Daniel O’Donovan and Siobhan Orsi summarise the main changes in the Ethical Standard (Ireland) for Auditors, the International Standards on Auditing (Ireland), and the International Standard on Quality Control (Ireland) 1. In November 2020, the Irish Auditing and Accounting Supervisory Authority (IAASA) issued revised ethical and auditing standards in a bid to support the delivery of high-quality audit and strengthen confidence in audit in Ireland. The revisions build on changes made to the standards in 2017, which implemented the requirements of the EU Audit Regulation and Directive. These new amendments, which were the subject of a formal consultation earlier in 2020, are effective for audits of financial statements for periods beginning on or after 15 July 2021, with early adoption permitted. This article summarises the main changes in the Ethical Standard (Ireland) for Auditors, the International Standards on Auditing (Ireland), and the International Standard on Quality Control (Ireland) 1. Revisions to the ethical standard IAASA’s aim in amending the ethical standard was to simplify and restructure the standard to ensure a better understanding of the ethical requirements. It also introduces more prohibitive requirements, including removing the exemption for SME-listed entities that were not subject to many of the prohibitions applied to listed entities. These concessions, offered in the 2017 IAASA Ethical Standard to entities of this nature, have been removed. Other key changes to the ethical standards include, but are not limited to, the following: Third-party test: the new standard sets out a clearer and stronger definition of the “objective reasonable and informed third-party test”, which is a core element of the ethical standard. It requires audit firms to consider whether a proposed action would affect their independence from the perspective of public interest stakeholders rather than another auditor. Additional guidance has been inserted to assist in application. Internal audit services: firms will no longer be able to provide internal audit services to audited entities or their significant affiliates. IAASA’s view was that the provision of internal audit services to audit clients created a risk, both real and perceived, to independence that needed to be addressed. Recruitment and remuneration services: the standard incorporates amendments that now prohibit auditors from providing recruitment and remuneration services or playing any part in management decision-making. Gifts and hospitality: the requirement to establish policies on the nature and value of gifts, favours, and hospitality that may be accepted from and offered to other entities has been extended to apply to those entities that are likely to subsequently become audit clients. Enhancements to the ethics partner’s authority: new provisions incorporated into Section 1 of the ethical standard highlight the increased importance placed on the ethics partner. Enhancements include a requirement for reporting to those charged with governance where an audit firm does not follow the ethics partner’s advice. Partner rotation: the cooling-off period for engagement partners on public interest entity audits has been relaxed and amended from five years to three years, as was the requirement in the EU Audit Regulation in 2014. The change has also been applied to listed entities. Clarification has been added that when the engagement partners rotate off an audit, they cannot have significant or frequent interaction with senior management or those charged with governance during the cooling-off period. A new requirement has been introduced so that, where audits and those providing audits move from one firm to another, any rotation “on periods” for partners and staff include any time before they and the audit changed audit firms. Reporting breaches of the ethical standard The extant Ethical Standard for Auditors (Ireland) 2017 requires auditors to respond to all possible or actual breaches of the standard and keep records of any contraventions. A requirement has been introduced in the new ethical standard for auditors to report breaches of the ethical standard on an annual basis to IAASA, the relevant recognised accountancy body for auditors of public interest entities, and the relevant recognised accountancy body for non-public interest entity auditors. Such reports are to be submitted at least annually. IAASA indicated in its feedback paper on the consultation that it will issue guidance to auditors regarding the format of reports to be submitted. It also stated that any action taken by IAASA or the relevant recognised accountancy body in response to such reports will vary on a case-by-case basis depending on factors such as the nature of the breach, the appropriateness of the firm’s response, and the firm’s regulatory history. The new ethical standard permits firms to complete non-audit service engagements that were previously permissible provided they were entered into before 15 July 2021 and for which the firm has commenced work, while applying appropriate safeguards. IAASA did not introduce prohibitions on contingent fees for non-audit services, loan staff assignments, and tax advocacy services – all of which were proposed in the consultation paper. In addition, IAASA made changes to specific auditing standards: ISQC (Ireland) 1 and ISAs (Ireland) 210, 220, 250, 260, 600, 620, 700, 701 and 720. Hereafter, we will briefly discuss the most significant changes auditors and entities should be aware of for audits of financial statements with periods beginning on or after 15 July 2021. Revisions to ISAs IAASA has revised ISA (Ireland) 700, Forming an Opinion and Reporting on Financial Statements to extend the requirement for auditors of public interest entities to explain the extent to which the audit is capable of detecting irregularities and fraud to audits of listed entities also. There has been a significant expansion of the application guidance to the standard in relation to this requirement, which guides auditors to provide more detailed and granular explanations tailored to the entity being audited. IAASA acknowledged in the feedback statement that, in some situations, legislation (e.g. ‘tipping-off legislation’) would prohibit auditors from disclosing certain information in the audit report. ISA (Ireland) 600, Special Considerations – Audits of Group Financial Statements (Including the Work of Component Auditors) has been revised to clarify that the work of component auditors used for the purpose of a group audit must be evaluated and reviewed by the group engagement team. Application guidance has been added to the standard to assist group engagement teams in determining whether the nature and extent of such evaluations and reviews of component auditor work are appropriate in their professional judgement. ISA (Ireland) 220, Quality Control for an Audit of Financial Statements now requires the engagement quality control reviewer (EQCR) for audits of group financial statements of public interest entities to perform their quality control review over each component for which work has been performed for the purpose of the group audit, and to discuss the results of the review with the relevant key audit partner. This is a significant enhancement of the quality control review required for such entities. ISA (Ireland) 701, Communicating Key Audit Matters in the Independent Auditor’s Report has been revised to require that the auditor’s report specify the threshold for performance materiality and explain the judgements made in determining performance materiality tailored to the circumstances of the audit.  This package of revisions to the standards is designed to enhance audit quality and public confidence in audit in Ireland. However, for group audits of public interest entities in particular, there is likely to be significant incremental associated effort and cost in complying with the new requirements. Chartered Accountants should familiarise themselves with all changes to the standards, which are available on IAASA’s website. Daniel O’Donovan is Principal in the Department of Professional Practice at KPMG Ireland and Chair of the Institute’s Audit & Assurance Committee. Siobhan Orsi is Associate Partner at EY Ireland and a member of the Institute’s Audit & Assurance Committee.

The need for structured, robust, and reliable business intelligence has mushroomed in recent years. As an increasing number of businesses grapple with the issue, Paul Cullen  explains the critical elements for implementation success. Data volumes within businesses have increased dramatically in recent years, primarily driven by cloud-based data solutions. Many companies struggle to harness this data in a way that enables them to focus on the key drivers of their success and to know if the strategies they have executed are having the desired results. Proper and well-planned implementation of a business intelligence (BI) solution can give management the real-time information they need to maximise commercial opportunities and ensure organisational coherence to deliver on agreed performance metrics. Why Excel just doesn’t cut it for BI Accountants have always loved Excel, and it still has a pivotal role as an analytics tool. However, when it comes to flexible reporting and giving end-users the ability to dive beyond the headline numbers to get to the ‘why’, Excel falls short in several key areas: Model maintenance headaches: in a 50-tab reporting workbook, any change to the layout can be very time-consuming (and often error-prone). I frequently encounter client reporting workbooks riddled with errors because one sheet has a misaligned row, which results in an incorrect aggregated summary. The dreaded invisible F2 edit: how many times have you spent hours pouring over an Excel workbook trying to figure out why the individual tabs don’t agree with the summary, only to eventually discover that someone has keyed in a manual F2 edit in a cell? Distributabilty: so you have built this all-singing, all-dancing Excel reporting pack, but it’s 70MB and cannot be shared via email. You also realise that some information needs to be segmented so that specific users can only see select slices of the data. These issues usually mean that multiple Excel models must be maintained, amplifying the risk of error and potentially compromising data integrity. Limits on row numbers: Excel’s sheet row limit has increased to one million in recent years. While this sounds more than adequate, you can easily exceed this limit if you include transactional data. Housing data in this way within Excel will usually result in slow, large file-size models. Usually dependant on one key user: there is typically only one key person who knows how to run and maintain a reporting model. Therefore, reporting quality, outputs, and cycle time rely to a worryingly large degree on one individual. The need for structured, robust, and reliable BI has mushroomed in recent years. As a result, dedicated BI platforms like PowerBI, Tableau, Qlik and ZapBI have evolved to address these shortcomings and provide analytics visualisations and end-user self-service reporting that goes far beyond Excel’s capabilities. Key obstacles to getting good BI Master data Many finance professionals underestimate just how unstructured their data is. I often hear clients say: “Yes, but we use NAV/Dynamics 365, so our data is really good”. They often fail to understand the inconsistencies across the company in how transactions are coded or recorded by staff. These inconsistencies make life difficult when you need to connect transactions across different platforms. For example, say you want to connect salary data for an employee from an HR system with data in a time-recording system. The employee ID is, say, PCULLEN250 on the HR system but CULLP on the time-recording system. This is just one example of the data-mapping tasks that must be undertaken for BI to succeed. I have seen this to varying degrees in every BI project I have delivered because, for many years, siloed teams have had their own ways of doing things. They simply didn’t realise that there would be a future requirement to bring all this data together at a transactionally-connected level. Historical processes or ways of working The ways in which your teams have historically coded transactions on source systems will almost certainly present challenges in initially setting up your new BI platform. I once worked with a ship management group with 1,000 ships under their control. Management wanted to get to ‘vessel profitability’, and we knew that cost allocation would be a challenge due to the complexity of the company’s operating structures. However, we were surprised to find that revenue for each vessel wasn’t available from the ledgers because the company issued just one monthly invoice to each carrier, even though some had more than 50 vessels under management. Furthermore, payroll costs for vessel crews were recorded by office location, not by vessel. Both of these historical processes gave rise to significant re-analysis work and new process design to enable the required analyses. Similarly, one healthcare client wanted to understand their profitability by treatment type. They believed that everyone across the more than 100 clinics they owned used roughly the same few hundred treatment type codes. In fact, there were over 6,000 live treatment codes in use and in some instances, clinics could even create their own codes at will. So expect to change some of your ways of working as a result of embarking on a BI implementation. How far back to go? Once it becomes clear to key stakeholders just how much insight a good BI implementation will