Connect with us

Accounting

What accounting firms miss when they rush into AI

Published

on

Firm leaders are getting contradictory messages right now. Every conference, every vendor, every LinkedIn post says artificial intelligence is about to transform accounting. The implication: If you’re not implementing it yesterday, you’re already behind.

But the companies actually building AI tools for accounting are working on a different timeline than the one being marketed.

When I talked with Mike Cieri, executive vice president of software at Bill, about implementation timelines, he was direct: “We’ll see rapid change over five years, but I don’t think in six months you’re going to have a complete turnaround on how the accounting industry works.”

Five years of steady change. Not a six-month revolution.

That gap between the hype and the reality is creating unnecessary anxiety. Firms are making decisions about AI adoption while feeling panicked about being left behind, when the actual timeline gives them room to learn and test properly.

What ‘experimenting’ actually means

Most firms fall into one of two camps: diving into AI implementations without testing, or freezing because they don’t know where to start. There’s a middle path.

“Take a couple of associates and say, ‘We’re going to try this in your area. We’re going to try this with a few clients and experiment with it until we feel good that there was value added, and we have the controls we value as a firm in place,'” Cieri suggested.

The word “experiment” matters here. An experiment has defined parameters, a limited scope, and permission to produce unexpected results. A firm-wide rollout has none of those things.

This approach addresses what firms actually worry about: What if this doesn’t work the way the vendor says? What if it creates more problems than it solves? What if we spend money and time and see no real benefit?

Testing small answers those questions with data instead of assumptions.

Where the value actually shows up

During my years in public accounting and later in C-level roles at companies, the frustration I saw repeatedly was talented people spending hours on work that didn’t require their expertise: Transaction coding. Data entry. Repetitive reconciliations.

AI should solve that problem — not by replacing accountants, but by handling the work that doesn’t need human judgment.

In our conversation, Cieri framed it this way: “Human involvement will be high leverage at key moments, where creativity is needed, judgment is needed, advisory is needed. We’re trying to amplify the value of human intervention in those moments.”

This changes what entry-level work looks like. Instead of spending two years learning to code transactions before getting to do analysis, new staff can move into interpretation and pattern recognition faster. The technical skills still matter, but they’re not the bottleneck anymore.

For experienced professionals, it creates bandwidth for work that keeps getting postponed: Strategic client conversations. Team mentoring. The advisory work that actually requires expertise.

From the client perspective: “I should be happier that we’re showing up to meetings and getting a higher-order thinker on the other side, showcasing for me a better picture of my business than I was getting before.”

That’s the actual value — not efficiency metrics on internal processes, but better outcomes for clients because the firm has capacity for meaningful work.

How review processes build trust

The question I hear most often: How do I know the AI did it correctly?

Same way you know a new staff person did it correctly: You review their work.

“We think of AI as just another actor in the system. We record those actions, there’s clear auditability, there’s clear transparency,” Cieri explained. “You’re building trust over time through verification. You see what the AI did, you check its work, you override when needed. The same process firms already use for training staff.”

The difference between firms that scale AI successfully and firms that pull back after problems: The successful ones built review processes from day one. They didn’t assume it would “just work.”

Starting point

If you’re somewhere between “We should do something about AI” and “I don’t know what to do,” here’s a practical framework:

  1. Spend time learning what AI actually does. “People tend to fear things they don’t understand, so just spending some time on that alone … to separate some of the fact from fiction in your own mind” makes the difference between decisions driven by anxiety and decisions driven by clarity, Cieri suggested.
  2. Pick one workflow that’s causing pain. Not the most complex one — the most consistently annoying one. Test with a limited scope. One person, one set of clients, defined timeframe.
  3. Define success before you start. What are you measuring? Time saved? Error reduction? Less end-of-month stress?
  4. Then pause before scaling. What worked? What didn’t? What surprised you? Most firms skip this reflection and miss the learning.

“Firms have a choice. If you want to turn on agents to do some of this work for you, that’s a choice you’re going to be able to make,” Cieri said. “It’s not just going to happen overnight.”
You control the pace of adoption.

What this actually requires

When I work with executives and partners on transformation — technology, workplace culture, business process — the pattern is consistent: The ones who succeed don’t move fastest; they move with intention. They test, reflect, adjust.

The ones who struggle try to do everything simultaneously because someone told them urgency equals importance.

AI creates opportunities for firms to reclaim time for work that matters: Strategic advising. Client relationships. Team development. But only if the adoption process itself doesn’t create the burnout and overwhelm that AI is supposed to solve. AI trends come and go. Fulfillment is evergreen.

Cieri said it best: “This is about supporting, not replacing, human connection.

The technology will wait. The question is whether you’re making decisions from clarity or from the pressure to keep up with what everyone else seems to be doing.

Take a beat. Test small. Build trust through verification. Scale when you understand what you’re scaling.

The firms that will succeed with AI are the ones who test first and scale deliberately.

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