Earmark CPE

Earn CPE Anytime, Anywhere

The Accounting Podcast

New CPA Mobility Rules Mean Your Firm Is Probably Breaking at Least One State Law Right Now

· ·

The accounting profession scored a rare bipartisan win this week and simultaneously confronted a growing compliance nightmare that’s hitting firms across the country. On this episode of The Accounting Podcast, hosts Blake Oliver and David Leary tackled both stories, along with Deloitte’s terrible week, new research on why accountants flee public accounting, and a special guest segment on the hidden complexities of CPA mobility.

A Rare Win for Government Transparency

Blake kicked off the episode by celebrating legislation he actually supports. The Fiscal State of the Nation Act, a bipartisan bill from Representative Andy Barr (R-KY) and Representative Scott Peters (D-CA), would require the Comptroller General to deliver an annual presentation to Congress on the federal government’s financial statements.

“We need to deliver an annual report to the board of directors, to the investors, to the people,” Blake said. The bill has broad support, with 81% of Americans backing the idea, according to a Harris Poll conducted on behalf of the AICPA.

The AICPA’s strong endorsement marked a rare moment of agreement between Blake and the organization. “I don’t think that’s ever happened before,” he joked, noting he was supporting two AICPA positions in one episode, the other being new independence standards for alternative practice structures.

The CPA Mobility Crisis

The episode featured Lindsay Patterson, co-founder and CEO of CPA QualityPro, who joined to explain how the profession’s victory on alternative pathways created an unexpected compliance minefield.

Twenty-five states adopted alternative pathways to CPA licensure, allowing candidates to pursue certification with 120 credit hours plus two years of experience instead of the traditional 150 hours plus one year. While this addresses the pipeline crisis, it’s shattered the “substantial equivalency” that made CPA mobility work.

“After going through every single state’s laws and rules, if a firm operates across state lines now, I bet they’re breaking at least one law,” Lindsay warned. “There are so many little nuances.”

The problem is that the old system worked because every state had basically the same requirements. Now, state mobility laws have wildly different rules about which credentials qualify. For example, a New York firm doing an audit in Oregon might discover too late that team members licensed through certain pathways can’t legally sign off on the work.

Lindsay outlined what firms now need to track for every CPA: whether they completed 120 or 150 hours, if they had an accounting concentration, whether their experience was supervised or just verified, and if they had one or two years of it. Most firms have never collected this data.

“Do you know any firm that asks their employees, ‘Was your experience verified or supervised?’” Lindsay asked.

The penalties are real. Lindsay has seen fines from $1,000 to $15,000, with some states being particularly aggressive. She once received an email from a state board because she had “CPE” in her email signature and had emailed someone in their state. “I’m like, who reported me for this? First off, we’re planning a birthday party, so calm down.”

David pointed out that this problem existed before alternative pathways, but Lindsay agreed it’s gotten worse. The pandemic made it even more complex, with CPAs moving states and assuming mobility provisions cover them when they actually need local licenses.

Deloitte’s Very Bad Week

While firms grapple with mobility rules, Deloitte faced a different kind of scrutiny. A viral Twitter post viewed 43.5 million times called the firm “a $74 billion cancer metastasized across America,” highlighting failed government IT projects and cost overruns.

“They take on a project like the California payroll system, and the project never gets done. And they just keep charging for changes and overruns,” David explained.

Making matters worse, Deloitte announced plans to hire 50,000 employees in India right after conducting layoffs. “The narrative out there now is Deloitte’s taking billions of dollars of taxpayer money to hire people in India,” David said. “Is Deloitte trying to get in the crosshairs of the Trump administration?”

Lindsay offered a philosophical take. saying, “Never attribute to malice what you can attribute to stupidity.”

Why Accountants Really Leave

A new report from researchers at Virginia Commonwealth University and Clemson University confirmed what many suspected: work-life balance, not money, drives most exits from public accounting. The study found poor work-life balance is the primary reason people leave, and they’re skeptical of empty retention promises.

