Earmark CPE

Earn CPE Anytime, Anywhere

Earmark Team

The Lookback Period Mistake That Turns Valid Refunds Into Permanent Losses

· ·

Lenora Hamilton thought she had everything figured out. She filed her 2017 tax return in November 2021—late, but still claiming a $2,070 refund she believed was rightfully hers. The IRS immediately rejected her claim. She appealed, lost, and spent nearly a year fighting in federal court.

The final verdict in early 2025 delivered a crushing blow: the court ruled her claim was “timely filed,” but she couldn’t recover a single dollar. Not because the refund was wrong, but because she missed something called the “lookback period.” A technical timing rule had permanently erased her entire refund.

In a recent episode of the Tax in Action podcast, host Jeremy Wells used Hamilton’s story to explain the refund statute of limitations—a subject most tax professionals think they understand but actually don’t. The stakes are enormous: once these deadlines pass, Wells warns, “there’s virtually no going back.”

The Two-Step Framework That Trips Up Even Experienced Practitioners

Most tax professionals think the refund statute of limitations is straightforward. File within three years, get your refund. But Wells explains it’s a complex two-step process where each step has different rules and different consequences.

Step One: Can You File at All?

The first step determines whether you can file a refund claim. This “limitation period” is the later of either three years after the return was filed or two years after the tax was paid if no return was filed. Wells calls this the “refund statute end date,” and it’s your final deadline to file any claim.

Here’s the key detail that trips up practitioners: “The filing of an original return, not an amended return, begins the period of limitation,” Wells explains. This means if you amend a return filed years ago, you’re still working within the timeline set by that original filing date.

Step Two: How Much Can You Actually Get?

Even if you file a timely claim, step two determines how much you can recover through the “lookback period.” The rules change dramatically based on when you file:

  • File within three years: You can look back at the full three years
  • File after three years: Your lookback period shrinks to just two years

This is where Hamilton got trapped. The court found she filed a timely claim, satisfying step one. But because she filed her 2017 return so late—November 2021—her lookback period couldn’t reach back to her 2017 tax payments, which were deemed made on April 15, 2018.

As Wells puts it, “The court said she filed a timely claim for refund. However, for that timely claim, there was no refund available. What does that mean? How can that be?” To understand the answer, you have to know when the IRS considers payments “made” under tax law.

The Payment Timing Trap That Caught COVID-Era Taxpayers

The lookback period depends on when payments are “deemed made,” not when they actually happened. This creates counterintuitive situations that can permanently cost taxpayers money.

The Withholding Rule

Under IRC section 6513, all tax withheld from your paychecks during the year is deemed paid on April 15th of the following year. It doesn’t matter if the money was withheld in January or December—it’s all considered paid on April 15th.

For Hamilton, “Her 2018 withholding is deemed paid on April 15th, 2019, which is the 15th day of the fourth month following the close of that tax year.”

The COVID-19 Disaster

These timing rules created a perfect storm during the pandemic. The IRS postponed filing deadlines—2019 returns were due on July 15, 2020, and 2020 returns were due on May 17, 2021. But payments were still deemed made on April 15th of each year.

This trapped taxpayers who filed during the postponement periods. Someone who filed their 2019 return on July 15, 2020 (perfectly timely) might wait until July 15, 2023, to file a refund claim. Their three-year lookback would run from July 15, 202,3 back to July 15, 2020. But their 2019 payments were deemed made on April 15, 2020, which falls outside their lookback window.

Wells explains: “This left taxpayers who didn’t file extensions for those tax years stuck with potentially valid refund claims, yet they didn’t have any periods within the lookback period because those payments were still deemed filed as of April 15th.”

The IRS eventually provided relief through Notice 2021-21, but only after recognizing that its own timing rules created harsh consequences for taxpayers who did nothing wrong.

The Dangerous “Due Date” Myth Costing Taxpayers Money

A destructive misconception in refund statute law sounds perfectly reasonable: “You have three years from the due date to claim a refund.” 

But Wells makes it crystal clear that this perception isn’t accurate. “The end date is actually three years from the filing date or possibly two years from the payment date.” The due date might coincide with these periods for taxpayers who file on time, but it’s not what controls the deadline.

Why the Due Date Myth Fails

The due date myth crumbles in the exact situations where practitioners need precision most:

  • Late-filed returns: A taxpayer who files their 2020 return in September 2023 doesn’t have until April 15, 2024 to claim refunds. Their three-year period starts from September 2023.
  • Amended returns with post-deadline payments: Wells explains these create situations where “a valid refund claim made more than three years after the due date, could look back into those payments made after the deadline.”

The Hamilton case perfectly illustrates this. If you applied the due date myth, you’d think she was too late filing in November 2021 for a 2017 return. But the court found her claim was timely because the real rules don’t work that way.

The Professional Liability Risk

For tax professionals, relying on the due date myth creates serious liability exposure. When practitioners give advice based on this oversimplified rule, they risk costing clients money they can never recover.

Wells emphasizes the finality built into these rules: “Once that statute of limitations is up, once you have passed that refund statute end date, there is no going back with some very, very limited exceptions.”

Why These Rules Are So Unforgiving

The refund statute of limitations operates with mechanical precision, regardless of hardship or apparent unfairness. Courts consistently rule that these deadlines are clear and unambiguous, so there’s no room for equitable exceptions or reasonable cause relief.

