 2024. The new rules are set forth in Release No. 33-11275. However, this new regulatory environment has faced legal challenges, creating uncertainty for companies and auditors. The agency took the unexpected step of voluntarily pausing the implementation of the rules while legal proceedings were ongoing.
Both progress and setbacks have marked the SEC’s journey toward finalizing climate disclosure rules. While the initial proposal aimed to require extensive climate-related disclosures, the final rules ultimately focused on critical areas like Scope 1 and 2 emissions, financial statement disclosures, and board oversight. However, even these revised rules have faced significant opposition.
How are the 2022 proposed rules different from the final rules?
One of the most contentious areas was the treatment of Scope 3 emissions. The 2022 proposal would have required public companies to disclose Scope 3 emissions, representing indirect emissions from upstream and downstream activities. This included emissions associated with a company’s supply chain, transportation and other value chain activities.
In a significant departure from the original proposal, the SEC eliminated the Scope 3 emissions disclosure requirement in the final rules. This decision was met with praise and criticism, with opponents arguing that Scope 3 emissions are critical to a company’s overall carbon footprint.
Other significant changes include the following:
Scope 1 and 2 emissions: While the requirement for Scope 1 and 2 emissions (direct and indirect emissions from purchased electricity) remained, it was limited to larger companies (accelerated and large accelerated filers) and only if the emissions were deemed “material.”
Financial statement disclosures: The proposed requirement to disclose the impact of climate-related risks on financial statements was removed from the final rules.
Board oversight: The SEC also eliminated requirements for disclosing board members’ climate-related experience and specific climate responsibilities.
Flexibility: The final rules provide more flexibility regarding where and how companies present their climate-related disclosures.
Why did the SEC make the changes?
The SEC’s decision to scale back the initial proposal was likely influenced by a combination of factors, including:
Complexity: Scope 3 emissions can be complex to measure and report, and some companies may have faced challenges in collecting and analyzing this data.
Legal challenges: The SEC may have anticipated legal challenges to the Scope 3 emissions requirement and removed it to avoid potential regulatory uncertainty.
Economic impacts: Some critics argued that requiring Scope 3 emissions disclosure could impose significant costs on businesses, particularly smaller companies.
While the final rules represent a compromise between the SEC’s initial ambitions and the concerns of various stakeholders, the issue of climate-related disclosures remains a complex and controversial topic. Ongoing legal challenges and continued uncertainty persist.
Legal battles and regulatory uncertainty
Almost immediately after the final rules were adopted, various groups, including businesses, conservative organizations and environmental activists, challenged them in court. In response, the SEC unexpectedly voluntarily paused the implementation of the rules while legal proceedings were ongoing. This decision has created a period of uncertainty for auditors and their clients.
On April 4, 2024, the SEC voluntarily issued a stay on its climate disclosure rules, originally adopted on March 6, 2024. This decision came in response to multiple lawsuits challenging the regulations across several federal circuits. The agency said it issued the stay for several reasons, including to avoid potential regulatory uncertainty. At the same time, litigation is ongoing to allow the court to focus on reviewing the merits of the challenges and to facilitate an orderly judicial resolution of the numerous petitions filed against the rules.
Legal challenges
Multiple lawsuits have been filed challenging the SEC’s final climate rules. Business interests and conservative groups have filed challenges in various federal appellate courts. Republican attorneys general have also filed legal challenges. Environmental groups like the Sierra Club have sued, arguing the rules are too weak. These cases have been consolidated and are now pending review in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.
SEC’s current position
Despite issuing the stay, the SEC maintains that the climate rules are consistent with applicable law and within its authority. The agency has stated that it will “continue vigorously defending” the validity of the rules in court and reiterated that its existing 2010 climate disclosure guidance remains in effect.
Where we are today
While the stay is in effect, companies subject to SEC regulations will not be required to comply with the new climate disclosure rules. However, many experts advise companies to continue their preparatory efforts, albeit on a less accelerated timeline, given the ongoing investor interest in climate-related disclosures and the potential for the rules to be upheld in court.
What does this all mean for auditors and their clients?
The evolving regulatory landscape has several implications for auditors and the companies they serve:
Increased scrutiny of ESG claims: Even without mandatory disclosures, the SEC remains vigilant against false or misleading ESG claims. Auditors must be diligent in reviewing sustainability reports and other ESG-related communications.
Focus on internal controls: Companies should have strong internal controls to support their ESG disclosures. Auditors may need to assess these controls for their overall audit planning.
Preparation for potential implementation: While the SEC rules are currently on hold, companies should continue to prepare for their potential implementation. Auditors can play a valuable role in helping clients through this period of uncertainty.
The road ahead
The future of climate-related disclosures remains uncertain, but this issue will remain a significant focus for regulators, investors, the courts and the public. Auditors must stay prepared to adapt their practices to meet the needs of their clients during this period of uncertainty and beyond.