“It’s the hours, the deadlines, the pressure, the unending timesheets, and the inability to take PTO,” Blake summarized.

The research also revealed that leaving is usually a long, social process with warning signs, meaning firms have opportunities to intervene if they’re paying attention. But as Lindsay noted, this isn’t just an accounting problem. “I think a lot of companies, not just accounting” struggle with retention.

Reasons for Optimism

Despite the challenges, accounting undergraduate enrollment rose 7.3% this fall—the third straight year of growth. One in eight business students now major in accounting, up from one in nine two years ago.

“We said it was going to happen,” Blake said, crediting alternative pathway reforms. “Get rid of that extra year of unnecessary, expensive education and more people will want to be accounting majors.”

Lindsay mentioned another positive indicator. “We have so much private equity investment in CPA firms right now. They are not looking to invest their money in an area that they think is about to go extinct.”

When a listener asked whether AI would eliminate accounting jobs, the panel was reassuring. David maintained his position that AI won’t replace bookkeeping entirely, though he admitted QuickBooks’ new AI-powered reconciliation features were “slick.” Lindsay was even more direct: “Get your CPA, you’ll get a good job.”

The Bottom Line

The accounting profession is navigating a period of significant change. Alternative pathways bring in new talent, but create compliance headaches. Technology is advancing but not eliminating jobs. And while firms like Deloitte face public scrutiny, the fundamentals of the profession remain strong.

For practitioners, Lindsay recommends auditing your compliance to understand how each employee got licensed and prepare for a more complex regulatory landscape. The enrollment numbers suggest the profession’s future is bright if it can manage the growing pains.

To hear the full discussion, including Blake reading Jerome Powell’s statement about standing up to political pressure and a truly bizarre story about a Florida gubernatorial candidate proposing a 50% tax on OnlyFans content, listen to the complete episode of The Accounting Podcast.

The Manager Paradox: Why AI Agents Need Just as Much Oversight as Human Employees

· ·

David Leary had something to confess at the start of The Accounting Podcast episode 471. He needed an employee health insurance survey for his company, and the whole thing, from blank page to finished Google Form, took him three and a half minutes.

“I started with nothing, and I needed a result, and end to end it did everything for me,” David told co-host Blake Oliver. ChatGPT created the survey questions first. When its implementation got clunky, Google Forms with built-in Gemini AI took over and built the entire form. No tedious field creation or manual option adding. Work that would have taken an hour vanished in the time it takes to brew coffee.

It’s the kind of AI success story that’s becoming common: technology wiping out drudgery and freeing humans for better work. But as the hosts dug deeper in this episode, they uncovered a reality check for accounting firm leaders.

AI’s Hidden Cost: Same Management Time, Different Headaches

The tools keep getting better at connecting dots. Blake pointed to Google’s new “Personal Intelligence” feature that links Gmail, photos, YouTube, and search into Gemini with one click. ChatGPT has similar workspace integrations that search your email history for client and project information.

“Once your firm gets big enough, you don’t realize three other people also have relationships with that client,” David noted. AI that surfaces that context before you act is a real leap forward.

But the success story gets complicated when you deploy AI agents across an organization. Jason Lemkin, who runs SaaStr (a community for software startup founders), has been tracking the results of such deployments. At SaaStr, about 60% of the team is now made up of AI agents. They deliver huge productivity gains, but also need about the same weekly management time as humans.

“The big mistake,” David explained, summarizing Jason’s findings, “is that you can’t treat AI as set-it-and-forget-it. You have to have daily management of AI.”

The reason you need that oversight is the accuracy rates. For five- to ten-minute tasks, AI hits near-perfect accuracy: 99.9%. But stretch those tasks to an hour or two, and accuracy drops to 80% or even 50%. And AI mistakes don’t announce themselves.

“The AI makes these small mistakes that compound into big mistakes,” Blake said. “Humans do this, too. If you don’t have proper oversight of people, they’re just doing their own tasks, and small errors can compound into disasters.”