bring, there is typically a desire to have as much history loaded into the model as possible. This is often the case where the company is private equity-owned, or a sale is planned. My advice here is the old 80/20 rule. Yes, it might be nice to see this new level of insight going back five years. But if your company is one of those where a lot of re-analysis will be required, you have to ask: is it worth it? I instead recommend that older historicals should, where possible, only be incorporated in aggregate. You should then ensure that the new data processes are designed and implemented so that future analytics are both robust and reliable. How often is too often? When implementing a BI platform, the next consideration is how often the data and outputs should be refreshed. It’s tempting to think: “Great, I can see what the sales team are doing every morning and then follow-up to discuss what’s going on”. However, this approach can quickly create a situation where staff have to spend time each day figuring out what just happened. And this, of course, can lead to ‘paralysis by analysis’. Be judicious about how often BI data should form the basis of a trading or operations conversation, and otherwise use it to indicate the company’s direction of travel. Introducing a new performance management BI tool will initially strain your executives and managers as they sift through a deluge of new and revealing information. This takes me to the following consideration: the need for culture change if a BI solution is to work correctly. Warning! Culture change approaching Imagine you are a sales or production manager, and you wake up to a new, live, web-based BI portal that shows everyone in your organisation where things might not be going so well on your patch. Senior management must avoid using the BI solution to shame or berate colleagues. Instead, it should be seen as a tool to identify opportunities and enhance performance across the business. Tread carefully here and avoid the ‘big bang’ approach of rolling out BI. You want your teams to embrace this new way of working, not run away from it or, worse still, seek to discredit it. With all this new performance management data at your fingertips, you may wish to consider redesigning your legacy compensation and bonus systems to ensure that these insights drive the right behaviours across the organisation. Embedding a robust BI solution in your organisation can be the catalyst for undoing the traditional silo mentality that can arise when different functions perform to their own narrow targets. Factors affecting implementation speed The following four issues will affect the length of time it takes to build and roll out your new BI platform. Poor data mapping: it is critical to understand how different naming conventions are used across your systems. You should conduct a thorough data-mapping audit to ensure that independent systems can be bridged on common field names (by employee ID, customer ID, or product ID, for example). Doing this during the development of the BI solution is time-consuming, but products like Caragon Flex can make the process much more manageable. Organisational readiness: prepare your team for the effort required to clean up your data and, more importantly, how this information will be distributed and reviewed once it is live. Having a new suite of detailed analytics can be overwhelming for data consumers if it is not clearly understood what it will be used for. Also, inform your colleagues that they are not expected to understand every data point that surfaces in the reports. Absence of a project champion: projects that should take weeks often take months due to the lack of an internal project champion. It is vital to appoint one and empower them to ‘herd the cats’ to ensure the project is delivered on time. Unclear output requirements/moving targets: consider what you want to get out of the new BI platform and be ruthless in identifying the key reports and key performance indicators you will need at the outset. Solution providers will typically build a proof-of-concept model to illustrate the art of the possible. This is a good time to agree on the minimum requirements for Phase 1 – but don’t bite off more than you can chew. Some processes must change As the earlier examples show, digging deep on data to build robust processes across multiple systems will invariably highlight process weaknesses that, if not remedied, will compromise the integrity of any BI platform. Therefore, it is essential to understand at the outset that go-live and the ultimate success of the project will be contingent on staff being adequately trained in the new ways of working. This might, for example, mean retraining payroll staff on payroll coding so that the correct costs are tagged to the relevant activity. Similarly, invoicing processes may need to change to ensure that revenue can be appropriately tagged to achieve the desired level of reporting granularity. You should also introduce tighter controls on crucial data fields across your systems (customer codes, product codes or employee IDs, for example). In my experience, this is best achieved by having a data governance standing group, to which all data changes (or new data field creations) must go for approval and communication to other potentially affected users. In conclusion A BI implementation is an exciting journey for a company. To get the most from it, here are my top four tips: Appoint a data champion and BI steering committee to ensure the project both gains and sustains momentum, and the business is prepared for what’s coming. Take the time to fine-tune your data mapping processes. Phase your BI roll-out in bite-size chunks to avoid overwhelming the organisation. Create a sense of ‘new frontiers’ within the business as it embarks on its data-empowered journey. Paul Cullen FCA is CEO at 1Truth, a Belfast-based management information solutions provider.

Reform of the public sector accounting process to an accruals-based system of accounting is gaining momentum, but don’t expect the transition to be total in the short-term, warns Dr Brian Keegan. Last month, the Institute launched a report by Queen’s University Belfast academics, Prof Ciaran Connolly and Dr Elaine Stewart, into the modernisation of public sector accounting. Ireland has long managed its public finances on what essentially is a cash basis of accounting. Modernisation would migrate the State to an accruals basis for accounting for public spending. The fact of the matter is that government over the years has simply gotten bigger. There are 50,000 more people employed in the Irish public service than in 2011, and annual spending has almost doubled in that time. Despite the constant carping from opposition politicians and the commentariat, we have better education, better transport infrastructure, better regulation and governance, and better health services than we used to. All of this demands even more rigorous financial management. Recent surveys by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accounting and the International Federation of Accountants note that 25% of countries worldwide have already migrated to an accruals-based system of accounting. There is an expectation that this will rise to 65% in the next few years. The UK is already operating an accruals-based system of accounting. The Minister for Finance, Paschal Donohoe TD, announced in 2019 that, in part due to OECD prompting, Ireland would undertake a similar public sector changeover. Nevertheless, as the Connolly and Stewart report notes, even the successful adoption of accruals accounting has its pitfalls. A cash-based system of accounting often suits politicians and civil servants alike. It is more difficult to explain away misspent funds or fudge budgeting processes if everything has to be tied up in neat, unaccrued bundles at the end of each year. In Ireland, these pitfalls may be particularly pronounced because we are not good at multi-year politics. Perhaps the most obvious instance of this is pension reform, where there have been at least as many reports and policy papers as there have been governments in recent times. Multi-year capital investment programmes can also fall by the wayside. The 20-year National Spatial Strategy, devised in 2002, seemed to run out of room. Both attempts to establish rainy day funds this century have yielded empty kitties. Constant change is both the glory and the weakness of the democratic process. Introducing an accruals-based accounting system will undoubtedly result in benefits in expenditure management. However, the multi-year budgeting and planning process is a different matter entirely, inextricably linked as it is with the political cycle. The process of change already underway seems to have considerable momentum, and Ireland will have better public accounting systems within the next few years. Even before the 2019 announcement, there was a process of improvement underway with the introduction of a Budget Oversight Committee and a Parliamentary Budget Office. The latter organisation does excellent work in explaining the shape of the public finances. Yet, the complete transition to the accruals basis will have to be phased in, with a long journey towards total change that will include staff training and the typically painful wrangling of recalcitrant IT systems. Arguably the most important stakeholders in this process are government ministers. They stand to benefit most from improvements in the financial management of their departments. However, great plans for long-term investment or reform too often fall by the wayside when the responsible minister loses their job at the polls. The prospects of re-election frequently depend on immediate policies with immediate spend and immediate results. It will be harder to run a political campaign on accruals accounting principles. Dr Brian Keegan is Director of Advocacy & Voice at Chartered Accountants Ireland.

The membership has voted to re-elect the Officer Group for a second term as the Institute and broader profession seeks to re-emerge from the COVID-19 crisis. President Paul Henry, Deputy President Pat O’Neill and Vice-President Sinead Donovan discuss the year that was and explain their priorities for the year ahead. The re-election of the Officer Group for a second term is an unprecedented step in the Institute’s recent history. Can you explain the thinking behind it and outline what it will mean for members as we enter a new phase in living with COVID-19 and its consequences? Paul Henry (PH): At the recent AGM, a proposal was put to – and passed by – the membership of Chartered Accountants Ireland to extend the term of the Officer Group by one further year. The coronavirus pandemic effectively halted important parts of the President’s role, not least outreach and member representation activities. As such, Council felt that an extension of our term would provide an opportunity for the Officer Group to achieve our objectives in a meaningful way for the benefit of members while providing much-needed stability and continuity as the pandemic on the island of Ireland enters a new phase. Over the past year, I have sought to provide leadership at a time of uncertainty as the island grappled with the challenges of COVID-19 and Brexit. During that time, I – along with my colleagues in the Officer Group – supported the advocacy activity of the Institute to alleviate pressure points for members so that they could continue to deliver for their businesses and clients. I also focused on attracting new talent to the profession, continuing a long tradition of positioning the Chartered Accountant qualification as the gold standard for the accounting profession. Looking ahead, the Officer Group will continue to lay the foundations for renewed growth in the aftermath of the pandemic. The future is uncertain and, for many, survival is the sole objective. My goal is to help Chartered Accountants, both in business and as advisors to business, prepare for the challenges that will come as economies re-open and a new ‘business as usual’ takes hold. Pat O’Neill (PON): The profession has worked through many unprecedented issues since the middle of last year, and now we are figuring out how to emerge from a period of significant restriction. We deliberated on the benefits that continuity would bring and concluded that as the economy opens up, the President and the Officer Group will have an opportunity to advance the member-focused initiatives identified at our election in 2020. So in terms of overseeing the evolution of our education model – and in the last year, that has entailed keeping the path to qualification clear and open for our students and member firms – this continuity is vital. We are also focused on supporting our future pathway to being a more digital organisation for the benefit of our members. And not least, we need to support our members in dealing with the challenges of emerging from the pandemic and the Brexit transition. Sinead Donovan (SD): As an Officer Group, we spent much of our time over the past year in fire-fighting mode. We now have an opportunity to make progress on issues of critical importance on a more proactive basis, and our re-election allows us to conclude some complex issues while putting the Institute and the profession on a solid footing as the vaccination programme and economic recovery gathers pace. The virtual environment has been a largely positive experience for the Institute and its members, but not without its challenges. How can members and students expect their Institute to evolve as the vaccination programme continues and restrictions are eased? PH: Since the pandemic took hold, members have benefited from a