The Finality Principle

Congress built finality into the tax code intentionally. As Wells explains: “There’s an implicit concept in the tax code that Congress has written into it. I tend to call it finality.” At some point, taxpayers should feel confident that old tax years are truly closed.

But this finality only works if practitioners understand the real rules. The Hamilton case, with its modest $2,070 refund that became a years-long legal battle, shows how even small amounts trigger the same unforgiving rules that govern million-dollar refunds.

The Stakes for Tax Professionals

These rules affect every practitioner who works with amended returns, late filers, or clients with potential refund claims. Understanding when the IRS deems payments made, how postponements interact with lookback periods, and when the due date myth doesn’t apply isn’t just technical knowledge—it’s client protection. And it can be the difference between recovering thousands of dollars and losing them forever.

When Time Runs Out, Money Disappears Forever

The refund statute of limitations represents tax law at its most technically demanding and unforgiving. The two-step framework of limitation periods and lookback periods creates a system where understanding timing rules can mean the difference between financial recovery and permanent loss.

For tax professionals, these rules represent the intersection of expertise and fiduciary responsibility. Relying on oversimplified rules or misunderstand the distinction between filing dates and due dates means risking giving advice that permanently costs clients money.

This finality places enormous responsibility on practitioners to understand and navigate these rules correctly.

Don’t let technical complexity cost your clients money they can never recover. Listen to Wells’ complete Tax in Action episode to master these critical timing rules and protect your clients’ interests and your professional reputation.

Why Your Audit Fails Before Fieldwork Even Starts

· ·

“Some audits are doomed before the fieldwork even begins.”

In Episode 2 of Audit Smarter, Sam Mansour cuts to the heart of a problem many audit professionals face but don’t fully understand. You’ve been there: an experienced team, solid procedures, and a reasonable budget. Yet somehow, the engagement still feels like constantly playing catch-up. Testing seems disconnected. Risks surface at the worst possible moment. Partners ask questions during review that should have been answered weeks ago.

The culprit? Poor risk assessment that undermines everything that follows.

Most audit professionals understand risk assessment is important, but few realize how dramatically it shapes their engagement. Mansour explains, “The risk assessment drives the entire audit approach. And if we misidentify or overlook specific audit risks, your testing could be misaligned, and you could waste time. But even more concerning, you might miss material misstatements.”

Here’s what’s happening across the profession and, more importantly, what you can do about it.

Why Risk Assessment Gets the Short End of the Stick

The problem isn’t that auditors don’t know how to assess risk. It’s that firms have systematically devalued this critical phase, treating it as administrative overhead rather than the strategic foundation it actually is.

“Many teams view planning just as a compliance step and not as a strategic one,” Mansour observes. Budget pressures and efficiency demands create an environment where teams feel pushed to rush through risk assessment. “We devalue the risk assessment phase. We think of it as a textbook thing. Let’s just check some boxes and move on.”

This leads to what Mansour calls “pencil whipping,” mechanically completing checklists without genuine thought or analysis. The evidence shows up everywhere in audit files: work paper references that don’t make sense, incorrect years, or references to people who no longer work at the organization.

“It’s pretty clear it’s been rolled forward,” Mansour notes. “And it’s also very clear no one read through it.”

When external reviewers, whether peer reviewers or regulators, see this kind of documentation, it immediately raises red flags. “As a peer reviewer, you look at some of these risk assessments, and it’s crystal clear they just rolled this from last year and they didn’t even look at it,” he explains. “You’re probably going to be pretty strict when you’re looking at the rest of that file because clearly these guys are just rolling from the prior year.”

The pressure to be “efficient” in planning creates a dangerous cycle where the foundation of the audit becomes weaker, making it much harder to execute proper testing throughout the engagement.

5 Common Mistakes That Derail Audits

Understanding where things typically go wrong helps you avoid these pitfalls in your own engagements. Mansour identifies several patterns that consistently create problems.

Generic, Template-Driven Approaches

When risk assessments are generic and not customized to the specific client, the walkthroughs and procedures that follow suffer. “If we are general or vague in our identification of risks, it results in generic audit procedures,” Mansour explains.

Copying Prior Year Without Thinking

Using prior-year documentation as a starting point makes sense, but many teams go too far. They simply copy everything over with minor adjustments, becoming “a little complacent, a little lazy” in the rollover process. A better approach is to use prior-year information as a guide but take a fresh perspective on the current year.

Failing to Link Risks to Procedures

One “gut-wrenching” moment in an audit review happens when the audit team identifies risks in checklists, but no corresponding procedures address them. “You identified this risk, but what did you do about it?” This mistake exposes fundamental gaps in audit logic.

Superficial Inquiries

Take related party transactions, for example. Many auditors accept a simple “we have none” from the client and move on. But as Mansour points out, “that’s not sufficient.” Instead, “auditors should dig into board minutes, vendor relationships, and ownership records” to understand whether related parties exist and what transactions might occur.

Misusing Junior Staff

Sending inexperienced team members to conduct walkthroughs without proper guidance is a recipe for problems. Junior staff might identify three issues out of ten while missing critical problems that experienced auditors would catch immediately. “Sometimes you need experience to tell you, you’re looking at ten different things and eight of them are going to be a problem and two of them are not,” Mansour explains.

