Connect with us

Accounting

The long, tortured debut of the IRS Centralized Partnership Audit Regime

Published

on

It has been 10 years since the Bipartisan Budget Act introduced the Centralized Partnership Audit Regime. The program was intended to help the Internal Revenue Service audit partnerships more efficiently, but over the last decade, the IRS, taxpayers and practitioners have encountered numerous issues with CPAR, often resulting in administrative burden. 

“CPAR impacts not only partnerships themselves, but also partners, who may be corporations or high-net-worth individuals,” said Colin Walsh, principal and practice leader of Top 10 Firm Baker Tilly’s tax advocacy and controversy services. “By its nature, CPAR is novel, widespread, misunderstood and controversial.”

“BBA and CPAR are both used to refer to the same thing,” according to Walsh. “The IRS calls it the BBA because that was the act that created it. Most practitioners call it CPAR.” 

irs-podium.jpg

The legislation it refers to made various changes to the Internal Revenue Code that made it significantly easier for the IRS to audit a partnership, make changes to that partnership’s tax return and then make an assessment as a result of those changes. It was a direct response to the prior regime, which was called TEFRA, where the IRS had a very difficult time auditing partnerships. TEFRA was named after the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, but the partnership audit provisions changed with the Bipartisan Budget Act.

“The initial legislation was at the end of 2015, but it was prospective,” explained Walsh. “Even though it came into effect in 2015, the first income tax return for which these rules were required was the 2018 Form 1065. Congress decided that they would give a little bit of time to prepare and gear up and adjust operating agreements. But in 2018, when they filed, they would be subject to the new rules if they got audited.”

Then the 2018 returns, especially the more complicated ones that got selected for exam, were filed in the subsequent fall, so the 2018 returns selected for audit were filed in the fall of 2019, and selected for audit in 2020. 

“When COVID hit, the IRS had a policy of bit selecting new returns for exam, so they decided that since everyone was suffering they would hold off on rolling out CPAR,” he continued. “So we, as tax controversy professionals, were geared up in 2020 to start these CPAR audits, but because of COVID, 2020 quickly turned into the spring and summer of 2023.” 

There was a convergence of two factors, according to Walsh: “We had this legislative program that was sitting on the shelf for a few years, but in addition to the legislation, for the first time in decades, the IRS was given funding with which it could implement the program. The IRS was struggling through the pandemic and even before the pandemic for lack of resources. So in 2023 and 2024 the IRS built internally a partnership audit task force. They were hiring folks, developing technology and processes to go out and audit partnerships. Baker Tilly’s partnership clients were getting selected for audit under these new procedures, and we spent a good chunk of 2024 administering these exams and starting to see, finally, a decade after the BBA became law, actual exams under this regime.”

The Inflation Reduction Act provided $80 billion to be paid out over 10 years, and the partnership audit task force was one of the things that the IRS intended to spend the money on. 

“But of course, what was $80 billion became $60 billion because some of the funding was clawed back, and that became $40 billion, and now we’ve hit a pause button. All of us who work in this space are very curious to see what impact the lack of funding is going to have on the audit of partnerships,” said Walsh. “We’re actively working with our clients on BBA/CPAR audits right now. This has been a decade in the making — we were on the precipice of really beginning this. The plane was just starting to take off, but now it’s back on the runway. And we don’t know when the plane is going to take off again or if it will take off at all.”

“Whenever anything is new, it’s bound to be a little bit of a bumpy road ahead,” he said. “It’s hard for Congress when they write a statute and it’s hard for Treasury when they issue regulations to contemplate the complexity of administering something like this. So this first year of the rollout of CPAR it has been a little bit bumpy in terms of rolling out the new rules. There are new forms, new Internal Revenue Manual provisions, and a centralized approval process for any changes that are made that agents have to coordinate with this other group. And there is some subjectivity as to how the law applies. So it’s a little bit more art than science at this point as we stumble our way through the first year, but I think both on the IRS end and on taxpayers end, we learned a lot.”

“For example, the first time we filled out a power of attorney under CPAR, it was rejected because it wasn’t filled out correctly,” said Walsh. “We had to change the wording to align with the way the IRS wants it. But now we won’t have that problem anymore because we’ve done it.”

The real question now is about how the law will be enforced, according to Walsh. 

“It doesn’t really matter if these rules exist if no one is there to conduct the audits,” he said. “The story is now more of financing than it is for the law, because the law has now existed for a decade. We just haven’t seen the administration of that law.”

Continue Reading

Accounting

FASB Standardizes Carbon Offsets Accounting Rules

Published

on

FASB Standardizes Carbon Offsets Accounting Rules

In a decisive move toward standardized environmental financial reporting, accounting standards boards issued updated implementation guidance during the week ending July 25, 2026, regarding the formal recognition and valuation of corporate carbon offsets and environmental credits. The revised frameworks establish precise rules for how enterprises must measure, record, and disclose carbon credits on balance sheets, eliminating years of inconsistent reporting practices across public capital markets.