greater degree of accessibility to their Institute, and that will continue. There will also be a continued emphasis on upskilling and knowledge sharing, as the Institute’s suite of webinars, bulletins, and other digital communications have been invaluable in helping members adapt to remote working while staying on top of relevant technical developments in the profession. We will also continue to work on our digital education offering. Last year, the Institute moved from a traditional in-person examination model to a virtual examination environment, condensing a five-year project into a far shorter period. There have been challenges and setbacks on this journey, and I acknowledge the difficulties our FAE students faced in April. We knew at the outset that there were risks involved in moving all examinations online, and it has been our objective over the last year to mitigate these risks to the greatest possible extent. More than 20,000 virtual exams have now been completed, and we will continue to work closely with our partners to test and develop the platform as we improve the Institute’s digital capabilities into the future. PON: The experience of the virtual working environment has been different for everyone. Large organisations, for example, have central functions, which makes the transition to a virtual working world that bit easier. In contrast, some smaller businesses and practices struggled to adjust to new technology and remote working norms while achieving some degree of work-life balance. And whether you are in business or practice, the process of developing relationships with new customers or clients has been challenging. Indeed, certain ways of working have changed irrevocably, but the value of face-to-face interaction cannot be overstated for many members. We have seen this demand for connection through increased engagement from the membership with services provided by the Institute, such as webinars and digital networking events. Our district societies, both in Ireland and abroad, have played a vital role in this regard, and as Paul said, the Institute was at the vanguard of online education delivery at the very outset of this pandemic. Although the Institute embarked on its digital journey before the arrival of COVID-19, we will continue our measured approach on that journey as we seek to maximise the benefit to our members. SD: One challenge that will become crucial for the Institute is the absence of in-person, on-the-job training, which many trainee Chartered Accountants have now missed out on. The profession may not see the impact of this development for several years. Yet, we must be mindful of this and work to ensure that those trainee Chartered Accountants most affected by the pandemic from a training perspective are upskilled accordingly in the months and years ahead. PH: That is correct, and we must also bear in mind that the current crop of students is missing out on vital peer-to-peer networking opportunities. One of the most notable benefits of my training has been the number of people who studied alongside me that ultimately became lifelong friends and business acquaintances. Unfortunately, students are missing out on that engagement and vital on-the-job learning that helps them develop critical soft skills, which are increasingly crucial for the Chartered Accountant of the future. The business community continues to grapple with a host of issues from Brexit and sustainability to good governance and diversity and inclusion. How is the Institute maintaining its focus on these issues while supporting its members through the COVID-19 crisis? PH: The Institute has adopted a proactive stance on these key issues, notably Brexit. There has been much debate about the Northern Ireland protocol. Irrespective of your position on it, the profession must endeavour to make the best of the situation in the best interest of the island of Ireland while becoming more familiar with the associated operational issues. In terms of sustainability, there is a clear opportunity for members to lead the charge in tackling the climate crisis. As business advisors, we can help people understand and record their sustainability activity and begin to report on that activity in a meaningful and confident way. This work will evolve greatly in the coming months.  The Institute also continues its work in critical areas such as diversity and inclusion and ethics and governance. Many members volunteer their time and expertise on a range of expert working groups, and I would like to express my gratitude to them for their involvement in the Institute and selfless work in the interest of the broader profession. This individual commitment is reflective of the broader societal contribution that we can make.  PON: It has been remarkable to see the extent to which, in particular this year, organisations have pivoted their narrative reporting to highlight their focus on issues such as governance, climate, and diversity and inclusion. We continue to promote these agenda items for our members through member committees, including those devoted to ethics and governance and diversity and inclusion. Much good work has been done in the past year or more, but the journey is just beginning in many respects. The Council of Chartered Accountants Ireland is very gender diverse. However, we have been working to ensure that diversity and inclusion are more formally incorporated into the appointments process for the Institute’s many boards and committees. I am glad to say that the Institute is moving in the right direction and at pace on many fronts. SD: 2021 is the year in which we need to take a giant leap forward in some of these areas. I fully appreciate the need to move forward with care, but the pandemic has also presented a catalyst for change. The past year has forced people to think about what has happened and what could happen in the future. At a very practical level, I have seen a distinct change in the rhetoric used around diversity and inclusion. There is still a degree of nervousness when it comes to asking specific questions of our membership, but I sense that the membership is becoming increasingly receptive to speaking out about diversity and sharing the many stories that are there to be told by our 29,500 members. And it isn’t just about our current members. The Institute and the profession as a whole must endeavour to be dynamic, vibrant, and attractive to the next generation of Chartered Accountants. We have made very good advances on that front in recent years, and it is up to us to maintain that momentum. Your re-election seeks to bring a sense of continuity to the profession at a critical juncture. But looking to the future, what is in store for the profession and its members in the decade ahead? And how will the Institute help them prepare for the changes that will come? PH: The future for Chartered Accountants is, in my view, very positive. People need advice in an increasingly complex world, and the members of our profession are trained to handle, interpret, and communicate technical information and data in a clear, accurate and insightful way. As the level of complexity grows, so too will the importance of those communication skills. And while artificial intelligence will support us in providing advice to clients, I don’t see it as a threat in any way. Instead, it will improve the insights we provide to our clients. PON: The Institute is working through its implementation of Strategy24. If I’m honest, the pandemic has meant that we need to be agile in terms of planning ahead. So, looking out to the end of our strategic planning period is difficult to do with much accuracy at the moment, not to mention beyond that. That said, issues such as the increasing digitalisation of business and the profession will be a challenge. Cybersecurity, automation, and analytics are becoming increasingly real for businesses. Business leaders – and, by extension, Chartered Accountants – must continue to embrace these developments. Taking a longer-term view, the Institute is also engaged with the Department of Education regarding the accounting syllabus in secondary schools in Ireland. This is an excellent example of the Institute looking forward and playing a very positive role in ensuring that the accountancy profession continues to play its part in shaping the education of the next generation of Chartered Accountants. What have you learned about leadership over the past year? And what do you see as the main challenges for leaders as the profession develops a shared understanding of the new world of work? PH: For me, the number one lesson has been the importance of communication. We have achieved a high level of communication at the Officer Group level and within the Executive Team at Chartered Accountants Ireland. However, many of the challenges faced by businesses worldwide during the pandemic arguably arise partly due to an inability to read the room in an online setting or notice nuances or concerns during a virtual meeting. I don’t think you can overstate the importance of this.  Another big lesson has been the importance of understanding the human side of your colleagues, and not just the professional side. It is vital to make time to get to know your colleagues and support them as we work through the months ahead. It could be something as simple as a 10-minute call with a cup of coffee to chat about anything other than work. Gestures such as this don’t take much effort or time, but the impact on your colleagues could be huge. PON: Flexibility is the word that springs to mind for me, the importance of adapting your leadership style. During this pandemic, I have learnt the importance of understanding the challenges and pressures my colleagues face beyond the office. It is important to reassure people that it’s okay to feel under pressure, to prioritise family and to look after their own wellbeing. Flexibility affords us all the opportunity to prioritise different areas of our lives while still achieving our professional goals, and harnessing this opportunity will be of great importance into the future. SD: I agree wholeheartedly with the point about communication. I have found that people with different personality traits have responded differently to the pandemic and the resultant lockdowns. So for me, the big lesson has been taking time to check in on individuals on your team, particularly those who might be closer to the introversion end of the scale. The extroverts, I have found, have managed during the pandemic as they can get their feelings across in a virtual setting, but that is not the case for all colleagues. If you want to get the best out of people and ultimately avoid losing excellent talent, leaders need to communicate and engage with their people in a meaningful way and on an ongoing basis. In that context, wellness must be a priority for all leaders – including us. As an Officer Group, we will therefore continue to raise awareness about the benefits of wellness initiatives and promote the many valuable webinars and other wellness initiatives hosted by CA Support and the various District Societies. Finally, what is in focus for you as you enter your second term? PH: The focus will be on building supports for members as the vaccine roll-out continues, economies re-open, and the recovery takes hold. There is also an opportunity to support the government and the public sector. We have begun to increase our activity in this space – not least with the recent publication of a position paper on proposed reforms to Irish public sector accounting, launched by Minister Michael McGrath – and that will continue in the year ahead. I would also like to take this opportunity to thank Barry Dempsey and the leadership and staff of Chartered Accountants Ireland for their sterling work over the course of the last year. It was a year of many firsts – the first virtual annual general meeting, the first virtual conferences, the first virtual conferring ceremonies, the first virtual student recruitment campaign, and the first virtual regulatory inspections. The staff have ensured continuity of service for members in the most challenging circumstances while innovating beyond what we thought possible just two years ago. Their efforts are greatly appreciated by the Officer Group, Council, and the membership at large. PON: There will also be a strong sense of continuity in the second term. For example, the Institute has made great strides in advocacy and raising the voice of the profession – and that will continue. The Institute is undoubtedly the best spokesperson for members in terms of the challenges they will face and the supports they will need as we re-emerge from the COVID-19 crisis. We will also seek to play our part in building trust in the profession. This is an emerging area, particularly with regard to developments concerning regulation in the United Kingdom. These developments will directly impact our members in Northern Ireland and possibly have a trailing impact for members elsewhere. It will be important to support our members through that process and we will do so in the first instance by responding in July to the United Kingdom’s consultation on proposed reforms to restore trust in audit and corporate governance. SD: Re-emergence is probably a good word to describe the theme of our second term. There will, of course, be an initial knee-jerk reaction to bring people together and enjoy face-to-face interaction once more, but we must not lose sight of the benefits of the hybrid working model. We need to ensure that we re-emerge from this pandemic in a safe and protected manner, but also in a way that embraces change for the benefit of our colleagues and organisations.

