Connect with us

Accounting

Using AI will solve old drudgery, introduce new drudgery for accountants

Published

on

We’ve all heard the claims by now that artificial intelligence is going to completely revolutionize the accounting profession. Already it is automating away those routine, manual processes that no one liked doing in the first place, and as it grows more sophisticated, the complexity of tasks the technology will be able to manage will only grow. With bots handling all the drudgery, the human accountants will be free to do only the things that interest and engage them. 

The problem is that we’ve seen this before. Accounting is no stranger to technological advancements, and while new technologies have indeed transformed the profession many times over generations, unpleasant drudge work has somehow remained a reality. Part of this is because, historically, technological solutions have tended to solve some problems while, at the same time, creating others which are themselves eventually solved by new technologies that, themselves, create new problems of their own, which must then be solved by the next generation of technology, and so on. 

For generations, accountants hand-filled their spreadsheets; go back far enough, and they used feather quills to do so. Then came the personal computer with the electronic spreadsheet, allowing them to quickly type that which they used to have to painstakingly write out, and what’s more it allowed them to modify these documents instantly — before then, they’d have needed to carefully apply whiteout or even start over entirely. The computer saved so much time and effort, transforming the profession and how it worked. 

Drudgery

But over time, accountants realized, it created work too. While keying in rows of Excel data was certainly faster and easier than writing by hand, it was still a repetitive, mundane and overall boring task that mainly was done by lower-level associates. While the old drudgery was gone, the new drudgery was ascendant, and soon eventually accountants came to dread having to fill cells, inspect for errors, maintain macros, troubleshoot equations, and listen to their computers groan beneath the weight of far-too-large data sets. People thought, ‘Wouldn’t it be nice to automate all this?’

So they did. The profession saw a push for automation that could take over this new drudgery, whether in the form of dedicated solutions or robotic process automation. Powered by sophisticated computer algorithms that fed on big data, business and accounting automation was presented as the thing that would liberate accountants from the drudgery of manual processes that ate up so much of an accountant’s day. Now we see most of the simple, routine tasks — often compliance-based — that used to dominate accounting work now being handled by software, automating away the boring stuff so the humans could concentrate on the things that really matter, like client engagement. 

Of course, over time, people have found that these automations can create their own sort of drudgery too. Yes, they can automatically process invoices or update the general ledger, but now they have to format the data fueling the automation, maintain the databases that hold this information, integrate disparate systems into a cohesive whole, make sure everything is patched and updated, and troubleshoot when (not if — when) things go wrong. 

Enter generative AI. Rather than setting up complicated integrations between systems, cludging them together into a unified workflow, accountants can now tell generative AI to do it for them. While still in the early stages, the technology has advanced rapidly in a short time, and what began as something only for drafting marketing copy is becoming a powerful tool for automation that can be run not on arcane command codes but simple natural language. Instead of navigating through tabs and menus to, say, draft an engagement letter, accountants can tell a gen AI system to just draft the letter. AI can handle all these routine, mundane, boring, repetitive processes for us, while we focus on the value-added services that really matter, like consulting. 

So is that it? Have we finally reached the apogee of accounting technology? Have we truly seen the end of boring, unfulfilling, unpleasant drudgery?

If previous paradigm shifts are any indication, the answer is no. New technology will probably continue solving some problems while creating others, and it is unlikely AI will be the exception. So while there is a whole universe of contemporary problems that AI is uniquely positioned to solve, users are also opening themselves up to new annoyances, frustrations and overall unpleasant tasks they’d prefer not to do. AI may take care of a lot, but it is unrealistic to think it would one day make the job free of toil and stress. 

Moreover, one might argue that toil and stress are inherent to the very nature of jobs themselves, which essentially are things that people would not ordinarily be doing on their own — at least not in the way they’re expected to — without money.

If there was nothing stressful, nothing boring, nothing overall unpleasant or unfulfilling about a job, if it was as simple and enjoyable as watching TV or seeing friends, it likely would not be a job in the first place. In fact, if it became something actually fun, it would quickly be recategorized as leisure, and people would have to pay to do it, instead of getting paid to do it.

Continue Reading

Accounting

IAASB tweaks standards on working with outside experts

Published

on

The International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board is proposing to tailor some of its standards to align with recent additions to the International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants’ International Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants when it comes to using the work of an external expert.

The proposed narrow-scope amendments involve minor changes to several IAASB standards:

  • ISA 620, Using the Work of an Auditor’s Expert;
  • ISRE 2400 (Revised), Engagements to Review Historical Financial Statements;
  • ISAE 3000 (Revised), Assurance Engagements Other than Audits or Reviews of Historical Financial Information;
  • ISRS 4400 (Revised), Agreed-upon Procedures Engagements.

The IAASB is asking for comments via a digital response template that can be found on the IAASB website by July 24, 2025.

In December 2023, the IESBA approved an exposure draft for proposed revisions to the IESBA’s Code of Ethics related to using the work of an external expert. The proposals included three new sections to the Code of Ethics, including provisions for professional accountants in public practice; professional accountants in business and sustainability assurance practitioners. The IESBA approved the provisions on using the work of an external expert at its December 2024 meeting, establishing an ethical framework to guide accountants and sustainability assurance practitioners in evaluating whether an external expert has the necessary competence, capabilities and objectivity to use their work, as well as provisions on applying the Ethics Code’s conceptual framework when using the work of an outside expert.  

