Accounting and Reporting in times of Uncertainties

Sherwin Longasa
Sherwin Longasa

Manager, Technical Accounting

Accounting and Reporting in times of Uncertainties
https://scrubbed.net/businesses/risk-advisory/Since 2020, the world has been rocked by a series of challenges, including the COVID-19 pandemic, Ukraine-Russia geopolitical tension, rising inflation and interest rates, and a looming recession (collectively referred to herein as “uncertainties”). The uncertainties have severely impacted asset valuation, slowed growth and expansion, challenged liquidity, and led to revenue losses, receivable collection losses, and increased operating expenses, mainly influenced by higher inflation. 
As the negative trend in most entities’ bottom lines continues, profitability ratios are also declining. This can lead to significant fluctuations in critical financial metrics like the current ratio, quick ratio, debt-to-equity ratio, and others, which serve as the foundation for financial covenants. As a result, it is imperative to generate a standard-compliant financial report that accurately reflects the current state of affairs. This report will be crucial for stakeholders, especially creditors and investors, to make informed decisions about their involvement with the business.
The economic upheaval caused by uncertainties has hit businesses of all sizes hard, resulting in some being forced to liquidate or close permanently. As we strive towards recovery, those who managed to survive are still facing the possibility of shutdown and have doubts about their ability to continue operations. These survivors are now faced with the additional challenge of addressing accounting concerns to meet the stringent requirements of US GAAP and other regulatory bodies. Providing accurate and reliable business reports during these uncertain times is essential to ensure compliance and meet stakeholder expectations.
Management should consider the following guide questions in assessing the financial statement impact of uncertainties:
  • How does the entity consider a significant decline in customers’ ability to make payments in their revenue assessment?

Probability of collection
To recognize revenue, ASC 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, requires that collection of substantially all of the consideration must be probable. Therefore, even after revenue is recognized at contract inception, the entity shall reassess if there is an indication of a significant change in facts and circumstances. For example, suppose a customer’s ability to pay the consideration deteriorates significantly; the entity shall reassess whether it is probable that it will collect future consideration for the remaining goods and services that will transfer. If the decline in the customer’s ability to make payments occurs subsequently after the entity recognized revenue, an assessment should be made on possible impairment of receivable (you may refer to the CECL discussion below). Further, before assessing collectability, entities must also consider price concessions they may offer customers as it reduces the transaction price.
Contract modification and termination
As challenges continue affecting businesses, some customers may resort to modifying or terminating an existing contract. A contract modification is defined as a change in the scope, price, or both. The entity shall assess whether a contract modification shall be accounted for as a separate contract, as it requires different accounting treatment. A modification is accounted for as a separate contract if there is an addition of distinct promised goods or services for an amount equivalent to its standalone selling price. The partial or complete termination of a contract will typically be accounted for as a modification, as it is a change to the scope and price of the contract.
The deterioration of a customer’s ability to pay and contract modification or termination arising from uncertainties typically will reduce the revenue to be recognized.
  • Does the entity consider relevant information in its estimate of the Current expected credit loss (CECL) for its financial assets?

When developing an estimate of ECL, the CECL model requires consideration of reasonable and supportable information about past events, current conditions, and forecasts of future economic conditions. Entities shall consider how the ripple effects of uncertainties, coupled with volatilities in macroeconomic variables, affect their assessment of ECL. 
Entities are expected to recognize a relatively higher allowance for credit losses during the periods affected.
Also read: CECL Adoption Is Just Around the Corner – Is Your Business Ready?
  • Does the entity perform the ‘lower of cost or net realizable value test in their inventories?

ASC 330, Inventory, requires an inventory initially measured using FIFO or average costing method to be subsequently measured at the lower of cost or net realizable value. Net realizable value is calculated by subtracting the estimated completion, disposal, and transportation costs from the estimated inventory selling price. 
The uncertainties caused widespread supply chain disruption, production stoppage, and inventory damage. It also increased materials, freight, handling, and storage costs, which means higher capitalizable and selling costs. Additionally, selling prices may be lower arising from price concessions granted to customers and a significant decline in demand for the product or service. These are some of the indicators that the net realizable value of the inventory will be lower than its cost, prompting recognition of a loss on inventory obsolescence.  
  • Are there events or changes in circumstances indicating that fixed assets are impaired?