When There’s No One Watching the Store

The IRS is an excellent case study for what happens without human oversight of AI. The IRS just lost more than 25% of its workforce through various reduction programs, according to the IRS Advisory Council’s annual report. Over 2,000 IT workers have left since January 2025 alone. More than half of the $80 billion allocated under the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act has been rescinded, totaling about $42 billion since 2023, including nearly all enforcement funding.

Now the agency faces implementing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), which includes more than 100 tax law changes. They need new guidance, technology updates, and process changes—all with fewer people and less money.

The consequences of this skeleton crew approach became clear in the case of Attallah Williams, a former SBA and IRS employee charged with stealing more than $3.5 million from federal COVID-19 relief programs. Williams used insider access at both agencies to approve fraudulent applications, recruiting accomplices through Instagram and collecting kickbacks. The scheme ran for three years and touched Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans, Economic Injury Disaster Loan (EIDL) grants, and employee retention credits.

“If one person can approve fraudulent pandemic applications, there are no controls at the federal level,” David said.

Tax Season Reality Check

Against this backdrop, tax season readiness varies wildly. CPA Trendlines’ busy season survey found that only 44% of firms feel about as ready as they were last year. Larger firms with 25 or more professionals report greater stability thanks to deeper staffing and refined processes. Smaller firms with 1-10 employees face the most volatility.

“Late documents, absences, compressed review cycles. When you have fewer people, you have less redundancy,” Blake noted. “When problems happen, it hurts more.”

Tax-heavy firms feel particularly exposed since their entire season depends on client behavior. Firms with recurring revenue from bookkeeping or advisory work report more stability because their work spreads throughout the year.

One bright spot came from Brenda Cannon of Cannon & Associates, who shared an innovation on the CPA Trendlines podcast. Instead of letting tax work pile up, she gives clients calendar links to schedule when they’ll submit documents. Eight slots per day, Monday through Thursday. Fridays for internal work. No slots three weeks before April 15th (reserved for extensions). Clients who don’t schedule by year-end get marked inactive.

“Clients no longer complain about extensions because they basically chose to miss their self-imposed deadline,” Blake explained. Only about 5% of clients left after implementing the system.

The Vanishing Entry Level

But even successful adaptations can’t solve a bigger problem: what happens when AI absorbs all the entry-level work that trains future professionals?

“The quality burden used to fall on the senior staff and managers,” David said. “But now the managers are going to have to bear that weight.”

Blake expanded the concern. Managers used to trust that trained seniors had learned to review work through years of practice. With AI handling those training tasks, that trust disappears. “I have a theory that life is going to get harder for managers in public accounting because they’re going to be the only thing between the AI doing the work and the partner.”

A viewer captured the problem in the live chat: “You can’t get experience to become a manager without an entry level. Bots and offshore have absorbed entry. So how do you get new managers?”

Blake’s answer was sobering. If firms can’t develop managers internally, they’ll have to recruit from industry. But industry professionals who’ve tasted work-life balance won’t return to the grind of public accounting. “The people won’t drink the Kool-Aid after they’ve had a break from drinking the Kool-Aid.”

Testing for Yesterday’s Skills

This transformation raises tough questions about the CPA exam itself. The 2024 pass rates were:

  • Audit and Attestation: 46%
  • Financial Accounting and Reporting: 4%
  • Tax Compliance and Planning: 73%
  • Regulation: 63%
  • Business Analysis and Reporting: 38%
  • Information Systems and Controls:58%

“The hardest part of the exam isn’t the material,” Blake argued. “We’re not doing advanced math. We’re doing algebra. It’s not complicated stuff; it’s just a lot of memorization, and it’s a real grind.”

Blake’s theory is the exam filters for grinders because that’s what firms needed. “The exam is a grind, and public accounting is a grind so they lined up.”

But that’s not the job anymore. “We don’t need accountants to come in and do a bunch of boring, manual, tedious work,” Blake said. AI does that now. The profession needs people who can analyze concepts and direct AI agents, not memorize rules they can look up in seconds.