The solution isn’t to avoid using junior staff. It’s to pair them with experienced team members who can provide real-time guidance and fill in the gaps.

Practical Tools to Strengthen Your Risk Assessment

The good news is that these problems are entirely fixable with the right approach and tools. Here’s what works:

  • Dynamic checklists. Move beyond simple checkbox exercises to checklists that challenge teams to collect new information and think deeply about what they find. Ask different types of questions that force auditors to go beyond surface-level inquiries.
  • Structured brainstorming sessions. Don’t just conduct one brainstorming session and call it done. Mansour recommends peppering collaborative discussions throughout the engagement. “Have the engagement team go out to lunch and consider that part of your brainstorming activity,” he suggests. These sessions force teams to share knowledge and often uncover overlooked areas.
  • Early data analytics. Instead of treating analytics as nice-to-have add-ons, deploy them “immediately after engagement acceptance,” Mansour advises. His approach: “Give me your trial balance, and I will do some data analytics on it right from the get-go.” This generates specific issues to investigate before client meetings, allowing you to connect numbers to client stories strategically.
  • Simple intelligence gathering. Something as basic as Googling your client’s name can reveal critical information, yet “a lot of auditors won’t even do that,” Mansour observes. “You’d be shocked at some of the stuff” these searches uncover. Review prior audit findings, look for industry changes, and stay current on client updates.
  • Collaborative team approach. Instead of having one person update risk assessment documentation alone, assign different sections to different team members. This ensures multiple people read through and think about the content, rather than having it all flow through one person who might miss important details.

What Separates Top Performers

Firms that consistently execute superior risk assessments share several key characteristics that set them apart.

They Treat Risk Assessment as a Mindset

“Top performers treat risk assessment as a mindset, not just a task,” Mansour explains. “They understand that there’s value in risk assessments. It’s not just a checkbox on their list.” Their teams are intellectually curious rather than robotic, but this requires giving people adequate time and breathing room to think deeply.

They Create Collaborative Environments

These firms don’t silo team members into individual sections. Instead, they “connect the dots between client goals, internal controls, and audit processes with purpose.” Team members actively consider how discoveries in one area impact testing in others, creating a comprehensive understanding that reduces risk while improving efficiency.

They Invest in Proper Mentorship

Rather than throwing junior staff into complex situations alone, top performers create systematic mentorship structures. They pair junior staff with experienced seniors who provide real-time guidance, immediate field discussions, and progressive responsibility increases.

They Focus on Custom Solutions

Elite performers avoid generic approaches entirely. They tailor audit plans to each client and engagement year. Their team members can explain their logic clearly without defaulting to “it’s what we were told” or “it’s what we did last year.”

Three Changes to Make Right Now

If your firm wants to improve immediately, Mansour recommends focusing on these three foundational changes:

  1. Slow down in the planning process and allow for deeper team discussions. Invest upfront time that prevents downstream scrambling and quality issues.
  2. Ensure walkthroughs include a formal evaluation of control effectiveness with documentation customized to the specific client and current year rather than generic templates.
  3. Critically assess each risk and match it to custom procedures designed to address it, eliminating the disconnect between identified risks and actual testing approaches.

How You Know You Got It Right

Success in risk assessment is measurable through specific indicators. Your audit plan should be tailored, not generic. This demonstrates genuine client-specific thinking rather than template dependency. Your team members should be able to explain their logic clearly and provide substantive reasoning for their approaches.

Most importantly, when partners or regulators review your documentation, they should be able to “read your risk assessment and understand the rationale,” as Mansour puts it. They should see a clear narrative and strategic thinking rather than dry, templated responses.

If your team can’t explain their logic, or if external reviewers see obvious evidence of rolling forward prior year templates, you’re still in checkbox mode rather than strategic thinking mode.

The Foundation Makes the Difference

Risk assessment isn’t preliminary work that happens before the “real” audit begins. It’s the foundation that determines whether your entire engagement succeeds or struggles. As Mansour explains using a gardening analogy, if the risk assessment seed “doesn’t get planted properly, if it’s not cared for properly, it sets you up for failure.”

Firms that recognize this and invest accordingly create sustainable competitive advantages through systematically superior approaches to this critical phase.

The strategies and tools we’ve covered are proven approaches to transform your risk assessment process from liability into a strategic advantage. However, implementation requires commitment to changing how your firm approaches and uses its resources for this foundational work.

Ready to dive deeper into these risk assessment strategies and discover the specific frameworks top performers use? Listen to the full episode of Audit Smarter for Sam Mansour’s complete insights on transforming your approach to risk assessment and elevating your audit practice.

The R&D Credit Reality Check Every Tax Professional Should Understand

· ·

Picture this: A small business owner walks out of a networking event buzzing with excitement. Someone just told them about the Research and Development tax credit. They’re already mentally calculating how much they’ll save on the custom software they’ve been developing for their consulting practice.

This scenario happens all the time, and it shows the gap between what business owners expect and what the tax code actually delivers. In this episode of Tax in Action, host Jeremy Wells, EA, CPA, breaks down one of the most misunderstood areas of tax law: the Section 41 Research and Development Credit.