Long-lived assets and finite-lived intangible assets (fixed assets) shall be tested for recoverability per ASC 360, Property, Plant, and Equipment, whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that its carrying amount may not be recoverable. In addition, the recoverability test follows a review of depreciation estimates and methods.
Supply chain disruption and stoppage of production render facilities and production equipment abandoned or idle. In addition, armed conflicts cripple businesses’ assets. These are circumstances that may necessitate impairment testing and accounting estimate reconsideration. When further testing indicates that the carrying amount of fixed asset is not recoverable, entities shall record an impairment loss. Also, it is plausible that the estimated remaining useful life of the asset will be shortened.
  • Are there events or changes in circumstances indicating that indefinitely-lived intangible assets are impaired?

Evaluating the impairment of indefinitely-lived intangible assets usually involves a two-part test. ASC 350, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other, provides for a qualitative test to assess whether it is more likely than not that the asset is impaired but provides an option to go straight to a quantitative test consisting of a comparison of the fair value of the asset with its carrying amount.
Discounted cash flow is one of the most traditional and standard methods of estimating the fair value of an asset. When the general market condition is unpredictable, entities using this method shall be prudent in their revenue and cash flow forecasts and consider how rising interest rates brings the present value factor used in discounting down.
  • Is there a possibility of a debt covenant violation?

Some long-term debts require compliance with certain covenants. For example, a note payable may include a financial covenant to maintain a minimum current ratio that, when violated, will make the note due and demandable. Even if the lender waives its call right due to the covenant violation for a period greater than one year while retaining future covenant requirements, the debt will not automatically classify as non-current when the covenant is breached. It will be classified as current if the borrower will not be able to comply with the covenant within the next 12 months from the balance sheet date.
If a debt covenant violation happens or is expected after the balance sheet date, the debt will generally be classified as non-current. Still, disclosure of the fact is required in the current reporting period.
  • How do uncertainties impact the probability of recognizing losses on contingencies?

ASC 450, Loss Contingencies defines loss contingency as an existing condition, situation, or set of circumstances involving uncertainty as to possible loss to an entity that will ultimately be resolved when one or more future events occur or fail. Accrual and disclosure of a loss contingency are required when (1) the occurrence of one or more future events confirming the fact of the loss is probable and (2) the amount of loss can be reasonably estimated. ASC 450 does not define “probable,” but is generally considered 75% or more.
Economic instability brought about by uncertainties may cause entities to recognize contingency losses such as those relating to the collectability of receivables, loss or damages of properties and other assets, and product warranties. Accordingly, entities shall be critical in assessing losses as it is a matter of judgment.
  • Does the entity consider events and transactions occurring after the balance sheet date?

Subsequent events consist of those events and transactions that provide evidence about conditions that (a) existed at the balance sheet date (i.e., recognized subsequent events) or (b) did not exist at the balance sheet date but arose after that date (i.e., non-recognized subsequent events).
The subsequent impacts of uncertainties cannot be predicted — effects may linger for some entities, but some might get alleviated. Therefore, entities shall consider which subsequent events would entail adjustments in the financial statements. Examples of these events include the bankruptcy of a customer occurring after the balance sheet date that confirms a bad debt existed at the balance sheet date or sales of inventory after the balance sheet date that give evidence about their net realizable value at the balance sheet date.
  • Does the entity assess the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern?

ASC 205-40, Presentation of Financial Statements – Going Concern requires management to evaluate, annually and for each interim reporting period, whether there are conditions and events that raise substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the financial statements are issued. When substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern is raised, management shall implement an effective plan of action to alleviate the substantial doubt.
When substantial doubt is raised, regardless if management plans alleviate it or not, the entity shall disclose the principal conditions or events that raised the substantial doubt, management’s evaluation of those conditions or events, and the details of the plan that alleviated (or were intended to mitigate) those conditions or events. Additionally, if substantial doubt still exists after considering management’s plans, the entity shall include a statement in its notes to financial statements indicating that there is substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern.
Management must perform a going concern assessment as regulators are aware that entities are vulnerable to liquidity risks during this period.
  • Does the company have safeguards to mitigate the increased risk of fraudulent financial reporting due to pressure to meet targets and other key performance indicators?