Paul Henry shares his thoughts on the challenges ahead following his re-election as President of Chartered Accountants Ireland for a second successive term. It has been my privilege to serve as President of Chartered Accountants Ireland for the last year, and in a sign of these unusual times, I find myself at the mid-way point of a two-year term of office. I feel incredibly fortunate to represent our almost 30,000-strong membership once again as we move into what I hope will be a brighter time for us all. I want to express my appreciation to my colleagues on Council, and my fellow Officer Group members, for affording me the opportunity to continue to lead the work we started together this time last year. It is a pleasure to be joined by Pat O’Neill and Sinead Donovan in this issue of Accountancy Ireland for a round-table discussion on the issues of importance for our members and students. This will be a year of adaptation as we recover and grow again. It is more crucial than ever that I, as President, my Council colleagues, and our entire organisation channel our collective energies to empower our profession to fulfil its mandate, “for tomorrow, for good”. For society and the economy at large, the last year has been one of worry, isolation, and loss. The public health crisis has persisted for longer than most of us expected, and it has tested us. As human beings, we are not designed to operate at such removes from each other. We are now at an inflexion point, as a combination of prudent public health measures and successful vaccination delivery facilitate reopening and a greater sense of sustained optimism than there has been to date. This time of year is an inflexion point for Chartered Accountants Ireland too – a chance to reflect and plan for the coming months. While it may feel like we have been running to stand still during the pandemic, it is important to reflect on what has been achieved. It was a year of firsts: our first virtual AGM, our first entirely virtual conferences, the virtual completion of examinations, our first virtual conferring ceremonies, and our first virtual student recruitment campaign, to name a few. We have seen a surge in member engagement, which shows that what we are doing is resonating. I thank the Institute’s staff for their commitment to making this possible. I thank our members for their perseverance and resilience in delivering to the high standards that our profession demands in practices, businesses, and the public sector at home and abroad. Our profession has played an instrumental role in supporting businesses in keeping the show on the road in the face of immense challenge. And there is so much still to do. I said last year that recovery from the pandemic would be the challenge of a generation, and all of us will be called on to show even greater leadership and resilience. I look forward to leading the Institute in meeting this challenge. Chartered Accountants Ireland will continue to work on behalf of members this year as your strongest supporter and ceaseless advocate. We will work to promote the profession in which we hold such pride to a new generation. And above all, we will position our shared expertise to contribute to a meaningful and sustainable recovery. I was asked recently as President what career tips I would give to my younger self, and right up there was my advice to build a strong team and keep hold of them. The stronger the team, the better the outcome. None of us can meet the challenges of the future without a collaborative approach, and I look forward to working with you, and for you, this year. Paul Henry is the President of Chartered Accountants Ireland.

Minister Michael McGrath provides an update on the National Recovery & Resilience Plan and the National Development Plan, as Ireland sets about rebuilding its economy with a focus on sustainability and resilience. In the past 15 months, the world has been hit by a massive health and economic crisis, unprecedented in modern times. No country could possibly try to tackle this on its own. By collaborating with international partners, we have been able to harness the best available medical knowledge for diagnosis, treatment, and vaccination against COVID-19. It was clear from early on in the pandemic that, as well as a concerted medical response to the crisis, there would need to be a dedicated economic plan to mitigate the economic impact. In July of last year, EU leaders met against a backdrop of growing turmoil in member states over the impact on people’s livelihoods. At this summit, an agreement was reached on a recovery package to complement the work of national governments.  The National Recovery & Resilience Plan NextGenerationEU The European Union’s €750 billion NextGenerationEU recovery instrument, along with the Union’s trillion-euro budget for the next seven years, is central to the EU’s response to the global pandemic. There is an important difference in the EU’s response to the global pandemic compared to the response to the financial crash. Lessons have been learnt, and the EU moved quickly to reassure member states that we would be supported. NextGenerationEU aims to help repair the immediate economic and social damage brought about by the pandemic and prepare for a post-COVID Europe that is greener, more digital, more resilient, and fit to face the future. The Recovery and Resilience Facility is the largest component of NextGenerationEU, making €672.5 billion available to member states in the form of grants and loans to stimulate economies and improve conditions for citizens. Every crisis is also an opportunity and, as we move on from COVID-19, we must use these funds to make a real difference to our country, reform where it’s needed, and put climate action at the top of our agenda. The Recovery and Resilience Facility and Ireland Ireland is expected to receive €915 million in grants under the facility in 2021 and 2022. A further set of grants is to be allocated in 2023, taking into account economic developments between now and then. To access this funding, Ireland has developed a National Recovery & Resilience Plan for approval by the European Union. The plan sets out the reforms and investments to be supported by the facility. My Department of Public Expenditure & Reform is responsible for preparing this plan, along with the Department of the Taoiseach and the Department of Finance. Other departments have also given their input to ensure a coordinated ‘whole of government’ approach. We are all on the same page when it comes to using these funds wisely and getting the best possible value from this investment. Recovery and Resilience Facility The Recovery and Resilience Facility is structured around six pillars:  Green transition; Digital transformation; Economic cohesion, productivity and competitiveness; Social and territorial cohesion; Health, economic, social and institutional resilience; and Policies for the next generation, as well as seven flagships identified by the Commission. Addressing green and digital transition is a hallmark of the facility. National plans must devote a minimum of 37% of expenditure to climate and 20% to digital investments and reforms. Plans should also seek to address seven flagship areas identified for reforms and investments: Clean technologies and the acceleration of development and use of renewables; Energy efficiency of public and private buildings; Sustainable, accessible, and smart transport; Roll-out of rapid broadband services, including fibre and 5G networks; Digitalisation of public administration; Increase in European industrial data cloud capacities and the development of powerful and sustainable processors; and Adaptation of education systems to support digital skills and educational and vocational training. Member states are required to embed the measures they plan to take in their national budgetary processes. The plans must also strike a balance between reforms and investments and seek to address challenges identified in the relevant Country Specific Recommendations. Ireland’s Plan and Projects Ireland’s Plan has a particular focus on green and digital transition, as well as supporting economic recovery and job creation. It is aligned with the National Economic Recovery Plan and has been developed alongside the ongoing review of the National Development Plan. Priorities for the National Economic Recovery Plan aligned with the National Recovery & Resilience Plan include climate actions and reforms; digital delivery of public services; social and economic reforms; digital transformation and adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies by SMEs; and research and innovation. The National Recovery & Resilience Plan includes a suite of projects focused on: Advancing the green transition; Accelerating and expanding digital reforms and transformation; and Social and economic recovery and job creation. Several large-scale reforms and investments are included to maximise the impact of the funds provided. Next steps National plans must meet stringent EU requirements set out in the Recovery and Resilience Facility regulation before they receive approval from the European Commission and the Council of Ministers. Intensive negotiations with the European Commission have been underway in recent months, and Ireland’s plan will be considered carefully for two months before it is approved. The facility is a performance-based instrument, which means that demanding milestones and targets must be met before funding can be drawn down – and this is as it should be. As well as milestones and targets, requirements include green and digital expenditure tagging, detailed costings, an appropriate control and audit framework, and compliance with the ‘do no significant harm’ principle. Plans should demonstrate a lasting impact on member states, whether by strengthening job creation and social resilience, whether the expenditure is reasonable compared with the expected return, and whether suitable control mechanisms are in place to prevent corruption, fraud, and conflict of interest.   European solidarity The lifetime of this Government will see Ireland mark 50 years of EU membership. Our membership has played an immense role in our social, economic, and political development. The values of the European Union are our values. That is why the Programme for Government sets out a vision of Ireland at the heart of Europe and global citizenship. During the five decades, we have benefited from the solidarity that comes with membership. We have seen this over the last year as we responded to the global pandemic and in the previous five years as we navigated the challenges posed by Brexit. In the Recovery and Resilience Facility, we see further evidence of that solidarity. In the coming weeks and months, the National Recovery & Resilience Plan, along with the National Economic Recovery Plan and the National Development Plan, will enable us to move beyond the pandemic to rebuild the economy and improve our country for all. We have been through a difficult period, and the economic and social scars cannot be underestimated or dismissed. However, decisions at the EU level have shown that we really are all in this together. Member states will be supported in finding their way forward, and we will emerge as a stronger and more resilient EU. The National Development Plan Creating our shared future Like accountants, ministers and civil servants are analytical thinkers, carefully scrutinising the driving forces of change, the prevailing macro-economic factors, and the views of the people we serve. We depend on evidence and numbers, and this analysis is vital as we craft the revised National Development Plan, which is due for publication later this year. The National Development Plan is one half of Project Ireland 2040. Launched in 2018, it sets out the investment priorities that underpin the implementation of the National Planning Framework. When this Government took office last July, we set about tackling the many challenges we face as a country, including the COVID-19 pandemic, Brexit, housing, and an uncertain political landscape. Our country is at a critical stage in its development, and there has been much discussion about an ‘infrastructure-led recovery’ across the globe. We know that we need to create opportunities to rebuild a better Ireland for all, as without substantial reform, we risk repeating the mistakes of the past. Investment decisions must support broader economic, environmental, and social outcomes. Our national recovery requires a holistic approach involving the contribution of both urban and rural areas. It is my view that we should take the opportunity to create the foundations for long-term, sustained economic growth. That is why, on taking office last July, I asked my officials to bring forward the mooted review of the National Development Plan. Economic context Our population is set to grow by one million people by 2040. The infrastructure implications of that alone are enormous. We must ensure we have thriving and sustainable communities for future generations. Ireland’s economy was the only one to grow in the EU last year. The European Commission expects Irish GDP to grow by 3.4% in 2021 and marginally faster in 2022. These are solid numbers considering the global challenges we’re facing. The impact of COVID-19 on our working lives has been seismic. We have undertaken the greatest global home-working experiment ever, moving it from the fringes to the mainstream. The Government’s National Remote Work Strategy helps to make remote working a permanent option in Ireland. It plans to give employees a legal right to request remote working and to introduce a code of practice on the right to disconnect. The Strategy commits to investment in remote work hubs and the development of the national broadband plan. The Programme for Government characterises the climate emergency as the single greatest challenge facing humanity. We are the first generation to truly feel the effects of climate change, and we may be the last to have an opportunity to reverse it. This is why we have to act now. In the public consultation we undertook, there was near consensus that the revised National Development Plan will have to be viewed through a climate lens. Public Spending Code We need to ensure that the right policy settings are in place. Rigorous cost-benefit analysis is essential, particularly in the current economic climate. As part of the ongoing reform of Ireland’s public investment management system, the Department of Public Expenditure & Reform has reviewed and updated the Public Spending Code. The review was informed by an extensive consultation process involving engagement with public officials and an examination of international best practice. Importantly, the Public Spending Code also incorporates learnings from various capital projects in Ireland, including the National Children’s Hospital. The update to the Public Spending Code specifically strengthens the existing guidance to better reflect the realities of project delivery with a particular focus on financial appraisal, cost estimation, and risk management. The updated Public Spending Code: Supports public bodies in delivering greater value for money; Provides greater clarity on roles and responsibilities; Revises the project life-cycle to reflect the realities of project delivery; Strengthens guidance; and Increases transparency through the publication of business cases and evaluation reports. This update followed an extensive consultation process, and as a result, there is a stronger focus on cost estimation and professional project management. We have also learned from international experience when it comes to managing mega-projects over €100 million. There are at least 40 projects in this category in the National Development Plan. Later this year, we will have a new governance and assurance process for major projects. This will involve two external reviews of major projects at key points in the project life-cycle by independent experts in infrastructure delivery. I have asked my ministerial colleagues to rigorously assess the costs of existing planned projects to ensure that those costs are up-to-date and realistic. I am also developing a new external review process for all major projects worth over €100 million. The process In early April, I published the Phase 1 Report on the Review of the National Development Plan. The work carried out as part of Phase 1 included:  Macro-economic analysis; Public capital expenditure and infrastructure demand analyses; Consideration of climate action, housing, and planning; and Alignment with the National Planning Framework. The Phase 1 report also includes detail on the successful public consultation process, Review to Renew, which generated 572 submissions. Phase 2 will involve detailed engagement with colleague departments to agree on capital allocations for the coming period and priority programmes for inclusion in the new National Development Plan. Combined, this is a solid evidence base that will allow us, as a Government, to make informed decisions and bring forward a new National Development Plan in the summer of 2021. Michael McGrath is Minister for Public Expenditure & Reform, a TD for Cork South Central, and a Fellow of Chartered Accountants Ireland.