The Credit That Sounds Simple But Isn’t

When clients first hear about the R&D credit, they focus on that appealing 20% credit for increasing research activities. It sounds straightforward: spend money on research, get 20% back as a tax credit. But as Wells explains, this credit is much more complex.

“I work with a lot of small service-based businesses,” Wells says. “So it doesn’t come up a lot in my practice, but there have been some cases where we’ve had businesses qualify for the credit, and that’s always a little exciting for me.”

That excitement comes after navigating through layers of complexity that immediately separate hopeful applicants from actual recipients.

Section 41 actually has three different parts: qualified research expenses, basic research payments, and Energy Research Consortium credits. For most businesses, only the first part matters. The basic research component applies to research without specific business goals, which Wells dismisses for his small business clients. “If they don’t have a business goal, they probably are not going to be able to afford to pay me for very long.” The energy research component targets massive global energy companies, not typical clients for most tax professionals.

Here’s where the “20% credit” gets misleading. It’s not 20% of research expenses. It’s 20% of the excess of qualified research expenses over a “base amount.” This base amount calculation is complex, but for most businesses, it defaults to 50% of qualifying research expenses.

Wells breaks down the math: “In general, we’re looking at 50% of qualified research expenses and then we’re taking 20% of that.”

The result? What sounds like a 20% credit actually delivers roughly 10% of qualifying research expenses as an actual tax benefit.

But even this 10% assumes businesses can navigate the qualification requirements, which proves much harder than the math.

The Science Requirement That Trips Up Most Businesses

The real barriers come from qualification requirements that act like scientific gatekeepers. Wells identifies the core problem: “This is probably the strongest limitation on what qualifies for research relevant to my clients. The research has to involve a process of experimentation that relies on the principles of either the physical or biological sciences, engineering or computer science.”

This creates an immediate disconnect. When most business owners think about research and development, they think of any effort to improve their operations: better customer service, more efficient workflows, or custom software. But Section 41 demands genuine experimentation rooted in hard sciences.

The “process of experimentation” adds another hurdle. Wells explains that this process “evaluates one or more alternatives to develop or improve a business component where the result was uncertain.” This isn’t about having a clear goal and executing a known path—that’s implementation, not research. True qualifying research requires genuine uncertainty about whether proposed alternatives will work, plus systematic testing of multiple approaches.

This eliminates entire categories of business activities that feel innovative but don’t meet the technical standards. Market research, customer satisfaction studies, workflow optimization, and business process improvements all fall outside the boundaries. As Wells states, “If your research consists of trying to understand your customers better, that’s not going to qualify as research.”

Software development faces even tougher standards. Internal software must pass what Wells calls “a very high bar” through the high threshold of the innovation test. This test requires proof of “substantial and economically significant” improvements, backed by “significant economic risk” where the business commits “substantial resources” with genuine uncertainty about recovery.

The economic risk part proves particularly challenging for small businesses because it excludes what Wells calls “sweat equity.” He explains, “What doesn’t count here, is that sweat equity, or the time spent by the business owner, or the uncompensated work by their partners, or even their staff.”

This requirement for actual cash rather than time investment doesn’t align with how most small businesses operate. The solo consultant developing custom software or the manufacturing business owner optimizing processes typically invest primarily time and expertise rather than substantial cash. Under Section 41, this automatically disqualifies them.

Making It Work: Expenses, Strategies, and Professional Help

For businesses that navigate the scientific requirements, the wage allocation requirements immediately complicate things for any business hoping to qualify through employee efforts.

Wells explains the 80% rule: “If you’ve got some sort of support staff spending at least 80%, four out of five working days a week directly involved in that research project, then their wages qualify in full.” Anything less than 80% requires careful splitting between research and non-research activities.

This gets trickier with executives. Wells has seen businesses try to claim big portions of C-suite wages for research. However, even technical CEOs who contribute to research projects rarely abandon their executive duties entirely. Wells says practitioners must “look at bifurcating, if not entirely writing off, their wages and salaries as not related to the actual research project itself.”

For businesses without internal research capacity, contract research offers an alternative, though with percentage limitations that reduce the effective credit rate. The general rule allows only 65% of contractor payments to qualify, though this increases to 75% for qualified research consortia and 100% for eligible small businesses, universities, or federal laboratories.

Wells breaks down the math for businesses relying entirely on contractors. “If all the qualifying research expenditures are paid to contractors, then we only get about 6.5% of those expenditures in terms of the credit.”

Despite this reduced rate, Wells suggests the contractor route might be easier than internal allocation headaches. “It might also be more advantageous to pay contractors and be able to take 65% of what’s paid to contractors than to worry about taking existing staff and trying to allocate some of their work toward the research project.”

Wells also highlights the payroll tax election as a cash flow strategy for startups. Rather than waiting years to use R&D credits against income taxes, businesses can elect to apply credits against the employer’s 6.2% Social Security tax, creating immediate benefits.

Given all this complexity, Wells strongly recommends working with specialists. “Finding a good, reputable firm to work with or to recommend and refer your clients to. But in general, it’s important that you understand the basis and the basics of section 41.”

Busting Common Myths

Wells addresses two common misconceptions about the R&D credit.