It is logical to expect a rise in the risk of fraudulent financial reporting during these times of economic uncertainty. Certain stakeholder expectations and incentives tied to a financial metric put pressure on management to commit such fraud in the form of revenue falsification and expense understatement. Entities shall put adequate and effective controls in place to prevent this kind of fraud. Examples of these controls include strictly implementing segregation of duties, performing regular account reconciliations, and promoting a culture of integrity and open communication. These practices are especially vital in nonprofit financial reporting, where transparency and trust are crucial for donor confidence and regulatory compliance, as well as broader risk and SOX compliance requirements.
Note that the set of foregoing questions is not an exhaustive list of considerations, and management needs to conduct a thorough company-wide assessment of all significant accounting considerations. Take Action! To effectively assess the impact of uncertainties, entities must gather information from across the organization and collaborate closely. It’s crucial for individuals within the organization to have a solid understanding of the provisions of US GAAP, IFRS, or other relevant reporting frameworks. Utilizing a financial statement disclosure checklist can help ensure that all required disclosures are complete and accurate. In addition, management should carefully analyze financial statements and look for any unusual or suspicious activity. Seeking guidance from technical accounting consultants or other experts can be helpful in addressing complex accounting issues and ensuring compliance with regulations. By taking these steps, entities can be better equipped to navigate the challenges posed by uncertain economic conditions. How Scrubbed Can Help Analyzing the consequences of uncertainties, from sifting through mountains of data to measuring their impact, can be an arduous process. However, generating precise and pertinent business reports is crucial in contributing to a united global recovery, despite the added workload. Fortunately, Scrubbed offers the expertise of trained professionals who can guide businesses through the intricate accounting and disclosure obligations of US GAAP and other relevant regulatory frameworks. This will enable informed business decision-making and facilitate successful navigation through uncertain times. Contact Scrubbed to learn how we can help in your goal of providing relevant and accurate financial statements in times of uncertainty.