“You have all these AI tools where they have all the knowledge. You don’t need to memorize things,” David added.

Yet change comes slowly. “Even if the powers that be agree with you, Blake, it’ll be a decade before they change that,” David said.

The Bottom Line

David’s three-minute survey creation shows where we’re headed: routine tasks becoming instant. But efficiency isn’t freedom. AI needs as much management as humans, but a different kind of management. The cognitive burden shifts up while the entry-level work that trained judgment disappears.

Every knowledge profession will face the same questions. How do you develop talent when AI does the training work? How do you maintain quality when the middle layer of reviewers vanishes? How do you test for skills that matter when memorization becomes obsolete?

Listen to the full episode of The Accounting Podcast for all the details, including more on the IRS crisis, innovative tax season solutions, and a surprise supporter for millionaire taxes.

The Accounting Profession Has AI Completely Backwards

· ·

When Accounting Today surveyed industry thought leaders about AI’s impact on the profession, every expert agreed that AI would automate the boring stuff like bank reconciliations, data entry, and transaction matching while humans would rise to strategic advisory work. Not one thought their own job was at risk.

On a recent episode of The Accounting Podcast, hosts Blake Oliver and David Leary did something clever. They fed the same questions to ChatGPT, asking it to respond as an accounting thought leader. The AI’s answers were just as good as the human experts’.

“None of the accounting thought leaders think their job could be replaced,” David said, “which is crazy because essentially AI can at least do the thought leader job.”

Blake and David argue that the profession has AI’s impact exactly backwards. While everyone confidently predicts automation will eliminate mundane bookkeeping tasks, the technology actually excels at synthesis, narrative-building, and strategic analysis—the very work that defines “thought leadership.”

What AI Actually Does Well

The standard story about AI in accounting is machines will handle the boring, repetitive tasks while humans ascend to strategic advisory work. It’s comforting and logical. But according to Blake and David, it’s completely wrong.

“AI can take financial statement information and turn it into a narrative better than I can, better than almost anyone can at this point,” Blake states. “That’s what we should be using it for.”

Consider Mike Salvatore, a Chicago business owner with two cafes, two bars, and a bike shop. He used to analyze his cost of goods once or twice a year, spending hours crunching numbers. Now he does it every three weeks by feeding data from QuickBooks and his point-of-sale system into Google’s NotebookLM, which creates a podcast-style summary of his business performance. He sends these AI-generated recordings to his managers.

“It’s essentially my CFO,” Salvatore told The Wall Street Journal.

This isn’t AI doing mundane bookkeeping; it’s performing executive-level analysis and communication.

Blake’s own experience drives the point home. He built an AI system that turns news articles into detailed research notes and social media posts. That work used to eat up hours each week. He also trained an AI ghost writer on hundreds of his past writings. Now he can dictate a voice memo and get back a polished article in his own style.

“Basically, it has made it so, as ‘thought leader,’ I don’t do any of that anymore,” he admits. “It’s like I have a team that does that for me. I started working out and I’m just enjoying life.”

Meanwhile, the supposedly “easy” transactional work is stubbornly resistant to automation. David, who spent years taking QuickBooks support calls before co-founding the podcast, gets fired up about this misconception.

“Matching bank feeds is not bookkeeping. That’s just matching,” he argues. “Accounting is sending an invoice to somebody so they’ll pay me.”

He describes his recent struggle trying to upload an invoice to a client portal. It’s a “mundane” task that should be simple but isn’t. The process requires navigating confusing interfaces, making contextual decisions, and handling exceptions that don’t fit predetermined patterns. AI can’t do this reliably because it lacks the real-world context that humans take for granted.

The disconnect is striking. Thought leaders keep repeating the same message they’ve preached about cloud accounting for a decade: technology will free you up for advisory work. But as David points out, “I don’t think AI is freeing up your time to do that work yourself.” Instead, AI is doing the advisory work directly.

Are You Willing to See the Opportunity?

Where things get interesting is the same AI capabilities that threaten thought leaders create a massive opportunity for regular practitioners if they’re willing to see it.