First, that service businesses automatically don’t qualify. While most service businesses won’t qualify for traditional reasons, Wells suggests this shouldn’t lead to automatic dismissal. “It might be possible to advise them in such a way to help them qualify for it, at least in part.” This might involve outsourcing research to qualified contractors, developing products for eventual sale rather than purely internal use, or ensuring research projects involve genuine experimentation rather than predetermined paths.

Second, that payroll is required. Wells points out that contract research expenses can qualify, even if at reduced percentages. While the effective rate drops for businesses using only contractors, “that might be better than nothing,” and “better than thinking that it has to be payroll and therefore nothing qualifies.”

The Bottom Line for Tax Professionals

The Section 41 R&D credit shows how well-intentioned tax policy is accessible primarily to those with sophisticated professional guidance. What sounds like a straightforward “20% credit” turns into a technical challenge that eliminates most hopeful applicants.

For tax professionals, understanding complex credits isn’t just about technical knowledge; it’s about managing client relationships and setting appropriate expectations. The practitioner who dismissively tells clients they don’t qualify without understanding restructuring possibilities doesn’t serve the client well. But the advisor who raises false hopes by oversimplifying requirements creates bigger problems.

Listen to the full episode of the Tax in Action podcast for Wells’ full breakdown of Section 41. His practical approach helps practitioners distinguish between realistic opportunities and unrealistic expectations while serving clients’ best interests.

The R&D credit may be complicated, but understanding its complexities opens doors to legitimate opportunities.

Inside QuickBooks Online’s Biggest Transformation Since Going Cloud-Based

· ·

You’re reviewing a client’s profit and loss report when you notice little sparkle icons next to several expense categories. Curious, you hover over one and get an instant explanation: “Office supplies increased 127% compared to last month due to these three transactions.” What used to require detective work across multiple screens now happens automatically, with AI explaining not just what happened, but why.

This isn’t a future vision—it’s happening right now in QuickBooks Online’s July 2025 updates. On the latest episode of The Unofficial QuickBooks Accountants Podcast, hosts Alicia Katz Pollock from Royalwise and Dan DeLong from School of Bookkeeping break down Intuit’s massive “In the Know” session, where the company unveiled what they’re calling “QuickBooks on the Intuit platform.”

The transformation goes far beyond typical software updates. AI agents now work like digital detectives, scouring your data for patterns and anomalies. Banking feeds can automatically process PDF statements. Client communication occurs directly within QuickBooks, eliminating the spreadsheet shuffle. And those sparkle icons on reports? They’re AI-powered insights flagging unusual trends before your clients notice them.

But here’s what every accounting professional needs to understand: this isn’t an optional upgrade. By September 2025, everyone will be permanently on the new platform, with no opt-out option. The window to influence the final product closes soon.

AI Agents Become Your Digital Workforce

The heart of QuickBooks’ transformation lies in what Intuit calls “Agentic AI”—intelligent agents that actively hunt through your data for insights. Alicia explains her mental image: “I always imagine an AI bot in a detective hat, because that’s how I think about the AI is looking through the data and scouring it.”

The accounting agent, available for Essentials plans and higher, represents the biggest shift in how bookkeepers handle transactions. Instead of facing a wall of uncategorized entries, the system now identifies transactions that are “data-backed and likely to be accurate” and pre-checks them for posting. When three transactions meet this criterion, a banner appears announcing “three transactions ready to post.”

The game-changer is anomaly detection. Those sparkle icons appearing next to categories on profit and loss reports identify unusual trends automatically. Dan shares his experience: “I’ve seen it on some reports where the prior month there was a specific project that was done, and it said it right there on the screen like it went down this amount of percent because these two invoices were in the prior month.”

The categorization intelligence has evolved beyond simple pattern matching. The AI now recognizes that Shell and Arco are both gas stations, suggesting similar categories across different vendors. It scrapes bank descriptions for contextual clues and provides multiple suggestions for ambiguous transactions—offering both “meals and entertainment” and “travel meals” for restaurant charges, depending on your patterns.

Perhaps most significantly, categorization history has expanded from 12 to 24 months—a change Alicia specifically requested. This ensures annual charges can reference the previous year’s categorization, eliminating frustration with recurring yearly expenses.

Platform Integration Changes Everything

What Intuit calls “QuickBooks on the Intuit platform” represents more than rebranding—it’s the breakdown of decades-old product silos. As Dan explains, “their core offerings of TurboTax, MailChimp, and QuickBooks are getting homogenized here. And they can essentially talk to each other.”

The logic makes sense when you consider user patterns. As Alicia notes, “a lot of people use MailChimp who have never used QuickBooks. There’s a lot of people who file their taxes with TurboTax who have never used QuickBooks. So merging them all together is a natural evolution.”

The new interface features an app carousel with customer hubs, sales hubs, accounting hubs, marketing hubs, and business tax hubs. The customer hub will integrate MailChimp directly within QuickBooks, while business tax functionality brings TurboTax capabilities to the accounting workflow.

The enhanced bank feeds represent the most visible daily change. Alicia, who has been beta testing and providing daily feedback to developers, describes the evolution: “Everything that we knew and loved about the banking feeds is still there, but they kind of changed it.” The new system allows inline transaction editing, customizable column displays, and comprehensive transaction details.