Related Content

Blogs

September 15 Estimated Tax Deadline: Strategies for Pass-Through Entities

September 15 Estimated Tax Deadline: Strategies for Pass-Through Entities

For growing pass-through entities, the September 15 tax deadline often creates a collision between cash flow and internal capacity. Guessing at estimated payments leaves companies vulnerable to IRS penalties or unnecessarily traps critical working capital meant for Q4 growth. By establishing a Safe Harbor floor and utilizing the Annualized Income Installment Method, companies can align tax outlays directly with actual revenue. When this execution is handled proactively, finance leaders stop playing defense against deadlines and reclaim their time for strategic planning. When a high-growth pass-through entity, such as an S-Corp or a Partnership, comes off an unexpectedly strong summer, revenue is up. This should be a moment for leadership to celebrate and plan their Q4 investments. Instead, the internal finance team often finds themselves staring down a cash crunch they didn't anticipate. The pressure point is September 15. For growing operations, this date is often a collision course. It is not only the deadline for Q3 estimated tax payments, but it is also the extended filing deadline for Forms 1065 and 1120-S . When you have an internal team trying to finalize the previous year's historical data while simultaneously projecting the current year's performance, the structure usually begins to strain. This isn't about a team dropping the ball. It's simply what happens when internal workflows haven't scaled up to match a company's growth. When two major deadlines collide, and the volume is too high, a stretched team has no choice but to improvise. The Cost of "Guesstimating" In a pass-through entity, the business itself generally does not pay federal income tax. Because income from partnerships and S corporations generally passes through to their owners, owners may need to make individual estimated tax payments based in part on their share of the entity’s taxable income When internal teams don't have a dedicated workflow for this, they often get bogged down trying to predict exact year-end profits during a busy quarter. Without a clear mechanism to manage this, I frequently see companies do one of two things: they either underpay and leave themselves vulnerable to IRS penalties, or they overpay to "be safe." Overpaying might feel like the responsible choice in the moment, but it unnecessarily ties up working capital. When these distributions are sized off gross revenue rather than a projection that accounts for deductions or state-level elections, the company pulls more cash out of the operating account than the owners actually owe. That excess traps liquidity that could have been used to fund critical Q4 growth initiatives—like a marketing push or inventory expansion—without seeking outside financing. Establishing an Estimated-Tax Safe Harbor  When our tax professionals step in to manage this process, the very first thing we do is establish a predictable foundation. We immediately build a "Tax Compliance Calendar" integrated with a "Safe Harbor Floor." A useful starting point is determining which estimated-tax safe harbor applies. For many taxpayers, one option is to base required annual payments on 100% of the prior year's tax, increasing to 110% for certain higher-income taxpayers. The current-year 90% test may also apply. Meeting the applicable requirements through timely payments can generally reduce exposure to estimated-tax underpayment penalties. Once that floor is established, we can adjust for the reality of the current year. Aligning Outlays with Actual Cash Flow If a company sees a massive spike in revenue during Q3, the standard installment method might demand a payment that creates a sudden cash flow imbalance. Good intentions won't balance the cash flow at this stage; you need a precise mathematical approach. To stabilize cash flow during a sudden revenue surge, one strategy to consider is the Annualized Income Installment Method . Instead of assuming income is earned evenly throughout the year, the Annualized Income Installment Method determines the owner's required installments based more closely on income earned during the applicable annualization periods State-level PTE tax elections may also provide federal tax benefits by allowing qualifying state income taxes to be paid and deducted at the entity level rather than being subject to the individual SALT deduction limitation. The result? Depending on the state's PTE tax regime, entity-level payments may reduce the state estimated-tax payments otherwise required from individual owners. A deductible PTE tax payment may also reduce the taxable income passed through to owners for federal purposes, which can affect their projected federal estimated-tax liability. Restoring Strategic Headspace When tax planning is handled consistently throughout the year, it changes how a leadership team operates. It can significantly reduce the risk of an "April Surprise." When Q3 estimates are calculated accurately and tied to a deliberate strategy, leadership knows exactly how much capital is truly theirs to spend. Tax shifts from a looming, unpredictable liability into a manageable line item. Just as importantly, the internal finance leader gets their time back. Instead of spending the first two weeks of September finalizing and issuing K-1s, calculating thresholds, and worrying about penalties, they can focus on high-level financial modeling and operational efficiency. A strong tax partner doesn't just run the numbers; they take the friction out of the process so your team can focus forward. When an experienced team handles the heavy lifting behind the scenes, you stop playing defense against IRS deadlines and start using tax strategy as a genuine tool to fund your growth. See how our tax professionals support growing operations and keep execution predictable. Let's talk through how we can support your finance function. Comparing Q3 Tax Strategies: Safe Harbor vs. Annualized Method vs. PTE Strategy Ideal for Primary Benefit Risk Level  100%/110% Safe Harbor  Rapidly growing companies  Provides protection from estimated-tax underpayment penalties when applicable safe-harbor requirements are satisfied  Low (May temporarily tie up cash if revenue drops)  Annualized Method  Seasonal or late-year spiking revenue Align tax outlays directly with timing of taxable income  Moderate (Requires meticulous record-keeping) PTE Tax Election Entities in high-tax states May provide an entity-level federal deduction for qualifying state income taxes while providing state tax benefits to eligible owners Low (Requires state-specific eligibility and election compliance) Key Takeaways: The Deadline Collision: The simultaneous timing of Q3 estimates and extended historical filings places severe strain on internal finance teams when workflows haven't scaled. The Cost of "Guesstimating": Overpaying estimated taxes based on gross revenue ties up liquidity that could otherwise fund critical Q4 growth initiatives without requiring outside financing. Building a Safe Harbor Floor: Establishing a baseline payment based on 100% or 110% of the prior year's tax liability can provide protection from estimated-tax underpayment penalties when the applicable safe-harbor requirements are satisfied. Aligning Cash Flow: The Annualized Income Installment Method stabilizes cash positions by calculating tax based on income earned during the applicable annualization periods rather than an arbitrary quarterly fraction. Restoring Strategic Headspace: When tax planning is handled reliably behind the scenes, internal finance leaders get their time back to focus on high-level financial modeling instead of chasing K-1s.