Mike Salvatore, the Chicago business owner interviewed by the Wall Street Journal, wasn’t working with an accountant before. His AI “CFO” didn’t displace a human. He simply started getting insights he’d never received.

“Very few accountants serving Main Street businesses will actually do that kind of work for a price these business owners want to pay,” Blake explains. “So they do it themselves, but they don’t do it often and they don’t do it well.”

AI is filling a vacuum, not replacing existing services. And that vacuum is huge.

If a business owner can get advisory insights that are even 50-80% accurate from AI, that’s better than the nothing they’re getting now. The question for accounting firms is whether to let clients figure this out themselves or to offer AI-powered advisory services with professional oversight.

“Firms can feed data from clients’ QuickBooks files and their point of sale systems into these tools to generate AI analysis,” Blake suggests. “You can charge for it, because you’re adding the oversight—checking the numbers, making sure it actually makes sense.”

David connects this to a decade-old challenge. He remembers when LivePlan tried to train bookkeepers to offer business planning services. “They really struggled with it because they’re good at bookkeeping. But it’s hard to teach somebody to tell a story and create the narrative around the numbers.”

Now, “all those bookkeepers can basically offer that with AI out of the box and charge for that additional service.”

When ChatGPT (playing the role of thought leader) was asked what would make it worry about being replaced, it gave a revealing answer: clients accepting “AI-generated advice as good enough, even in ambiguous scenarios.”

Blake’s interpretation is blunt. “That’s what AI will fill—the gap in the market where accountants aren’t providing the service. There’s a big gap and there aren’t enough of us.”

Why Billable Hours Kill Innovation

One survey question asked about the “AI premium.” How much more should an AI-savvy accountant earn compared to an identical colleague who doesn’t use AI? The thought leaders said these employees should obviously be paid more.

Blake laughed at this. “How can you pay them more if you’re looking at them in terms of billable hours? AI is going to actually reduce their billable hours, not add more.”

If an employee uses AI to finish work in half the time, they bill half the hours. Under the traditional model, they look less productive, not more. Under the traditional model, “you should pay the AI employees less because they’re working less,” Blake points out.

This creates a ridiculous situation where your most innovative, efficient employees appear to be your worst performers.

Ryan Lazanis, who built and sold an accounting firm and now coaches other firm owners, has a different approach. He focuses on just two numbers: bottom-line profit and monthly recurring revenue. Not billable hours, utilization rates, or time per client.

“He is not breaking it down by client. He’s not looking at individual job profitability,” Blake explains. The only thing that matters is whether the firm made money over the year.

This makes sense because staff costs are fixed. “The amount of hours they spend has no impact on your profitability,” Blake notes. You only need to worry if one client is so demanding they prevent you from taking on others.

“You don’t have to track hours for months to figure out which clients are eating up your profits,” David adds. “You just go to your team and say, ‘Who’s the biggest pain in the ass client?’ And they’re going to tell you.”

There’s also a technical angle to consider. Blake cites research showing AI is nearly 100% accurate on tasks that take humans 4-5 minutes. That accuracy drops for longer tasks, but the threshold is “doubling every seven months.” By the end of 2026, AI might handle 10- to 20-minute tasks reliably.

But this only matters if firms can capture the productivity gains. Under billable hours, faster work just means more hours to fill. Under outcome-based metrics, faster work means more capacity for growth.

Is the AI Accounting Influencer Coming?

As the episode wraps up, Blake and David float an idea that captures the absurdity of the current moment. They’re considering creating an AI accounting influencer—a completely artificial thought leader to see if it can build a following comparable to real industry voices.

“Let’s make an AI accounting influencer and see if we can build its following to eclipse that of those real influencers,” Blake suggests. They could have it write newsletters, create content, maybe even land sponsorship deals.

It’s partly a joke, but it makes a serious point. If an AI can answer thought leadership survey questions as well as humans, write articles, and provide strategic insights, what exactly makes human thought leaders irreplaceable?

The answer might be less comfortable than the profession wants to admit.