Julia Rowan answers your management, leadership, and team development questions. Q. I did really well at the beginning of the lockdown, but it’s beginning to feel like a struggle. We worked hard before, but COVID-19 has added at least 15% to our workload. I’m trying to remain positive and upbeat with my team, but I feel I’m running on empty. There is so much in this short question – the pressure to be positive, the desire to mind your team. And I appreciate how important it is to be positive, but what kind of positive? Leaders often want, with great intention, to protect their teams – from negativity, from too much work, from politics. The problem is that the leader then takes on the dual burden of protecting and being positive. That’s exhausting. You manage a team of adults. Trust yourself to be real with them. You don’t want to be relentlessly negative (‘everything is awful’), but unrealistic positivity (‘everything is awesome’) is not doing anyone any favours. You can be positively realistic (‘it’s harder with COVID-19, let’s talk about how we cope with that’). Not having to pretend will allow you to show up more authentically, and that gives permission to others to be authentic. I generally find that when teams are allowed the space to express how difficult things are, they find solutions and ways forward. Not having to pretend releases creativity. By being realistic, you have not stopped supporting the team – you are supporting them in a more useful way. I’m a huge fan of journalling to become aware of our drivers and then put them to good use. Positivity, perfectionism, and people-pleasing are drivers I come across all the time. Becoming more conscious of them helps us to channel them more usefully. Q. An experienced member of my team continually asks for direction. The quality of their work is good, but I have to spend a lot of time briefing them, checking, and so on. I’m not sure how to address this or whether I should just let sleeping dogs lie. My first response to this question is to ask whether your team member’s need stems from their ‘will’ (confidence, motivation) or their ‘skill’ (ability). You tell me that the quality of their work is good, so my guess is that their skill is okay, and the issue is confidence. There is also the possibility that they are simply in the habit of asking you. The next time this person asks you for input about a task, engage in a different kind of conversation and provide a different kind of support. Ask questions that allow them to access their knowledge and experience and build on their strengths and achievements. If there is a genuine lack of confidence, be sure to reassure and give positive feedback. You need to prepare for this because on a busy day, it’s very easy to get bounced back into the usual way of doing things. Write out some good questions in advance. I often advise leaders to respond carefully when asked a ‘How do I…?’ question and reflect on what the person asking the question truly needs: is it advice, confidence, or permission? Julia Rowan is Principal Consultant at Performance Matters, a leadership and team development consultancy. To send a question to Julia, email julia@performancematters.ie   

Barrie O’Connell considers how Ireland can achieve continued success in international financial services after three decades of momentous growth. As a semi-senior auditing investments and subscriptions in the offices of Chemical Bank on Lower Abbey Street in the late 1990s, I knew little of the influence international financial services (IFS) would have on my career as a Chartered Accountant. Ireland has built a thriving IFS industry over the last three decades. This success can be measured using several metrics, some of which are outlined in Table 1. So, what are the factors behind this success? In my view, Ireland’s strategic approach and talent have been the two key enablers. Chartered Accountants have played – and will continue to play – a key role when it comes to talent. The ‘Ireland for Finance’ strategy In 2019, the Government of Ireland launched the Ireland for Finance 2025 strategy. The strategy was developed by the Department of Finance, with input from a range of stakeholders, and is part of the current Programme for Government. It contains four pillars: Operating environment; Technology and innovation; Talent; and Communications and promotion. The Ireland for Finance 2025 strategy is aligned with other key Government strategies, including the National Development Plan and the National Digital Strategy. A refresh of the strategy will likely be undertaken after the COVID-19 pandemic to account for the permanent impact on the future of work, the changing operating environment, and the intense competition from other IFS investment locations. Each year, the Department of Finance also publishes an action plan and an update on actions. This allows each action to be measured and provides accountability, as each action has an owner. The IFS team within the Department of Finance plays a significant role in supporting the strategy’s implementation. There is also a dedicated Minister of State for IFS at the Department of Finance, which ensures continuing focus on the sector. Coincidentally, the current Minister, Sean Fleming TD, is a Chartered Accountant. Operating environment Ireland has enjoyed great success as an IFS location for a long time. With new entrants relocating here due to Brexit, there is the prospect of more to come. This will remain the case while there is uncertainty around UK firms’ ability to achieve financial services equivalence and, thus, access to EU markets post-Brexit. However, the environment for IFS is increasingly competitive. Industry participants continually face pressure to optimise their business by delivering new and innovative products and exploiting process and location efficiencies. They must deliver on these issues while serving their customers’ needs and ensuring the global financial system’s continued stability. The industry is more technology-intensive than ever, and artificial intelligence (AI) and automation present both opportunities and challenges for Ireland. We must continue to position ourselves as a location that is open to providing an innovative, supportive, and dynamic environment for companies that seek to leverage our expertise and history in technology and financial services. After COVID-19, other countries will redouble their efforts to attract investment. As IFS is a mobile sector, Ireland must be agile and adapt quickly to the new environment. The IFS sector has been remarkably resilient over the last year, and I am impressed by how the sector adapted to remote working and continued to deliver for customers. This resilience is a key differentiator, and the collective ability to solve issues gives Ireland credibility and trust in a global marketplace – something that is noted internationally. Track record The IDA and Enterprise Ireland have both contributed to the development of the country’s IFS industry. I am continually impressed by the IDA’s work with overseas companies and Enterprise Ireland’s work to create opportunities for indigenous companies to operate successfully from Ireland. Indeed, these organisations are the envy of many other countries globally. Irish Funds is another excellent example. It works relentlessly at an international level to promote Ireland as a funds location, and the quality of the content at its events is compelling and demonstrates some of the best qualities of ‘Team Ireland’. Meanwhile, the European Financial Forum, usually hosted in Dublin Castle, was hosted virtually this year. It is another superb showcase of what Ireland offers in IFS to companies operating globally and is supported by an effective regulatory environment with a fully independent Financial Services Regulator. The development of the “IFS Ireland” brand has been a crucial first step in building an integrated offering across different sectors. We must now market Ireland with consistency and in new and innovative ways.  The secret sauce Ireland’s key asset is its people and talent. Ireland has a well-educated, highly-skilled, flexible, internationally diverse and multilingual workforce. Our demographics are favourable, with 33% of the population less than 25 years old and over 50% of those between 30-34 holding a third-level qualification. Chartered Accountants’ skills and attributes are a good fit for this sector, and I am aware of so many Chartered Accountants Ireland members who have cultivated successful careers in IFS – not just in Dublin, but throughout Ireland. The executive and senior management teams in IFS in Ireland, many of them Chartered Accountants, are a vital ingredient in our competitive advantage. They advocate with head office, look to develop and grow the offering based in Ireland, and are prepared to manage global operations from Ireland – and often exceed expectations when they do. Many have very senior global roles in large IFS organisations, and we don’t always acknowledge them and their relentless focus on expanding their organisation’s footprint in Ireland enough. For example, the recently announced acquisition of GECAS by AerCap, headquartered in Dublin, is a fantastic transaction that demonstrates Ireland’s position as a world leader in aviation finance. Caution needed Now is the time for Ireland to redouble its efforts. Some commentators suggest that the future of work will alter the relationship between talent and location, but I am inclined to challenge this hypothesis. In my view, where the executive and senior management teams are based will continue to be a key consideration for an organisation’s location. With accelerating disruption and digital transformation impacting the IFS sector, Ireland must be aware and adapt accordingly. In the coming years, protecting existing jobs may well be as important as growing the number of those employed in the sector. Ireland must therefore invest in education and training to ensure that workers stay relevant and productive and harness the strengths of Ireland’s technology sector to position Ireland as a leader in technology-based financial services and platform development. Chartered Accountants Ireland’s FAE elective in Financial Services is a welcome development in this regard. Action Plan 2021 The IFS Action Plan 2021, which is available to download at www.gov.ie, outlines several priorities in this regard, including sustainable finance and fintech. These areas have huge growth potential and present an opportunity for Ireland to take a leadership position globally. Sustainable finance and environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria are strategically important to all companies. It is fitting that the Minister highlighted both as critical areas of focus for 2021 and beyond. Ireland’s recently enacted Investment Limited Partnership (ILP) legislation was an objective in the action plan for several years and has the potential to deliver significant growth in the private equity area. The Central Bank of Ireland also issued a stakeholder engagement consultation in recent weeks, and this will be a key focus for the 2021 action plan. Cause for optimism IFS is a vital element of Ireland’s overall economic strategy. Like all strategies, the strategy for IFS must be continually reviewed and adapted as the world evolves. Given our talent, flexibility, and drive, there is much cause for optimism while resisting complacency. It is incredible to see what started in the IFSC now present in every corner of Ireland, from Killorglin to Letterkenny. Yes, IFS in Ireland will need to change, adapt and continue to improve. But for newly qualified and experienced Chartered Accountants alike, the opportunities in IFS are almost limitless. Go and explore them for yourself. Barrie O’Connell is Partner in KPMG and Chartered Accountants Ireland’s representative on the Ireland for Finance Strategy 2025 Industry Advisory Group.  