Read More >
Blogs

How to Scale a Fractional CFO Practice: Infrastructure, AI, and Execution

How to Scale a Fractional CFO Practice: Infrastructure, AI, and Execution

Fractional CFOs scale by separating strategy from daily execution. At the CFO Leadership Conference in Boston, panelists outlined the model: a three-part team structure, AI tools for repetitive analysis, and strict scope boundaries. The common thread is that strategic capacity depends on reliable accounting operations underneath it. Fractional CFOs operate in a fundamentally different model, balancing multiple clients and shifting priorities without the benefit of deep organizational embedding. You are hired to provide altitude, clarity, and rapid impact. But when a client lacks a mature finance operation, that executive focus is quickly consumed by operational cleanup. This exact tension took center stage at the CFO Leadership Conference in Boston. During our morning panel discussion, The Multi-Business Executive: How Fractional CFOs Scale Leadership Across Clients , moderated by Scrubbed’s Accounting Director Arian David, Triangle Coffee founder and fractional CFO Ottavio Siani and Scrubbed’s CFO Aira Pineda detailed how fractional CFOs build capacity to avoid this operational trap. They mapped out the real-world infrastructure and AI practices required to support multiple fast-moving client environments. Here are the operational realities shared in the room. The Infrastructure Blueprint for Scaling a Fractional CFO Practice A primary challenge for scaling organizations is the gap between strategic desires and foundational accuracy. Volume increases faster than structure, and founders frequently bottleneck their own operations by micromanaging the finance function. As Aira shared with the room, stepping into a fractional role often means untangling founder-led accounting and directly telling the CEO, "you're not supposed to do this". Once leaders step back from the daily execution, "suddenly they have time" to actually focus on growing their business. Successful practitioners build a deliberate team architecture to handle the volume. To build a sustainable infrastructure, Ottavio explained that a fractional CFO setup requires three key elements: A fractional CFO to provide strategic direction. A trusted internal employee to manage sensitive operational context. An external accounting firm to run the daily numbers. This structure prevents the CFO from becoming the operational bottleneck. Read: Are Fractional CFOs the Future for Growing Companies? Navigating Risk in Founder-Led Environments The most pointed friction in a fractional role often comes from enforcing structure. During the session, an audience member challenged the panel on how to balance strict risk controls with the commercial reality of working for independent founders who operate as the "gods of their own businesses". Aira addressed this tension directly, clarifying that operational controls and commercial growth do not have to collide.  "I don't think it's contradictory, to be honest. I think it's complementary," she explained.   "I think you make better decisions as a CFO, having kind of just at the back of your mind that risk mindset." Taking calculated risks is necessary to create shareholder value. However, a fractional CFO can only support that aggressive growth when the foundational accounting operations are secure enough to absorb the complexity. Building Fractional CFO Capacity with AI Tools Technology accelerates this architecture when carefully managed. Ottavio shared how he uses Claude to generate monthly financial statement analyses based on tested templates, reducing a repetitive task to minutes. Arian detailed using Claude to abstract private equity contracts, while Aira highlighted using NotebookLM to summarize 50-page forensic documents. However, systems create results, but human professionals must validate them. Aira illustrated the danger of false confidence by testing a complex revenue recognition issue across Claude, Gemini, and ChatGPT. Although all three models provided the exact same answer, they failed the final human review when  "A big CPA firm comes and says, no, that's not the accounting treatment." Designing Aligned Execution and Preventing Scope Creep Growth adds complexity. Strong execution ensures that complexity remains manageable. When fractional leaders possess a reliable accounting layer, closes become predictable and strategic conversations gain traction. Without this layer, scope creep inevitably takes over. "I think a challenge with being a fractional CFO is having to limit your scope, right?" Ottavio noted. "I typically dedicate like a day a week, and I need to keep myself from spending too much time outside of the original scope that we, we agreed upon, so that I can make sure that I'm kind of meeting all my clients". Key Takeaways: A sustainable fractional CFO practice separates strategy from execution: the CFO, a trusted internal employee, and an external accounting team each hold a distinct role. Founders bottleneck their own operations by staying in the daily accounting. Helping them step back frees time for growth. Risk mindset and commercial growth are complementary. Calculated risks require stable accounting operations underneath them. AI tools like Claude and NotebookLM compress repetitive analysis from weeks to minutes, but experienced professionals must verify every output against source documents. Scope discipline holds only when a reliable accounting layer runs the day-to-day work. About the Panelists Arian David | Accounting Director, Scrubbed  Arian serves as the Accounting Director for Retail and Distribution at Scrubbed. She brings over 12 years of specialized execution experience managing complex accounting operations across the distribution, e-commerce, and retail sectors.  Aira Pineda | CFO, Scrubbed  Aira directs financial strategy and operations as the Chief Financial Officer at Scrubbed. She brings over a decade of hands-on experience operating as a fractional CFO for small to medium-sized enterprises. Ottavio Siani | Fractional CFO & Founder, Triangle Coffee  Ottavio is the founder of Triangle Coffee, a multi-location café business operating in Boston and Washington, D.C. As an active fractional CFO, he advises a portfolio of clients, including Hon, CN Naturals, and Port of Mocha, on building and restructuring finance teams. 