Looking Ahead

The Accounting Today survey offered some important insights, though probably not what it intended. The people most confident about AI’s limited impact are those whose work AI does best. When ChatGPT generated answers indistinguishable from human experts, it demonstrated the very vulnerability those experts deny.

The real story is that AI excels at synthesis and narrative, which are the heart of advisory work, but struggles with the contextual, exception-filled world of everyday bookkeeping.

Firm owners should rethink their services to capture the advisory opportunity AI makes possible, and abandon billable hours before they strangle your ability to innovate.

For individual practitioners doing transactional work, the news is actually good. Your skills remain valuable precisely because your work requires the messy, contextual judgment that AI lacks.

And for thought leaders? As David observed with obvious frustration, the elitist attitude that “I’m better than you” has been in accounting for 30 years. “The reality is completely opposite. People are completely missing what’s really going to be replaced by AI.”

The race isn’t between humans and machines. It’s between practitioners who recognize AI’s true capabilities and those who cling to comfortable narratives while missing the transformation happening around them.

To hear more about Blake’s AI-powered lifestyle, David’s thoughts on what bookkeeping really is, and their plan to create an AI influencer that might outperform the human ones, listen to episode 469 of The Accounting Podcast.

The Auditors Got Red Flags About $95 Million in Missing Funds and Signed Off Anyway

· ·

In the last episode of 2025 of The Accounting Podcast, hosts Blake Oliver and David Leary kicked off the conversation with an unexpected problem: America is running out of pennies. David’s friend owns sandwich shops in Tucson and literally can’t get pennies from the bank anymore. Businesses are being forced to round to the nearest nickel, and point-of-sale systems are scrambling to adapt.

“Square admits one fifth of all the transactions on Square are still paid in cash,” David noted, highlighting how this seemingly small issue affects millions of daily transactions. The government claims there are 300 billion pennies in circulation, but as David pointed out, “Obviously this isn’t true because businesses all over America do not have pennies to use in transactions.”

But the penny shortage was just the warm-up. The hosts quickly moved to a much bigger story about missing money: $95 million vanished at Evolve Bank, yet the auditors still signed off on clean financial statements.

$95 Million Went Missing While Auditors Said Everything Was Fine

Blake followed the Evolve Bank story for years, and recent Freedom of Information Act requests uncovered stunning details about what the auditors knew and ignored.

Evolve Bank is a chartered bank that worked with Synapse, a “banking as a service” company that wasn’t a bank itself but managed the technology connecting consumer apps like Yotta and Juno to actual banks. When you used these apps, you’d see your balance, but you had no idea which bank actually held your money. Synapse managed all those details.

“Everything worked great until April 2024, when Synapse filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy and shut down operations,” Blake explained. Suddenly, the banks and the apps couldn’t figure out where customer money actually was. Evolve froze withdrawals from thousands of accounts, leaving people unable to access their own money for months.

When banks examined Synapse’s records, they found massive problems. Between $65 and $95 million in customer funds couldn’t be traced to any bank. “Your Juno account might say $10,000, and the bank that’s supposed to have the $10,000 says, ‘We don’t have it,’” Blake explained.

The most damaging revelation came from the 2023 audit. When Crowe, Evolve’s auditor at the time, asked Synapse to confirm cash balances, the response should have triggered immediate action. Evolve listed 113 accounts, but Synapse was missing 29 accounts from daily data feeds. Synapse’s general counsel asked to discuss the discrepancies with Evolve’s leadership.

Evolve never responded to that request, yet Crowe still issued a clean audit opinion.

“Ninety five million is a lot of money,” Blake observed. “It would be 6% to 7% of Evolve’s total assets, likely over 100% of their annual net income, a double digit percentage of equity capital in some years. And typically, materiality would be 1 or 2% of assets.”

Are SOC 2 Reports Worthless?

The Evolve disaster led the hosts to question other compliance frameworks, particularly SOC certifications that companies display as badges of trustworthiness.