The revolutionary statement import feature can process PDF bank statements and extract transactions automatically. While currently requiring human oversight—hence the two-hour processing time, at least for now—this capability could eliminate entire businesses built around transaction import services. As Alicia explains, “there’s a human being looking at it to see if it did a good job or not, and if it didn’t do it right, it’s actually going to a human being who is fixing the programming.”

Interface changes aren’t just cosmetic. The new left navigation is “brighter, it’s lighter, it’s prettier” with collapsible sections and bookmark functionality for one-click access to frequently used screens. The transformation from “Add” to “Post” in banking feeds reflects more technically accurate accounting language.

Client Communication Gets Built-In

The context gathering system eliminates the bookkeeper’s perpetual question: “What was this transaction for?” Built directly into QuickBooks, this feature threatens third-party apps by providing client communication tools within the core platform.

Alicia explains the problem this solves: “When you don’t know what something’s for, you have to go ask. And in the old days, we used to use spreadsheets for that. More recently, we’ve been using apps like Uncat, Keeper, or Financial Cents, where you can communicate with your clients right inside the app, but now you can do it right inside QBO.”

The system creates a to-do list maintained within QuickBooks, allowing bookkeepers to ask clients questions without requiring client QBO access. Clients receive emails with magic links to respond, and “it’s always the same link. And so you can just have your clients save it and bookmark it as the place to go.”

The expense forwarding feature allows anyone to send not just expenses but also income transaction directly into the system. However, this convenience introduces new risks. Alicia warns, “If you don’t have a bill approval process, you may have somebody who just goes in and pays everything without questioning anything. You actually could wind up paying bad actors who just sent random bills into your account to see if they could.” She reminds everyone to make sure they only give these email addresses to people they can trust.

The integration of Bill Pay Basic across all plans, including Simple Start, amplifies these concerns. Firms handling bill payments may want to consider upgrading clients to QBO Advanced, which includes mandatory bill approval workflows.

The September Deadline and What It Means

The timeline carries strategic implications beyond software preference. This isn’t a typical update where holdouts can postpone adoption—it’s a mandatory migration with a hard September deadline.

July offered opt-in/opt-out flexibility. August brought automatic transitions for new brand files. Crucially, all ProAdvisors’ clients were switched simultaneously. As Dan notes, “They threw accountants a bone” by ensuring firms wouldn’t juggle clients across different interfaces. September completes the mandatory transition, and by the month’s end, the new platform becomes permanent with no opt-out option.

The current period is critical for shaping the final product. As Alicia emphasizes from her beta testing: “This is the time to make sure that the platform works for us. They need your feedback.” Her daily communication with development teams resulted in interface improvements that serve real accounting workflows.

For firms considering the timeline, the choice is clear: engage now to influence the outcome, or adapt in September to whatever system emerges. The difference between being a beta participant and a forced adopter could determine whether your practice thrives or struggles.

Training and Resources Coming

Recognizing the scope of change, Intuit announced new training opportunities. Two courses are coming in October: one about understanding Agentic AI in general, and another specifically about AI agents in QuickBooks. There’s also ongoing research about what accounting professionals want to see in ProAdvisor Academy.

Alicia is completely rebuilding her training library at Royalwise. “I’ve got over 50 different courses of over 100 hours of QuickBooks Online content. So in September we are going to start over again from scratch,” she explains. Her Community and Coaching memberships will provide free entry into all webinars as she recreates content for the new platform.

Shape the Future or Be Shaped by It

The July 2025 QuickBooks updates represent the most significant transformation since moving to the cloud. AI agents are becoming the invisible workforce handling pattern recognition and routine categorization. New communication tools eliminate constant client back-and-forth. Interface changes reflect a fundamental shift toward integrated business management.

For accounting professionals, these changes represent both opportunity and risk. Those who engage now can influence the final product through feedback. As Alicia’s daily communication with developers shows, active participants can achieve solutions that serve the profession’s real needs.

But come September’s mandatory transition, the window for input closes. Firms will adapt to whatever system emerges from this beta period. The most successful professionals will view this transition as evolution—an opportunity to eliminate tedious data entry and focus on high-value advisory work.

Don’t let this transformation happen to you—be part of shaping it. The September deadline isn’t just about software—it’s about the future of the accounting profession itself.

Alicia Katz Pollock’s Royalwise OWLS (On-Demand Web-based Learning Solutions) is the industry’s premier portal for top-notch QuickBooks Online training with CPE for accounting firms, bookkeepers, and small business owners. Visit Royalwise OWLS, where learning QBO is a HOOT!

The Secret to Turning Fear Into Career Fuel

· ·

Picture Nancy McClelland at 40, standing backstage in a short fringe dress, her heart pounding as she prepares for her first go-go dancing performance. The stage lights are bright, the music is starting, and all she can think about is what people will say when they see her “hauling her 40-year-old heiny across the stage.” This wasn’t just stage fright. This was the terror of pursuing a lifelong dream that felt completely at odds with her professional identity as an accountant.

Yet in that moment of pure vulnerability, McClelland discovered something that would reshape her entire approach to career growth. When she confided to fellow dancer Laurel that she wished she could be fearless like her, Laurel’s response was life-changing: “Oh no, no, no, no, Nancy, I’m just as scared as the next person. The difference is that I do it anyway.”