Continue Reading

Accounting

Tariffs will hit low-income Americans harder than richest, report says

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s tariffs would effectively cause a tax increase for low-income families that is more than three times higher than what wealthier Americans would pay, according to an analysis from the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy.

The report from the progressive think tank outlined the outcomes for Americans of all backgrounds if the tariffs currently in effect remain in place next year. Those making $28,600 or less would have to spend 6.2% more of their income due to higher prices, while the richest Americans with income of at least $914,900 are expected to spend 1.7% more. Middle-income families making between $55,100 and $94,100 would pay 5% more of their earnings. 

Trump has imposed the steepest U.S. duties in more than a century, including a 145% tariff on many products from China, a 25% rate on most imports from Canada and Mexico, duties on some sectors such as steel and aluminum and a baseline 10% tariff on the rest of the country’s trading partners. He suspended higher, customized tariffs on most countries for 90 days.

Economists have warned that costs from tariff increases would ultimately be passed on to U.S. consumers. And while prices will rise for everyone, lower-income families are expected to lose a larger portion of their budgets because they tend to spend more of their earnings on goods, including food and other necessities, compared to wealthier individuals.

Food prices could rise by 2.6% in the short run due to tariffs, according to an estimate from the Yale Budget Lab. Among all goods impacted, consumers are expected to face the steepest price hikes for clothing at 64%, the report showed. 

The Yale Budget Lab projected that the tariffs would result in a loss of $4,700 a year on average for American households.

Continue Reading

Accounting

At Schellman, AI reshapes a firm’s staffing needs

Published

on

Artificial intelligence is just getting started in the accounting world, but it is already helping firms like technology specialist Schellman do more things with fewer people, allowing the firm to scale back hiring and reduce headcount in certain areas through natural attrition. 

Schellman CEO Avani Desai said there have definitely been some shifts in headcount at the Top 100 Firm, though she stressed it was nothing dramatic, as it mostly reflects natural attrition combined with being more selective with hiring. She said the firm has already made an internal decision to not reduce headcount in force, as that just indicates they didn’t hire properly the first time. 

“It hasn’t been about reducing roles but evolving how we do work, so there wasn’t one specific date where we ‘started’ the reduction. It’s been more case by case. We’ve held back on refilling certain roles when we saw opportunities to streamline, especially with the use of new technologies like AI,” she said. 

One area where the firm has found such opportunities has been in the testing of certain cybersecurity controls, particularly within the SOC framework. The firm examined all the controls it tests on the service side and asked which ones require human judgment or deep expertise. The answer was a lot of them. But for the ones that don’t, AI algorithms have been able to significantly lighten the load. 

“[If] we don’t refill a role, it’s because the need actually has changed, or the process has improved so significantly [that] the workload is lighter or shared across the smarter system. So that’s what’s happening,” said Desai. 

Outside of client services like SOC control testing and reporting, the firm has found efficiencies in administrative functions as well as certain internal operational processes. On the latter point, Desai noted that Schellman’s engineers, including the chief information officer, have been using AI to help develop code, which means they’re not relying as much on outside expertise on the internal service delivery side of things. There are still people in the development process, but their roles are changing: They’re writing less code, and doing more reviewing of code before it gets pushed into production, saving time and creating efficiencies. 

“The best way for me to say this is, to us, this has been intentional. We paused hiring in a few areas where we saw overlaps, where technology was really working,” said Desai.

However, even in an age awash with AI, Schellman acknowledges there are certain jobs that need a human, at least for now. For example, the firm does assessments for the FedRAMP program, which is needed for cloud service providers to contract with certain government agencies. These assessments, even in the most stable of times, can be long and complex engagements, to say nothing of the less predictable nature of the current government. As such, it does not make as much sense to reduce human staff in this area. 

“The way it is right now for us to do FedRAMP engagements, it’s a very manual process. There’s a lot of back and forth between us and a third party, the government, and we don’t see a lot of overall application or technology help… We’re in the federal space and you can imagine, [with] what’s going on right now, there’s a big changing market condition for clients and their pricing pressure,” said Desai. 

As Schellman reduces staff levels in some places, it is increasing them in others. Desai said the firm is actively hiring in certain areas. In particular, it’s adding staff in technical cybersecurity (e.g., penetration testers), the aforementioned FedRAMP engagements, AI assessment (in line with recently becoming an ISO 42001 certification body) and in some client-facing roles like marketing and sales. 

“So, to me, this isn’t about doing more with less … It’s about doing more of the right things with the right people,” said Desai. 

While these moves have resulted in savings, she said that was never really the point, so whatever the firm has saved from staffing efficiencies it has reinvested in its tech stack to build its service line further. When asked for an example, she said the firm would like to focus more on penetration testing by building a SaaS tool for it. While Schellman has a proof of concept developed, she noted it would take a lot of money and time to deploy a full solution — both of which the firm now has more of because of its efficiency moves. 

“What is the ‘why’ behind these decisions? The ‘why’ for us isn’t what I think you traditionally see, which is ‘We need to get profitability high. We need to have less people do more things.’ That’s not what it is like,” said Desai. “I want to be able to focus on quality. And the only way I think I can focus on quality is if my people are not focusing on things that don’t matter … I feel like I’m in a much better place because the smart people that I’ve hired are working on the riskiest and most complicated things.”

Continue Reading

Trending