Read More >
Blogs

Scaling Your Finance Function: When to Hire a Fractional Finance Team

Scaling Your Finance Function: When to Hire a Fractional Finance Team

As noted at the CFO Leadership Conference, volume often outpaces structure, quietly straining finance execution. To scale capacity, growing companies can integrate partner-led finance teams anchored by an internal liaison. By taking responsibility for this daily execution, these professionals restore predictable reporting and give leaders their focus back. For many middle-market companies, there is a distinct moment when the finance function shifts from supporting the business to struggling to keep up. Transaction volume increases. Deadlines tighten. The close starts taking longer, and reviews feel rushed. Internal teams spend more time fixing issues than moving forward. During our afternoon panel at the CFO Leadership Conference in Boston, How CFOs Use Fractional Talent to Scale the Finance Function, Triangle Coffee founder and Fractional CFO Ottavio Siani, Scrubbed’s CFO Aira Pineda, and Accounting Director Arian David unpacked a critical reality for growing organizations. Building a finance organization that can flex with the business requires deliberate structural choices. Here is a closer look at how to architect that structure by integrating partner-led finance teams. When to Hire: The 160-Hour Threshold Prompted by Arian to define the trigger point for bringing on fractional help, Scrubbed CFO Aira Pineda highlighted a practical threshold: evaluating whether a role truly demands a full-time, 160-hour-per-month commitment.  This evaluation is a cornerstone strategy for companies navigating new growth stages. Fast-moving projects often require immediate, specialized execution.  " Sometimes I need a project very quickly done, and I need someone experienced already ," Aira explained. " I don't want to go through the headache [of hiring full-time]. A fractional team just makes it faster for me. " Partner-led finance teams offer a cost-effective alternative to full-time hiring, providing the exact capacity needed without the overhead of onboarding. They take responsibility for the work behind your numbers, allowing the internal team to focus on strategic growth. Full-Time vs. Fractional Finance Team Comparison Feature Full-Time Finance Hire Fractional Finance Team Capacity Commitment Onboarding & Ramp Time Billing Model Specialization 160+ hours/month (Fixed) 60–90 days Annual Salary + Benefits + Equity Generalist execution Flexible / Scalable capacity Immediate deployment Flat Monthly Retainer Multi-disciplinary experts  Best Used For  Continuous daily operations  Fast growth, specialized projects, scaling The Architecture of Integration: The "Bridge" Person A fractional finance team cannot work effectively in isolation. Fractional CFO Ottavio Siani, who systematically leverages these exact structures across multiple ventures to scale his own executive leadership,  identified a critical requirement for successful integration: designating an internal "bridge" person. This full-time employee acts as the primary point of contact between the company and the fractional team. They do not need deep accounting expertise. Their value lies in providing internal context and answering day-to-day questions while the company operates.  When communication paths and responsibilities are clearly defined, fractional professionals can operate as an extension of the internal finance function rather than as a disconnected outside vendor. Best Practices for Integrating a Fractional Finance Team A fractional finance function only succeeds when it is treated as an integrated part of the business. The Standard of Accuracy : Accuracy is a non-negotiable requirement. As Aira noted during the panel discussion, "We work with numbers, and accuracy matters. If we end up, as a CFO, presenting a wrong number to our board... that is grounds for termination." Match the Billing Model to the Engagement : While hourly billing is common for initial testing, Ottavio strongly advocated