In this episode of the She Counts podcast, hosts Nancy McClelland and Questian Telka explore the relationship between fear and professional success. They share raw stories of moments when they chose courage over comfort, from McClelland’s dancing debut to Telka’s surprise presentation to 500 people instead of 80. Their conversation reveals an uncomfortable truth about women in accounting: we’re often told to be fearless when what we really need is to be strategically courageous.

The most successful women in accounting don’t overcome their fears. They harness them as career accelerators. They transform every terrifying moment into evidence that they can handle whatever comes next. This builds the muscle to move forward when every instinct tells you to retreat.

Why “Don’t Be Afraid” Is the Worst Career Advice Ever

The accounting profession has a fundamental problem with fear, and it starts with the most damaging piece of career advice ever given: “Don’t be afraid.” We’ve all heard it in conference rooms, performance reviews, and networking events. But McClelland and Telka discovered this advice isn’t just impossible to follow; it’s actively harmful to career growth.

“I personally wish we could delete the phrase ‘don’t be afraid’ from our lexicons,” McClelland explains. “Being afraid is an extremely natural, very human way to be.  Our bodies do this to keep us safe. So by saying, ‘don’t be afraid,’ we’re like, ‘Pay no attention whatsoever to all of these hormones that are coursing through you.'”

The distinction between courage and fearlessness isn’t just semantic; it’s career-defining. Fearlessness is the absence of fear, which Telka points out is completely unrealistic: “I’ve never met someone that doesn’t have fear and doesn’t get afraid. Some of us are better at hiding it than others, but fearlessness is the absence of fear. And that’s just completely unrealistic.”

Courage, however, is something entirely different. As Telka defines it: “Courage is accepting that you feel the fear and acting despite being fearful anyway; doing it anyway.”

This reframe changes everything. Instead of viewing fear as a weakness to overcome, successful women in accounting learn to see it as valuable information. McClelland discovered this through her unlikely mentor, Laurel, whose words became her operating system: “As I say those words out loud, I can feel the goosebumps on my arms and my legs. It’s become a mantra to me. I see fear as something I’ve earned. And courage is the thing that makes me strong—not being fearless.”

Fear often signals you’re approaching something meaningful enough to accelerate your growth. Your body cannot distinguish between fear and excitement: the sweaty palms, rapid heartbeat, and nervous energy are identical responses. The only difference is your mental interpretation. When you reframe these sensations as excitement about an opportunity, rather than terror about potential failure, you transform your body’s natural alarm system into a career accelerator.

This understanding is especially crucial for women in accounting, who face additional pressure to appear “professional” while receiving contradictory messages about vulnerability and emotion. The moments that terrify us most often contain the greatest potential for professional transformation.

When Terror Becomes Your Greatest Teacher

The most profound professional transformations often begin with a phone call that changes everything. For Telka, it was discovering just days before Intuit Connect, that her carefully planned presentation for 80 people had been moved to a 500-person auditorium.

“I full panic, full panic, like from 0 to 11,” she recalls. “And I stayed there until after my presentation was over. I feel like I missed half the conference because I was just so scared and terrified.”

But here’s what happened next: “It was literally one of the best things I have ever done. And my favorite part was engaging with the people in the audience.” The very thing Telka feared most—not being able to answer questions from a large crowd—became the highlight of her experience.

This experience taught Telka a lesson about her capabilities: “If I did that, I can do anything. There’s nothing more terrifying to me than standing up in front of a room of 500 people. And so now I’m like, okay… and I just did it.”

McClelland learned similar lessons through an unlikely teacher: skydiving. Despite her intense fear of heights and her boss’s logical observation that not wanting to jump from a plane is perfectly reasonable, McClelland completed the full training course and solo jump. The experience taught her that “training mitigates risk. Learning how to do the thing will build your confidence.”

This insight transforms how we approach career challenges. McClelland applies this principle when working with bookkeepers who say they “could never do advisory work.” Her response: “I bet if you studied how to do advisory work, you would be confident enough to do advisory work. But you’ve got to actually learn how to do the thing and really dig in and test yourself.”

Yet even understanding this concept doesn’t eliminate fear from future challenges. McClelland emphasizes this crucial point: “Courage builds courage. I’m not afraid of all the same things I used to be afraid of.” But new fears replace old ones, and even familiar challenges can still trigger anxiety.

These transformative moments don’t happen by accident. They require specific tools and strategies for moving through fear rather than around it.

The Professional Toolkit for Acting Despite Fear

The difference between women who advance in accounting and those who remain stuck isn’t the absence of fear. It’s having a systematic approach to harness that fear as career fuel. McClelland and Telka shared practical strategies that work in any challenging situation.

Start with Your Why

The foundation begins with reconnecting to your purpose. As Telka explains: “I constantly come back to my why. And that generally helps me make a decision. And it helps me mitigate the fear that I have around those decisions.” When you remember that you care more about your goal than your fear, the choice becomes clearer.

Separate Action from Feeling

McClelland learned from her therapist that your three selves—thinking, doing, and feeling—don’t actually need to be aligned to accomplish something. “You can be lying in bed depressed and be like, ‘I do not feel like doing the thing,’ and your brain can be like, ‘Doing the thing is the worst idea in the world.’ And you can still get your butt out of bed, and you can do it.”