Under the finalized accounting standard, purchased carbon offsets can no longer be categorized under vague administrative expenses or unstandardized intangible asset accounts. Instead, organizations must classify environmental credits based on underlying operational intent—distinguishing between credits held for immediate compliance compliance obligations, long-term offset obligations, or active market trading. Furthermore, companies are required to evaluate carbon holdings for fair value impairment at the end of each reporting period, ensuring that depreciated or low-quality environmental credits do not distort corporate asset values.

The standardized rules carry significant implications for corporate audit committees and chief accounting officers. External audit firms are implementing rigorous verification protocols to validate the physical legitimacy, legal ownership, and scientific permanence of carbon credits claimed on balance sheets. Inaccurate or overstated carbon accounting claims now carry substantial financial litigation risk, alongside potential regulatory enforcement for misleading ESG disclosures.

To remain fully compliant, corporate accounting departments must establish centralized carbon tracking systems integrated into primary standard ERP ledgers. Accounting teams that proactively adopt standardized environmental reporting protocols will build investor credibility, streamline annual audit processes, and insulate their organizations against evolving regulatory scrutiny.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Automated Tax Compliance Tools Reduce Risk

Published

on

Automated Tax Compliance Tools Reduce Risk

Corporate tax departments reached a critical juncture in automated operational management. With nations worldwide rapidly enacting digital service taxes, localized value-added tax (VAT) mandates, and real-time electronic invoicing requirements, manual tax calculations have become obsolete. Modern corporate tax divisions are aggressively deploying AI-driven tax engine software to automate complex cross-border indirect tax calculations in real time.

The imperative for automated tax compliance stems from the sheer complexity of current trade policies and multi-jurisdictional commerce. E-commerce platforms, software vendors, and global manufacturers face constantly changing regional tax rates, statutory exemption rules, and cross-border tariff structures. Automated tax engines embed directly into enterprise enterprise resource planning (ERP) architectures, automatically applying correct tax codes at the point of sale, calculating real-time withholding amounts, and generating compliant e-invoices.

Automated audit trail generation represents another key advantage of modern tax tech integration. Advanced compliance platforms log every transactional tax determination on immutable digital ledgers, providing tax authorities with transparent, self-verifying audit trails. This capability drastically reduces the operational duration and administrative cost of corporate tax audits, protecting enterprises against severe penalties resulting from calculation errors or missed reporting deadlines.

For chief financial officers and tax directors, investing in automated tax compliance is a vital operational risk mitigation strategy. Automating routine tax calculations frees high-level accounting professionals to focus on strategic tax planning, transfer pricing optimization, and risk management in an increasingly complex global economic environment.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Continuous Auditing Transforms Corporate ERPs

Published

on

continuous auditing transforms corporate erps

As corporate accounting departments cross the threshold into late July 2026, the adoption of continuous, automated auditing systems has reached a definitive turning point. Driven by advances in artificial intelligence and deep integration with modern Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) platforms, leading finance organizations are moving away from traditional, periodic post-hoc audits in favor of real-time, 100% transactional verification. This technological transition is redefining internal control environments, reducing compliance costs, and eliminating the structural delays inherent in legacy quarterly closing processes.

Unlike traditional auditing frameworks that rely on statistical sampling—a process that inevitably leaves operational blind spots—continuous auditing software monitors operational data feeds continuously. Every purchase order, electronic invoice, payroll disbursement, and cross-border wire transfer is automatically cross-referenced against established corporate governance parameters, regulatory tax schedules, and anti-fraud algorithms in real time. Anomalies or unauthorized ledger entries are flagged instantly, allowing internal audit teams to investigate and remediate compliance gaps immediately rather than months after the close of a financial period.

The implications for executive financial management are far-reaching. By embedding continuous verification directly into daily transaction workflows, chief financial officers gain uninterrupted visibility into the organization’s true financial standing. Real-time balance sheet auditing eliminates the severe operational bottlenecks associated with month-end and quarter-end financial reconciliations, freeing accounting professionals to focus on strategic financial modeling, tax planning, and capital allocation rather than manual data entry and spreadsheet consolidation.

However, implementing continuous auditing requires accounting leadership to invest heavily in data governance and technical upskilling. Internal audit teams must evolve from manual ledger reviewers into system architects capable of auditing complex algorithms and validating automated data pipelines. Accounting firms and corporate controllers that master continuous auditing will establish a resilient compliance framework capable of meeting stringent international regulatory standards with total transparency.

Continue Reading

Trending