for flat-fee models to maintain strategic alignment. "The problem with hourly billing is the company ends up being pretty precious with your time, and you'll often be held out of important meetings," Ottavio noted. "Retainer-based [billing] leads to a much healthier relationship." Demand Verified Data Controls (SOC 2) : Handing over financial workflows requires absolute trust. Middle market businesses must partner with CPA firms that maintain rigorous, verified controls, such as a SOC 2 audit, to guarantee data security. Scaling with Technology and Distributed Talent A fractional model also allows companies to broaden the talent pool available to the finance function. Distributed teams can provide access to specialized skills, additional coverage, and capacity that adjusts as the business changes. However, location alone does not determine whether the model will work. Quality depends on how the team is managed, how communication is structured, how the work is reviewed, and whether the provider understands the company’s accounting requirements and operating environment. Technology can further expand the team’s capacity. During the panel, Aira described analytics teams using AI-assisted tools to write Python code and process data more efficiently than manual Excel workflows would allow.  The value is not simply that the technology moves faster. It reduces repetitive work, so finance professionals can spend more time reviewing outputs, investigating exceptions, and applying judgment. Technology can accelerate the work. Accountability remains human. Building the Right Finance Structure Fractional support works best when it solves a defined structural need.  The company must still establish internal ownership. Responsibilities must be clear. Workflows must be documented. Review standards must be understood by both teams.  When those elements are in place, a fractional finance team can help the business: Add capacity without immediately adding permanent headcount. Access specialized expertise. Support periods of rapid growth or transition. Make the close and reporting process more predictable. Reduce pressure on internal finance leaders. Create a stronger foundation for future hiring. The objective is not to outsource responsibility. It is to build a finance function with the right capacity, expertise, and structure for the company’s current stage of growth. About the Panelists Arian David | Accounting Director, Scrubbed  Arian serves as the Accounting Director for Retail and Distribution at Scrubbed. She brings over 12 years of specialized execution experience managing complex accounting operations across the distribution, e-commerce, and retail sectors.  Aira Pineda | CFO, Scrubbed  Aira directs financial strategy and operations as the Chief Financial Officer at Scrubbed. She brings over a decade of hands-on experience operating as a fractional CFO for small to medium-sized enterprises. Ottavio Siani | Fractional CFO & Founder, Triangle Coffee  Ottavio is the founder of Triangle Coffee, a multi-location café business operating in Boston and Washington, D.C. As an active fractional CFO, he advises a portfolio of clients, including Hon, CN Naturals, and Port of Mocha, on building and restructuring finance teams. 

Read More >

Links

Contact Information

SF Bay Area Headquarters
111 Anza Boulevard, Suite 320, Burlingame, CA 94010, United States

Phone: (800)837-5160
Email: [email protected]

"Scrubbed" is the brand name under which Scrubbed Advisory, LLC and Scrubbed Assurance, LLP provide professional services. Scrubbed Advisory, LLC and Scrubbed Assurance, LLP practice in an alternative practice structure in accordance with the AICPA Code of Professional Conduct and applicable law, regulations, and professional standards. Scrubbed Assurance, LLP is a licensed independent CPA firm that provides attest services to its clients, and Scrubbed Advisory, LLC provides tax, finance, and support services to its clients. Scrubbed Advisory, LLC is not a licensed CPA firm.

Copyright © Scrubbed. All rights reserved.