McClelland’s shorthand for separating the action from the need to want to do it is “putting your yoga pants on.”. This approach makes it easier to develop courage as a habit over time.

Commit When You’re Not Terrified

McClelland developed a crucial strategy: “I say ‘yes’ ahead of time. I say ‘yes’ to whatever it is I’m going to do when I’m not terrified. And I have a policy of not backing out.” This worked when Financial Cents asked her to teach 700 people the Time Warp dance at a virtual conference. She said yes when it sounded exciting, then honored that commitment when fear kicked in later.

Use Physical Exercise to Burn Adrenaline

McClelland’s therapist taught her that adrenaline is a finite resource. “If you are really scared about something, go get some physical exercise. Use up all that adrenaline. It takes a while for your body to regenerate it.” This is why you’ll find speakers like Misty Megia doing jumping jacks before big presentations.

Borrow Confidence from Others

Telka credits both McClelland and Megia with providing crucial support: “Find someone who believes in what you’re doing, who believes in you, even if it’s something that you’re scared to do.” You can amplify this by speaking your fears aloud or writing them down. McClelland explains: “You can actually magnify that by saying it in a group of friends. You can magnify it by saying it to a mentor and borrow your confidence from them. So simultaneously, you’re taking the power away from the fear and you’re borrowing confidence.”

Break Tasks into Smaller Steps

Instead of focusing on overwhelming challenges, break them into manageable pieces. This approach makes the insurmountable feel achievable.

Develop Personal Mantras

McClelland keeps reminders like “remember who you are inside” and “go with the freak-out flow.” Telka draws from science fiction, reciting from Dune: “I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it is gone, there will be nothing. Only I will remain.”

The ultimate insight is that you don’t need to feel ready to act. You just need to act. Each time you choose action over comfort, you build evidence of your capability to handle difficult situations, creating a career acceleration system that transforms fear from an obstacle into an opportunity detector.

The Fears That Hold Women Back in Accounting

Women in accounting face specific challenges that require courage to overcome. These fears are deeply connected to how we’re perceived and judged in professional settings.

The Emotional Professional Paradox

Telka came from a Big Four environment where “if you have an emotion, you need to step away. Do not be emotional.” She used to take it as an insult when someone called her sensitive or emotional. “But I think it’s my strength at this point,” she reflects. “My emotions, my empathy, my compassion, my sensitivity—I used to take it as an insult, but it’s actually my strength.”

Setting Boundaries and Asking for Money

For firm owners, the challenges multiply. Setting boundaries with clients and team members requires constant courage. McClelland admits: “It’s been really, really hard for me because I feel so much empathy for them. Sometimes you just have deadlines and it’s terrifying. I just get paralyzed sometimes.”

Asking for money remains one of McClelland’s biggest challenges. “I don’t want to have to sell it. I don’t want to have to ask you for money. I just want to do these things that I want to do that I think will make a difference in the world and be paid, and then just skip the part where I have to ask for it.”

Admitting You Don’t Know Something

Perhaps the most universal fear is admitting ignorance. As McClelland learned from teaching music theory, “The best thing to do when you’re teaching and somebody asks a question you don’t know is to earn the trust of the students by saying, ‘I don’t know the answer to that, but I know where to find it, and I’m going to get back to you on it.'”

The Motherhood Penalty

The guilt around balancing career and family creates another layer of fear. Telka boldly states: “I do not have guilt leaving my kids to go to conferences.” McClelland, though not a mother herself, reinforces this: “Your children need to see an example of you having a healthy, enthusiastic relationship with your work and with your hobbies and with your friends.”

These fears are normal and shared by successful women throughout the profession. The difference is that successful women develop strategies to act despite these fears rather than letting them dictate their choices.

Your Next Breakthrough Is Waiting

The most successful women in accounting share a secret that has nothing to do with technical expertise and everything to do with their relationship with fear. They’ve learned that fear isn’t the enemy of career advancement; it’s the most reliable indicator that they’re approaching something meaningful enough to accelerate their growth.

Consider how this approach transforms common career challenges: Instead of avoiding difficult conversations with clients, you prepare thoroughly and have them anyway. Instead of declining speaking opportunities because you’re not an “expert,” you accept them and become one through the experience. Instead of staying in safe employment because entrepreneurship is scary, you start your firm and learn to navigate the fear of the unknown.

Every major career breakthrough requires moving through fear rather than around it. The women who advance fastest act despite their doubt. They understand that professional growth happens not when we feel ready, but when we choose to act anyway.

Each time you choose courage over comfort, you’re building the muscle that makes the next scary decision a little easier to navigate.

The next time you feel that familiar terror before a big presentation, client meeting, or career move, remember McClelland standing backstage in her go-go boots and Telka discovering her 80-person room became 500 people. They didn’t wait to feel ready. They didn’t eliminate their fear. They simply chose to act anyway.

Listen to this full episode of She Counts to hear more strategies for transforming fear into professional fuel, and discover how other women in accounting have built careers by repeatedly choosing courage over comfort. Because your biggest breakthrough might be hiding on the other side of your biggest fear. The only way to find out is to do it anyway.