The Internal Revenue Service issued a notice Friday giving some breathing room to participants and advisors involved with micro-captive insurance companies.
In January, the IRS issued final regulations designating micro-captive transactions as “listed transactions” and “transactions of interest,” akin to tax shelters. The IRS had proposed the regulations in 2023 but needed to be careful to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act to allow for a comment period and hearing after a 2021 ruling by the Supreme Court in favor of a micro-captive company called CIC Services because the IRS hadn’t followed those procedures back in 2016 when designating micro-captives as transactions of interest. However, the micro-captive insurance industry has asked for more time to comply with the new reporting and disclosure requirements, and one group known as the 831(b) Institute announced earlier this week it had sent a letter to the IRS’s acting commissioner requesting an extension.
On Friday, the IRS issued Notice 2025-24, which provides relief from penalties under Section 6707A(a) and 6707(a) of the Tax Code for participants in and material advisors to micro-captive reportable transactions for disclosure statements required to be filed with the Office of Tax Shelter Analysis. However, the relief applies only if the required disclosure statements are filed with that office by July 31, 2025.
In the notice, the IRS acknowledged that stakeholders had raised concerns regarding the ability of micro-captive reportable transaction participants to comply in a timely way with their initial filing obligations with respect to “Later Identified Micro-captive Listed Transactions” and “Later Identified Microcaptive Transactions of Interest.”
In light of the potential challenges associated with preparing disclosure statements during tax season and in the interest of sound tax administration, the IRS said it would waive the penalties under Section 6707A(a) with respect to Later Identified Micro-captive Listed Transaction and Later Identified Microcaptive Transaction of Interest disclosure statements completed in accordance with Section 1.6011-4(d) and the instructions for Form 8886, Reportable Transaction Disclosure Statement, if the participant files the required disclosure statement with OTSA by July 31, 2025.
The relief is limited to Later Identified Micro-captive Listed Transactions and Later Identified Micro-captive Transactions of Interest. However, the notice does not provide relief from penalties under Section 6707A(a) for participants required to file a copy of their disclosure statements with OTSA at the same time the participant first files a disclosure statement by attaching it to the participant’s tax return.
Taxpayers who are concerned about meeting the due date for these disclosure statements can ask for an extension of the due date for their tax return to obtain additional time to file such disclosure statements. The disclosures required from participants in micro-captive listed transactions and transactions of interest on or after July 31, 2025, remain due as otherwise set forth in the regulations.
There’s also a waiver for the material advisor penalty for similar reasons. “In light of potential challenges associated with preparing disclosure statements during tax return filing season and in the interest of sound tax administration, the IRS will waive penalties under section 6707(a) with 5 respect to Later Identified Micro-captive Listed Transaction and Later Identified Microcaptive Transaction of Interest disclosure statements completed in accordance with § 301.6111-3(d) and the instructions to Form 8918, Material Advisor Disclosure Statement, if the material advisor files the required disclosure statement with OTSA by July 31, 2025,” said the notice. “Disclosures required from material advisors with respect to Micro-captive Listed Transactions and Micro-captive Transactions of Interest on or after July 31, 2025, remain due as otherwise set forth in § 301.6111-3(e). This notice does not modify any list maintenance and furnishment obligations of material advisors as set forth in section 6112 and § 301.6112-1. “
In my work with accounting firms, I’ve lost count of how many times I’ve heard partners say some version of: “We’re paying top dollar. Why are people still leaving?” One conversation particularly sticks with me — a managing partner genuinely baffled by rising turnover despite offering excellent compensation packages.
What I often discover isn’t surprising: Many firms have mastered technical excellence and client service while leadership runs on autopilot. They focus almost exclusively on metrics and deadlines, forgetting the human element. No wonder talented professionals walk out the door seeking workplaces where they’re valued for more than just their billable hours.
Traditional accounting leadership has often prioritized technical excellence and client service at the expense of human connection. We’ve built cultures where being constantly available somehow equals commitment, boundaries are treated as limitations rather than assets, and professional development means technical improvement instead of leadership growth.
Technology has both connected and disconnected us. I’ve worked with firms where team members haven’t had a meaningful conversation with their managers in months despite being on Zoom calls together every day. This disconnect leads to declining engagement and stalled innovation, and makes retaining talented professionals increasingly difficult.
Connected leadership isn’t complicated — it’s about creating real relationships through intentional practices that build trust. It’s the opposite of the “manage by spreadsheet” approach that’s all too common in our profession.
I love thinking about connected leadership like conducting an orchestra. Great conductors don’t just keep time — they understand what makes each musician unique, create space for individual expression within the group, and know when certain sections should shine while others provide support. Most importantly, they get that beautiful music comes from relationships, not just technical precision.