The coronavirus pandemic accelerated the journey towards the fourth industrial revolution and new threats emerged in the process. Business leaders must therefore think about cybersecurity in a new way, writes Dani Michaux. Over the past year, we have seen significant geopolitical changes driven by the impact of COVID-19, forcing organisations to strengthen their resilience. The realisation has also dawned that the world as we once knew it has changed. Amid all of this, I see a new and very different operating model emerging for business. That new operating model is based on various restructuring activities, accelerating digitalisation initiatives, alternative partnership models, and a sharper focus on core activities. As organisations pivot, it is essential to reflect and consider the risks that may emerge as part of these organisational changes. What do the changes mean for the organisation, its supply chain partners and players, connected industry, government, and broader society? One prominent challenge is the need to safeguard the new digital ecosystem, which underpins this transformation, from cyberattack and information infrastructure breakdown. The world kept turning in 2020 During the early part of 2020, we saw an increased number of CEO identity frauds, payment frauds, ransomware attacks, and crude attacks on insecure cloud services. As the year grew old, we saw more complex attacks targeting supply chains, major cloud environments, remote working applications, security product providers, and even critical infrastructure services. This time last year, we claimed that cybersecurity is key to achieving the fourth industrial revolution. COVID-19 has accelerated that revolution and the use of digital and cloud technologies in both the public and private sectors. Those technologies are now fundamental to our society. Sadly, the pandemic has also shown that organised crime is opportunistic and ruthless in exploiting events to gain financial advantage. Thus, we witnessed a steady stream of high-profile cyberattacks on private enterprise, government, and social media platforms during the year. It is nevertheless encouraging to observe the pace at which organisations rolled out robust digital infrastructure during difficult times and the collaboration between business, technology, and security teams to safeguard these rapidly deployed services. It illustrates how these often-siloed parties can work together effectively to introduce secure innovation at market speed. COVID-19 has propelled Chief Information Security Officers (CISO) into a new dimension. Suddenly, they must manage thousands of home-working sites, personal devices, and a rapid shift to the cloud. The CISO has moved from securing corporate IT boundaries to a broader view of enterprise security. The timescale for many cloud migration projects has collapsed from years to months in the race to meet fast-changing business needs. Hyperscale cloud providers are increasingly dominant and intently focused on security. To succeed in the future, security teams must: Reskill employees to reflect the split of responsibilities between enterprise and cloud-service providers; Adapt to agile development methods and new digital channels; and Enact these innovations while cloud security skills attract a premium salary as the global job market competes for much-needed talent in 2021. The rise of supply chain attacks Political and business leaders have become alert to the global interdependence of many critical functions and the nature of risk that cross-border supply chains have. The pandemic made these murky operational and systemic risks real and gave people pause for thought. Supply chain attacks are not new. However, in the new highly digitalised and interconnected world, they are becoming more prominent. Frequent attacks raise concerns about organisations’ ability to remain resilient. We have seen several prominent cases over the past few years. Examples include the Target cybersecurity attack, where a network intrusion may have exposed approximately 40 million debit and credit card accounts; a global cyber-espionage campaign known as ‘Operation Cloud Hopper’, which formed part of a shift to target managed service providers; a worldwide campaign against telecommunications providers called ‘Operation Soft Cell’; and the latest cyberattack on Solarwinds, a global provider of network management solutions. A common theme in these attacks is the presence of third-party providers of hardware, services, or software. In complex infrastructure, set-ups that include rapid pivoting to new environments and dependencies on third-party suppliers are both common and intimate. Third-party providers are targeted with the ultimate aim of reaching a bigger mark. The methods and duration of the compromise vary, but there are some common patterns. These include exploiting speed and rapid deployment challenges and looking for exposures in security controls as firms shift rapidly to new technology. Of course, smaller organisations within the supply chain may also attract greater attention, based on the assumption of reduced sophistication and scale of security operations. Lessons can be learned from sectors like oil and gas, where human safety is at the top of executive agendas and assumptions are challenged continuously. It starts from the proposition that you cannot assume that anything will work in the event of an explosion. For example, a company might have a procedure to pre-book hospital beds for casualties, but what happens if the hospital doesn’t have a burns unit? What happens if the ambulances can’t get to the site of the explosion? These things have to be planned for in advance, requiring creative paranoia and a certain mindset. That’s the type of culture of resilience that should be in place in all organisations. It is a question of overall operational resilience, not just the resilience of IT systems and security. In this complex world, organisations should address the following practical questions: 1. Understand the risks and dependencies in the supply chain. Here are some questions to ask: What are the threats and exposures associated with third-party access to your environments, services, and products? Do you have contractual agreements in place with clear service level agreements concerning expectations around cybersecurity? Are you in a position to monitor those, including supplier activities? Do you monitor exposures and cyber risks associated with the supply chain and discuss these issues as part of an ongoing agenda within the organisation’s management and risk committees? 2. Understand the full extent of the supply chain within the existing environment and any changes arising from new digitalisation initiatives. Here are some questions to ask: How has the profile changed based on the rapid digitisation, restructuring and transformation initiatives in place? Do you have a view further down the supply chain (to fourth- and fifth-party providers, for example)? 3. Make arrangements to respond to supply chain cyberattacks collectively. Here are some questions to ask: Are there any mechanisms in place? Have you exercised these? Has the organisation included lessons learned from previous attacks? How has the organisation adapted based on the lessons learned from incidents? Are any other improvements required? Stepping into the future As we look to the future of highly digitalised and scalable environments, resilience will be paramount and non-negotiable. Organisational resilience will rely heavily on the stability of the end-to-end supply chain. However, it will also require a new approach to data security. The hunt will be on for cybersecurity orchestration opportunities, robotic process automation around manual security processes, more integration with key IT workflows, and new managed service and delivery models. Third-party security may also need new models for more dynamic risk management and scoring, including better tracking of supply chain stresses. Of course, assessments such as SOC 2 and ISAE 3402 will play a growing role as firms seek to provide evidence once to satisfy myriad client questions about cybersecurity. However, we can also expect to see the rise of ‘utility models’ where intermediary organisations aggregate client assurance requirements to undertake a one-size-almost-fits-all assessment of suppliers’ cybersecurity. This is already happening in the UK with the support of financial regulators. Over the last few years, firms have also sprung up offering risk scoring services based on a scan of a firm’s internet-facing services. They also monitor for data disclosures in the shady corners of the internet and alert customers to a potential supplier problem that they may not be aware of or are yet to disclose. Large companies will often ask these risk-scoring services to monitor hundreds of suppliers. As the outsourcing of non-core business services accelerates, it is worth asking: do you pay sufficient attention to your dependency on third-party actors who are now integral to your security and resilience as a business? As we look to the future, organisations will need to move on from thinking exclusively about enterprise firewalls, anti-virus software, and patching policies. Instead, they will need to consider approaches to security. This begins with the premise that a company’s success is based upon its reputation, which is ultimately a manifestation of the trust others have in its offerings. This mindset leads companies to embed security into products and services, but it also focuses attention on protecting customers, clients, and those increasingly important supply chain partners. It emphasises stewardship of the trust they place in you when they share their most sensitive data or show their willingness to become dependent on you. No organisation is an island, and all of us are part of an increasingly hyperconnected world. In that world, trust in supply chains and ecosystem partnerships matters more than ever. Dani Michaux is Head of Cybersecurity at KPMG Ireland.

Neil Hughes outlines the survival options for small- and medium-sized businesses as the ‘next normal’ approaches. In general, 2018 and 2019 were good years for Irish business. Many companies entered 2020 with stronger balance sheets, relatively low debt levels, aggressive growth targets, and optimism – particularly in the small- and medium-sized enterprise (SME) sector. By Q2 2020, however, firefighting due to COVID-19 restrictions quickly soaked up all available management time and resources. Growth strategies were shelved, and survival was prioritised. Government supports were immediately made available to companies severely affected by the pandemic. Figures released by Revenue in February 2021 show that the State paid out a total of €9.3 billion in 2020 between the Pandemic Unemployment Payment (€5.1 billion), Temporary Wage Subsidy Scheme (€2.8 billion) and the Employment Wage Subsidy Scheme (€1.4 billion). Seventy thousand companies have availed of the Revenue Commissioners’ Debt Warehousing Scheme, at a total cost of around €1.9 billion. These supports, along with the forbearance provided by financial institutions in Ireland, have helped prevent a tsunami of corporate insolvencies. The concern, however, is if post-pandemic those companies that ultimately need help the most will not reach out and avail of the supports and processes available. Overcoming the stigma It is regrettable that, historically at least, the use of formal corporate insolvency mechanisms to restructure struggling businesses has been viewed quite negatively by the Irish business community. The inference is that such businesses were somehow mismanaged when, in reality, this was often not the case. Companies can fall into financial difficulty for various reasons. Factors outside the control of company directors can necessitate a formal restructure rather than the terminal alternative of liquidation. Now, in the middle of a pandemic, a previously successful business operator, through no fault of their own, can find themselves saddled with an unsustainable level of debt and risk becoming insolvent. While government support measures were necessary to prevent widespread corporate failures and potential social unrest, for many companies, these actions may have simply delayed the inevitable and kicked the can further down the road. In most corporate insolvencies, there is an expected level of pressure for money that the company does not have, which precipitates a formal restructure. This pressure has been temporarily released, but the creditor