“My guess is Synapse had their SOC 2, because it’s not that hard to get a SOC 2,” Blake said. “According to my understanding, it’s really just a lot of documentation of the controls. But there’s not necessarily any confirmation that those controls are being followed.”

“They paid the money and got the badge for their website,” David observed. 

The hosts also discussed how a New Jersey accounting firm, Sax, took 18 months to inform nearly 250,000 people about a data breach. The firm claimed it followed standard procedures and saw no evidence the stolen data was misused, but for 18 months, affected individuals had no idea their personal information might be compromised.

“People could be using your stolen identity fraudulently 18 months before the accounting firm lets you know,” David said.

The problem is that while firms must have Written Information Security Plans (WISPs), they’re not necessarily legally required to execute them properly. “We focus on the wrong thing,” David argued. “We focus on having a WISP, not actually executing the WISP.”

Partners Don’t Know What Partners Make

In a lighter but equally revealing segment, Blake shared his favorite LinkedIn post of the year from Chase Birky, CEO and Co-founder of Dark Horse CPAs. Chase shared that almost a third of partners don’t know how much partners make at their own firms.

“How do CPAs not know how much they make? Isn’t that sort of what we do?” Chase wrote. The problem stems from a lack of transparency at many firms where partner compensation is calculated in a “black box” and communicated well after the fact. This secrecy is at least part of the reason talent leaves public accounting.

“I left because I got offered a job in tech that paid a lot more,” Blake said, sharing his own experience. “I didn’t know how much a partner made, and nobody could tell me what the path looked like.”

Should Companies Report Twice a Year Instead of Four Times?

The hosts also debated President Trump’s suggestion that U.S. companies should move from quarterly to semi-annual reporting, like much of the rest of the world.

Research from the UK showed that changing reporting frequency had “virtually no impact on companies’ internal investment decisions.” Studies also found that quarterly reporting creates “noisier data” that benefits sophisticated investors while hurting everyday investors.

“We’re always talking about how we have too much work to do in accounting and we’re pressed for time,” Blake said. “What better way to give ourselves more time than to make it two times a year instead of four?”

David wondered if less frequent reporting might reduce the pressure to play accounting games. “Monthly reporting probably puts pressure on people to sidestep the rules because it’s so fast and you have to perform.”

Looking Ahead to 2026

The hosts wrapped up with predictions for the coming year. David was skeptical about AI transforming bookkeeping. “I don’t see me doing bookkeeping at the end of 2026 any differently than I did in 2025, 2024, 2023, or 2022.”

Blake disagreed, pointing to new AI browsers that can actually navigate accounting software and complete tasks. “The time is doubling every seven months,” he explained. “Within the next year, we’re going to see AI able to complete tasks that take 15 to 20 minutes with 100% accuracy.”

David also predicted that OpenAI would strike a multi-million dollar deal with the AICPA, that at least two AI companies would fail, and, in his easiest prediction, “Intuit will tick off accountants in 2026.”

The episode covered far more ground than can be captured here, from the technical details of audit failures to the future of AI in accounting. For the complete discussion and all the insights Blake and David shared in their final episode of 2025, listen to the full episode of The Accounting Podcast.

Two-Thirds of Accounting Staff Hate Private Equity—But Partners Love It

· ·

Two-thirds of partners at private equity-backed accounting firms say they’re satisfied with their arrangements. But ask the staff actually doing the work, and you’ll hear a different story. Over half are dissatisfied, with one director calling the situation “a dumpster fire.”

This stark disconnect emerged from an Accounting Today survey discussed on The Accounting Podcast by hosts Blake Oliver and David Leary. The episode also revealed a disconnect in pricing. Tax preparers charge an average of just $280 for a basic 1040 (CPAs) or $228 (enrolled agents). These numbers had David asking incredulously, “Where are these people? I’ve never been quoted this low of a price.”

The Private Equity “Dumpster Fire”

The numbers from Accounting Today’s survey reveal a profession divided. Among partners and owners at PE-backed firms, 67% report satisfaction (40% very satisfied and 27% somewhat satisfied). But look at staff responses and it’s almost a perfect mirror image: 52% are either somewhat dissatisfied or very dissatisfied.