This approach sits at the heart of what I teach through The B³ Method — Business + Balance = Bliss. When leaders create environments where team members feel genuinely seen and valued, magic happens — both in personal fulfillment and on the bottom line.
Alenavlad – stock.adobe.com
The business case for connection
Before dismissing this as too “soft” for our numbers-driven profession, consider the data. According to Gallup’s 2024 State of the Global Workplace report, low employee engagement costs the global economy $8.9 trillion annually — an extraordinary sum that affects businesses of all sizes.
Organizations with high engagement see 21% higher profitability and significantly lower turnover. What accounting leaders really need to understand is that managers account for 70% of the variance in team engagement. When managers themselves are engaged, employees are twice as likely to be engaged too. These positive shifts translate to better retention, stronger client relationships and improved profitability.
Beyond retention, connected leadership directly impacts client relationships and innovation. When team members feel psychologically safe, they’re more likely to raise concerns, suggest improvements, and deliver exceptional client service.
Becoming a connected leader
You don’t need to overhaul your entire firm to start seeing results. Try these practical approaches:
Take a beat. Before jumping into solutions or directives, pause to really listen. Some of my most successful clients start meetings with “connection before content” — spending just a few minutes establishing human connection before diving into the agenda. I recently had an attendee of my Connected Leadership workshop tell me: “Taking just two minutes to meditate can remarkably reset the nervous system, providing a quick and effective way to find calm and focus during a busy workday.”
Create boundary rituals. Work-life harmony isn’t about perfect balance — it’s about intentional integration. Help your team establish clear boundaries that actually enhance client service, like “no-meeting Fridays” or dedicated deep work blocks. One partner told me their key takeaway was “to take care of myself to be better in all aspects of life!”
Measure what matters. Beyond billable hours and realization rates, assess team connections through regular check-ins focused on engagement and belonging. Another workshop participant noted that, as a leader, they must take “100% responsibility for my own actions and outcomes.” What gets measured gets managed — so measure the human element, too.
Get comfortable with vulnerability. Share appropriate challenges and lessons learned, showing that vulnerability is a strength. Poignant feedback from my last workshop stated: “For the managing partners and leaders of the organization to put out there for us their vulnerabilities, past struggles, and pain is a testament to their humanity and endurance, and that is a powerful takeaway.”
The future of accounting leadership
Implementing connected leadership will likely face resistance, particularly in traditional accounting environments. This approach can initially be misperceived as “soft” or less important than technical skills. However, the firms that successfully navigate this transition recognize that connected leadership isn’t separate from business success — it’s foundational to it.
When faced with resistance, start small with measurable experiments. Document outcomes, adjust approaches and gradually expand successful practices. Focus on the business case rather than just the human case, though both are equally important.
As our profession navigates unprecedented talent challenges, we need to evolve how we lead. The firms that will thrive won’t just be those with the best technical expertise — they’ll be the ones where leaders prioritize connection alongside excellence.
I challenge you: Are you leading in a way that creates meaningful relationships, or are you perpetuating a culture where people feel like just another billable resource? Your answer might determine whether your firm struggles to keep talent or becomes a magnet for professionals seeking both success and fulfillment.
In an orchestra, the most powerful moments often come not from individual instruments playing louder, but from all sections playing in harmony. The same is true for our teams.
Ohio’s new law providing an alternative path to a CPA license has taken effect after 90 days and the Ohio Society of CPAs is pointing out another provision of the law, enabling out-of-state CPAs to practice in the Buckeye State.
Ohio Governor Mike DeWine signed House Bill 238 in January, enabling qualified CPAs from other states to work in Ohio, The OSCPA noted that other states are working to adopt similar language to Ohio.
“Automatic interstate mobility essentially works like a driver’s license,” said OSCPA president and CEO Laura Hay in a statement Thursday. “You can drive through our state without an Ohio license, but you still must follow our laws and if you don’t, you’re penalized. The same applies here – a licensed CPA in good standing can now practice here but must adhere to our strict professional standards.”
Four other states — Alabama, Nebraska, North Carolina and Nevada — currently function under this model. That means a CPA with a certificate in good standing issued by any other state is recognized and allowed practice privileges in those four states as well as Ohio. A number of states like Ohio are also taking steps to provide alternative pathways to CPA licensure aside from the traditional 150 credit hours. In addition, approximately half of all jurisdictions have indicated they are shifting to automatic mobility to ensure that CPAs from all states will have practice privileges and be under the jurisdiction of the state’s board of accountancy.
“The realities of globalization and virtualization place greater importance on the individual’s qualifications, rather than their place of licensure,” Hay stated. “And the more states we have that accept this model, the more successful we will all be in addressing the national CPA shortage.”
State CPA societies as well as the American Institute of CPAs and the National Association of State Boards of Accountancy have been working on ways to make the CPA license more accessible to expand the pipeline of young accountants coming into the profession and relieve the shortage.