strain will inevitably build again when trading resumes. ‘Zombie’ companies Low insolvency numbers for 2020 are therefore misleading. There is anecdotal evidence to suggest that several companies have ceased trading, have no intention of reopening and, in some instances, have handed the keys of their premises back to landlords. However, these ‘zombie’ companies are not included in the insolvency statistics, as they continue to avail of government supports and will be wound up whenever the supports end. While helpful, the subsidies and supports do not cover the entire running costs of a business, and many companies continue to rack up debt as their doors remain closed. These debts may seem insurmountable, but there is hope. The Great Recession vs the COVID-19 crisis This current recession is in stark contrast to the ‘Great Recession’ that resulted from the banking crisis of 2008. Back then, there was a systemic lack of liquidity in the market due to the collapse of Ireland’s banking sector, which left SMEs with little or no access to funding. This time, there are several re-capitalisation options with banks (including the new challenger banks) in a position to provide funding, especially through the Strategic Banking Corporation of Ireland (SBCI) Loan Scheme. Many private equity funds are also willing and ready to invest in Irish businesses. After the pandemic All the while, the Government can borrow at negative interest rates to stimulate growth and recovery. With the vaccine roll-out, we are starting to see the light at the end of the tunnel. This begs the question: what will happen when the pandemic is over? There are several key points to note: Consumer behaviour: it is reasonable to assume that a large portion of the population will revert to normal. This could generate a domestic economy similar to the rejuvenation that followed the Spanish Flu pandemic of 1918 and the end of the First World War. There is certainly pent-up demand and savings (deposits held in Irish financial institutions were at an all-time high of €124 billion in late 2020). Unfortunately, a portion of society will change their consumer habits forever due to COVID-19, which will have a detrimental effect on businesses that find themselves on the wrong side of history and unable to survive the recovery. Government action: how the Government reacts will have lasting repercussions. Difficult and unpopular decisions are likely required to pay for the ever-rising cost of the pandemic and its restrictions. Such choices may result in an increase in direct and/or indirect taxes, with less disposable income circulating in the economy. The UK Government has already made moves in this direction with its 2021 budget. The Revenue Commissioners: Revenue’s intended course of action is currently unclear in relation to clawing back the €1.9 billion of tax that has been warehoused or how aggressively it will pursue Irish companies for current tax debt after the pandemic is over. Early indicators are that Revenue will revert to a business-as-usual strategy sooner rather than later. Banks and other financial lenders: the attitude of Irish banks and financial institutions to non-performing loans remains to be seen. Banks have been accommodating to date and worked with, rather than against, borrowers – a criticism levelled against them in the wake of the 2008 banking collapse. Personal guarantees provided by directors to financial institutions to acquire corporate debt, particularly in the SME sector, will have a significant bearing on successful corporate restructuring options. The attitude of landlords: landlords in Ireland are a broad church, ranging from those with small, family-operated single units to large, multi-unit institutional landlords or pension funds. Landlord-tenant collaboration is essential for stable retail and hospitality sectors, and in the main, rent deferrals were a foregone conclusion during the various lockdown stages of the pandemic. However, these rent deferrals still have to be dealt with. The attitude of general trade creditors: in certain instances, smaller trade creditors in terms of value have been the most aggressive in debt collection and putting pressure on businesses to repay debts as soon as their doors reopen. Companies with healthy balance sheets and those that managed their cash flow prudently will be the ones to come out the other side of this pandemic when the government supports subside. Businesses will need time to: Assess the post-pandemic consumer demand for their products and services;  Assess their reasonable future cash flow projections; Agree on payment arrangements for old and new debt; and Make an honest assessment of whether they will be able to trade their way through the recovery phase. For those who have been worst hit, however, all is not lost. Ireland has some of the most robust restructuring mechanisms in the world, with low barriers to entry and very high success rates. The fallout can be mitigated if company directors take appropriate steps. Restructuring options When it comes to successful restructuring, being proactive remains the key advice from insolvency professionals. Too often, businesses sleepwalk into a crisis. Options narrow if there has been a consistent and pronounced erosion of the balance sheet. Those who act fast and engage with experts have the best chance of survival. 1. Examinership There are various restructuring options available, but examinership is currently most suitable for rescuing insolvent SMEs. The overarching purpose of examinership is to save otherwise viable enterprises from closure, thereby saving employees’ jobs. In 2019, liquidations accounted for 70% of the total number of corporate insolvencies in Ireland, and examinership only accounted for 2% of the total. It is plain that a higher portion of those liquidations could have been prevented, jobs saved, and value preserved if an alternative restructuring option like examinership had been taken. There are only two statutory criteria for a company to be suitable for examinership: 1. It must be either balance sheet insolvent or cash flow insolvent. It cannot pay debts as and when they fall due; and It must have a reasonable prospect of survival.  The rationale for examinership in a post-pandemic environment is therefore clear. Companies saddled with debt will likely meet the insolvency requirement, and historically profitable companies that have become insolvent due to the closures associated with the pandemic will pass the ‘reasonable prospect of survival’ test. Once appointed, the examiner must formulate a scheme of arrangement, which is typically facilitated by new investment or fresh borrowings. The scheme will usually lead to creditors being compromised and the company emerging from the process solvent and trading as normal. 2. The Summary Rescue Process One of the main criticisms levelled at examinership is the perceived high level of legal costs required to bring a company successfully through the process. To address this perceived issue, in July 2020, An Tánaiste, Leo Varadkar TD, wrote to the Company Law Review Group (CLRG) requesting that it examine the issue of rescue for small companies and make recommendations as to how such a process might be designed. The CLRG’s reports in October 2020 recommended the ‘Summary Rescue Process’. It would utilise the key aspects of the examinership process and be tailor-made for restructuring small and micro companies (fulfilling two of the following three criteria: annual turnover of up to €12 million, a balance sheet of up to €6 million, and less than 50 employees). Such companies constitute 98% of Ireland’s corporates and employ in the region of 788,000 people. A public consultation process is now underway to finetune the legislation. Here is what we know so far about the Summary Rescue Process: It will be commenced by director resolution rather than court application. It will be shorter than examinership (50-70 days has been suggested). A registered insolvency practitioner will oversee the process. Cross-class cramdown of debts will be possible, which binds creditors to a restructuring plan once it is considered fair and equitable. It will not be necessary to approach the court for approval unless there are specific creditor objections. Safeguards will be put in place to guard against irresponsible and dishonest director behaviour. A proposed rescue plan and scheme will be presented to the company’s creditors, who will vote on the resolutions. A simple majority will be required to approve the scheme. The Summary Rescue Process will be a huge step forward. The process of court liquidation has been systematically removed from the court system in recent years in favour of voluntary liquidations. This new rescue process will bring a similar approach to formal restructuring, allowing SMEs greater access to a low-cost restructuring option akin to a voluntary examinership. It will give more hope to companies adversely affected financially by the pandemic that options exist for their survival. Neil Hughes FCA is Managing Partner at Baker Tilly in Ireland and author of A Practical Guide to Examinership, published by Chartered Accountants Ireland.

In the wake of the Davy scandal, Cormac Lucey identifies four urgently required changes for Ireland’s regulatory system. The scientist Max Planck said that science advances funeral by funeral. In his 1950 autobiography, he explained, “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” If science advances funeral by funeral, how fast does corporate governance progress? The implication of Planck’s aphorism is that old leopards don’t change their spots and cannot be taught new tricks: if you don’t like your leopard, you must get rid of it or, if the leopard is protected by employment law, issue it with a P45. In Ireland, corporate governance advances P45 by P45. I am sceptical of the notion that revised organisational guidelines and regular attendance at corporate governance updates achieve much. If you have to regularly teach staff the difference between right and wrong, it begs the question: are you working with the wrong people? There is a lot of common sense in a popular maxim from Charlie Munger, the sprightly 97-year-old who jointly leads Berkshire Hathaway together with the merely 90-year-old Warren Buffett. Munger said: “Show me the incentive, and I’ll show you the outcome”. What are the incentives in Ireland? Consider the recent scandal at stockbrokers, Davy. This concerned a case where 16 key staff members purchased bonds in the then defunct Anglo Irish Bank in 2014 and concealed this fact from the vendor, who had commissioned Davy to get the best price possible for the thinly traded bonds. The bonds were sold by the vendor for 20.25 cent in the euro, realising €5.6 million. If they were held until maturity – when they were repaid in full – they would have generated gross proceeds (before funding and legal expenses) for the Davy insiders of €22 million. The maximum fine the Central Bank may issue for regulatory infractions is just €10 million. And the fine administered in this case was only €4.1 million. This raises serious questions about the design of our regulatory system. That the Davy executives who profited from this deal will have seen the value of their part-ownership of the brokerage firm drop considerably was a merely coincidental side effect of the whole process. It seems to me that several changes are urgently required: The maximum fine for a regulatory infraction should be a multiple (five to ten times) of the gross gains made. Where possible, fines should be levied on individuals rather than on firms. Those who have acted improperly in the past should not continue to be employed in senior roles or hold large ownership positions at financial services companies. We should financially incentivise whistle-blowers, like in the USA. There, a whistle-blower can claim a share of the wrongdoer’s loot. Bradley Birkenfeld, an ex-banker, was paid $104 million by the Internal Revenue Service for exposing his former bosses who had helped US clients hide money in Swiss bank accounts. If we can’t rely on people always being honest (and we can’t), then let’s change their estimate of where their self-interest lies. A low-cost regulatory system focused more on incentives and occasional but vigorous action aimed at wrongdoers can replace today’s expensive system, which is built on detailed rules and extensive box-ticking that largely focuses on the already compliant. Cormac Lucey is an economic commentator and lecturer at Chartered Accountants Ireland.