The anonymous comments from survey respondents paint an even bleaker picture. “It is a dumpster fire,” said one director at a large firm. “Low morale, people leaving, bonuses cut, pay raises eliminated or lowered.”

Another director at a very large firm agreed. “It’s horrible and dysfunctional. Losing clients, staff leaving, and partners pay more attention to their bank account than taking care of staff. Most partners are counting the days until they can leave with their money in hand.”

Perhaps most concerning for the profession’s future, 64% of respondents believe private equity will have a negative impact on the integrity and independence of public accounting firms. Another 56% think clients will suffer negative consequences.

“The industry will take a hit and the clients will take a hit,” David noted. “That’s not going to bode well for everybody else.”

It’s worth noting that fewer than 400 of the 44,000 US CPA firms have taken private equity investment, so less than 1%. But these tend to be larger, high-performing practices, and the trend only started accelerating around 2022.

Tax Preparers Leave Money on the Table

While PE-backed firms wrestle with cultural upheaval, smaller practitioners face a different challenge: chronic underpricing. The National Association of Tax Professionals’ 2025 survey reveals CPAs charge an average of just $280 for a basic 1040. Enrolled agents charge even less at $228, while non-credentialed preparers average $185.

These numbers shocked David. “Since I stopped doing my own taxes and pay an accounting firm to do them, it’s $1,200 to $1,300 a return. I’ve never been quoted this low of a price.”

Still, the survey contained some encouraging news. When preparers raise fees, clients rarely leave. Melissa Bowman, an EA in Ohio, increased prices 12-20% across the board twice since 2020, and “not one client left because of pricing.”

“If not one client leaves after you implement a substantial price increase like that, you’re still underpriced,” Blake pointed out.

One particularly surprising finding is that 18% of preparers don’t charge extra for state returns. “TurboTax has trained 45 million taxpayers over the last 30 years that you have to pay extra to get your state return done,” David noted. “The fact that almost 20% don’t charge for doing the state return seems crazy to me.”

Billion-Dollar Audit Relationships Raise Independence Questions

The independence concerns raised by private equity pale next to the decades-long, billion-dollar relationships between the Big Four and their largest clients. Deloitte has audited Microsoft since 1986, collecting $78 million in 2025 alone.

“This is like a $2 billion relationship between Deloitte and Microsoft over the last 40 years,” David calculated. “With that much money involved, the motivations just can’t be aligned with the public.”

The situation gets more complex when you consider that these firms also sell consulting services. “Doesn’t Deloitte sell Microsoft consulting type services and they implement Microsoft Copilot AI type things, but they also audit Microsoft?” David asked.

Blake acknowledged the concern. “These firms are audit firms, but they’re also consulting firms. And consulting teams are some of the biggest resellers now of the technology their clients develop.”

Change may be coming whether firms want it or not. With Microsoft cutting 15,000 jobs in 2025, David predicts inevitable pressure on audit fees. “They’ll go back to their auditor and say, ‘we don’t want to pay this much for our audit. We want you to use AI,’” David predicts.

What’s Next for the Profession?

The AICPA is seeking comments on ethics rules updates for alternative practice structures—the arrangements that enable private equity investment. But there’s a catch. Despite announcing the comment period weeks ago, the actual exposure draft won’t be available until December 29.

“Today is the 23rd,” David pointed out. “If it’s not done today, when are they doing this? Christmas Eve, Christmas Day?”

David predicted the process could drag on. “This could take a decade,” he suggested.

The accounting profession is under pressure from private equity reshaping firm culture, chronic underpricing in tax prep, and billion-dollar audit relationships raising independence questions. For practitioners, there is a clear need to raise prices and watch the PE developments carefully.

For the complete discussion, including a story about a Scottish police officer’s heroic retrieval of evidence from a toilet and concerns about IRS readiness for tax season, listen to the full episode of The Accounting Podcast.