Seven Chartered Accountants reflect on their careers overseas and describe life in different countries as the COVID-19 pandemic continues. Fiona Walsh  Audit Manager at KPMG  Sydney, Australia Time abroad: three years In June 2018, I was given the opportunity to move to Sydney as part of KPMG’s global mobility programme. This was a really exciting opportunity, both personally and professionally, so I packed my bags and moved half-way across the world. Moving with the same company and in the same role made the move a lot easier as, along with starting a new job, you are trying to familiarise yourself with a new city, find a place to live, and settle in. The first few months are a really exciting time but while Australia is quite similar to Ireland culturally, it did take longer to settle in than I had imagined. When the pandemic hit, it changed life as we knew it in Sydney. The switch to a virtual world was sudden. At first, there was a novelty attached to it. We quickly had to adapt as most Australian companies are June year-ends, so busy season was fast approaching. However, in Sydney, we returned to the office relatively quickly as COVID-19 numbers decreased. We have been working from both the office and home for several months now. One positive outcome from the pandemic is that we now have a lot more work flexibility, but I don’t believe a full-time work-from-home model is sustainable in the long-term. We found the transition back to the office easier than expected, with a renewed value on face-to-face interactions with teams and clients. In Australia, we have been very lucky with the impact of COVID-19 restrictions compared to Ireland, but the toughest part is that, for the Irish community abroad, we don’t know when we can next jump on a flight to visit family and friends. I got engaged to my fiancé in October (also an Irish Chartered Accountant), so we are very excited to get home to celebrate. The uncertainty of the pandemic makes a full-time move home more difficult to contemplate in the short-term. Claire Iball Finance Director at Intel Portland, Oregon, USA Time abroad: 15 years The worst part of being away from home during the pandemic is not being able to physically see and hug my family in Ireland, though FaceTime and WhatsApp have eased the distance. When I took this role in the US, I thought I would stay for two to three years. I didn’t know what I was getting into. I am super independent, but the first few months without friends and family were difficult. That said, I don’t think I would do anything differently. You can only grow when challenged by new situations, people, and environments. It tested my ability to adapt and respond to change and differences. Working for a US company where the majority of business partners are US-based means more traditional work hours. In contrast, working for a US company while living in Ireland meant working later into the evening to collaborate with US colleagues. And while I would love the opportunity to work in Ireland and live closer to family, I have also started my own family here and have a different lifestyle and new friendships. I think working from home during the pandemic has opened up job opportunities and does not require experts to be in certain locations. As the end of pandemic is in sight, we will reflect and adapt to the new world and way of working.  I think there are great personal development opportunities in working abroad. Anyone thinking of doing so should go for it. If you want to experience a new country, culture, and learn new ways of working, that’s the best way to go about it. It’s always better to regret something you’ve done rather than something you haven’t done. S. Colin Neill Board member New Jersey, USA Time abroad: 45 years On graduation from Trinity, I joined Arthur Andersen in Dublin. I had always heard that being a Chartered Accountant would provide a passport to travel the world, and indeed it proved to be.  My wanderlust took me to New York after qualification at a time when it was relatively unusual for Chartered Accountants to make such a move. I eventually got involved in the formation of the Association of Chartered Accountants in the US (ACAUS), which sought to enhance and promote the Chartered brand. The effort was extremely successful – ACAUS celebrated 40 years last year and has achieved mutual recognition of qualifications with many US states. My life would not have turned out the way it did without the solid business foundation of the Chartered Accountant training and qualification. I am now semi-retired, but I remain active on several boards. The challenge for me has been to master and embrace current technology, which I have luckily done. Some of the boards I serve on support the charitable fundraising activities of hospitals, both in the US and Ireland. The pandemic has made holding live fundraising events impossible, and that has had severe consequences for the hospitals. On the other hand, the commercial entities whose boards on which I serve are thriving. Unfortunately, one is an historical cemetery and crematory – business is booming. While I travel back to Ireland several times year – mostly to play golf – leaving was a very good move for me. The only time myself and my Irish friends ever questioned moving back to Ireland was during the rise of the Celtic Tiger. The thought did not last long, however. Gavin Fitzpatrick Director of Financial Accounting and Advisory Services at Grant Thornton San Francisco, California, USA  Time abroad: 20 months The pandemic has definitely made it more challenging to achieve the objectives I set for myself when first taking this role. Meeting existing clients to further develop relationships has been more difficult in a remote environment. Building rapport with new teams, whether internal or external, has required additional effort. Add to this the personal challenges of keeping a young family in good spirits during lockdown in a foreign country. This role, and the last 12 months, have taught me the importance being agile, staying positive, and taking stock regularly to challenge myself to ensure I am putting effort into relevant tasks. The way I support existing clients has changed, but they still get value from a local contact who can help them navigate a world of constant change. Despite a year of home-schooling and travel restrictions, my family have managed to make the most of this adventure, creating memories, friendships, and achieving many personal goals along the way.  Despite the challenges, this move has been a success, both personally and professionally. If I had the opportunity to do it all over again, I wouldn’t do anything differently. We try to make the best decisions we can with the information we have at a point in time. When the outlook changes, no matter how radically, we adapt. Roles such as mine are important for our business and the development of our teams. While planning for similar roles in the future will no doubt mean considering additional matters, I would encourage anyone to grab these opportunities wherever possible. Fearghal O’Riordan Vice President at Aon Cayman Islands Time abroad: 11 years I’m missing Ireland. It has been 18 months since I was home. Not being able to see family, friends, neighbours and Galway has been a challenge. I am a keen horseracing fan, so I miss being able to visit stables and see the horses. But, I do enjoy it here, and I guess I am settled now. This is home. I met my wife here on my first visit and we have been together 19 years, and the Cayman Islands people have been very welcoming and good to me. It’s a very attractive place to live. I love the mix of cultures here in the Caribbean. We have over 100 nationalities in a population of 65,000. You meet lots of wonderful people with great stories of life in their homelands. We are fortunate to have a super global IT infrastructure supporting our local office. That held up very well when we all went remote in March 2020. Thankfully, the IT didn’t buckle under the strain. The Cayman Islands came out of lockdown in July and I’ve been working in the office since, though staff do have flexibility to continue to work from home, especially those who commute through morning traffic. The Cayman Islands is (as of 15 March 2021), COVID-19 community transmission-free since July 2020 so we are very, very fortunate to be living relatively normal lives with the sole exception of the border being closed so travel is restricted. Having emigrated twice, I would implore anyone thinking of doing so to make the most of where you are – be it in Ireland or abroad. Everywhere has benefits and downsides. Enjoy the best of where you are and, if you move, make the best of that place. Nowhere is perfect but if you do have that sense of adventure, go for it. Louise O’Donnell  Manager of International Operations, Strategy, Legal & Compliance at Oman Insurance Dubai, UAE  Time abroad: 12 years I definitely knew what I was getting into when I moved here 12 years ago, and I would not change anything with regards to working and living overseas. I believe it has moulded me and allowed me to work in an extremely multi-cultural environment where I experience different viewpoints that will remain with me in the future. On a personal level, it allowed me to put down roots in a new city, take up new hobbies, and create a life. I also met my husband in Dubai.  However, due to the pandemic, it is the first time since leaving Ireland that I have not been able to go home to see my family and friends. The rate of change in lockdowns and the ambiguity prevented me from doing so. That said, I am not ready to move home yet, and given that my personal life is very much entwined in the region, it would be a difficult choice to make. My husband is from Palestine, so it would have to be a good move for both of us – a consideration I didn’t have when I jumped at the chance to move to Dubai.  For others wanting to move abroad, I would give the same advice pre-pandemic and post-pandemic: go for it. You might have a defined timeline for moving overseas and a plan for when you might then return home. I had that in mind, as well, but my plans changed. We all think ‘I will live overseas for a maximum of three years and then go home’ – most expats in the UAE had the same thing in mind, but most usually end up here for longer than anticipated. I think there will always be a need for overseas employment, particularly in locations that are well-known expat hotspots. These locations continue to be transient and are developing fast, hence the need to bring new talent into these cities will remain. Even though we are still working from home and many countries remain in lockdown, I do not believe that this will continue full-time post-pandemic. There is a lot of debate on this topic and we do hear of certain industries moving their staff to 100% work-from-home, but I am a firm believer that innovative work still gets done in the office and we all need face-to-face interaction. Niall Fagan  Audit Senior Manager at Grant Thornton  Newport Beach, California, USA Time abroad: 10 years When I embarked on my secondment in 2011, I was looking for a new adventure both personally and professionally. The initial transition was challenging, but working for a large global organisation with consistent systems and methodology made the work transition easier. Having been one of the first secondees in the San Francisco office, I set up a group where we help future secondees and international hires with their transition to the US and I love to pass along all of my experiences. It’s been just over a year since I’ve been to our office or to a client site. At first, it seemed impossible to think we’d be able to operate at the same level of efficiency remotely. While working from home has definitely had its challenges, I believe we’ve demonstrated that we can perform efficient audits in a remote setting, which could have a large impact on our industry. It brings into question the need for large office spaces and the need for audit team onsite every day. Continued remote working should provide more flexibility and better work-life balance for people. From a personal point of view, while the pandemic has been tough and we might have to wait until 2022 before we can make it back to Ireland again to visit family and friends, it has allowed me to spend a lot more time with my two small children, for which I’m thankful. If someone is considering a career overseas in the post-pandemic world, my advice would be to go for it. The Chartered Accountancy qualification is highly respected worldwide. You can gain invaluable experience, learn new skills, and grow your global network. From a life experience perspective, I believe living and working in another country is extremely valuable, and I would encourage anyone who has an interest to take a chance.

One of the few silver linings of this pandemic, according to Dawn McLaughlin, is the evolution of leaner businesses that are better positioned to serve their customers.  I am always amazed at the resilience and determination of our business community. History has demonstrated our resolve over the years with businesses trading through all types of adversity. At every turn, we dusted ourselves down and got straight back to serving our customers and community. No matter what we faced, and there were some desperate times, we worked through them. It took a pandemic to stop us in our tracks. It therefore came as no surprise when a recent survey carried out by the Londonderry Chamber of Commerce revealed that 72% of members were optimistic about the future. Despite being in lockdown and having no clarity on the lifting of restrictions, the Chamber’s members see better days ahead. This was further brought to the fore at my recent President’s Lunch when the level of positivity was palpable. While the short-term challenges were acknowledged, the opportunities in healthtech and fintech beginning to bear fruit were noted together with the creation of spinouts from the collaboration between local health and educational establishments. So, what is there to look forward to? And how do we get out of the current situation? It is that entrepreneurial spirit that keeps shining through. Avoid the temptation to wallow in the problem; instead, look for the solution. And we have plenty to build on. There is pent-up demand in the market, surplus funds held by some, and financial assistance in the pipeline to kick-start the high street. For innovative and ambitious businesses, alternative and export-led markets are waiting to be explored. Invest NI is ready and willing to assist businesses with creative ideas and export potential. Traders who survive the pandemic must be poised to take advantage of the opportunities ahead. During the lockdown, owner-managers took a hard look at their business and made necessary changes. The fat has been shed and processes refined. We have leaner businesses that are better positioned to serve their customers in a more streamlined and efficient manner. When we look to the northwest, we see tremendous opportunity for the years ahead. Based on four pillars that span everything from tourism and digital innovation to employability and health and wellbeing, the City Deal will help create a thriving and prosperous region with equality of opportunity for all. It will also further cement the northwest as a top area in the United Kingdom and Ireland to set up a business, acting as a regional hub of enterprise and entrepreneurship that fosters innovation and development. All this, coupled with existing strengths like the high quality of life and low cost of living, makes the northwest more attractive than ever to foreign investors, start-up companies, entrepreneurs, students, and families looking to relocate. The recent government funding to support the vital air route between City of Derry Airport and London Stansted also helps keep our region connected to crucial business hubs across these islands. This, together with the A5/A6 upgrade, are vital factors for companies looking to invest in the northwest. Now is the time to look ahead to the future with confidence – a future that looks increasingly bright. Dawn McLaughlin is Founder of Dawn McLaughlin & Co. Chartered Accountants  and President of Londonderry Chamber of Commerce.

Dee Moran and Lilian Halpin explain entities’ existing obligations regarding beneficial ownership and look ahead to future developments, focusing on trusts in particular. Most entities have a legitimate role to play in the global economy, but they also have the potential for criminals to use the structure for money laundering, terrorist financing and other financial misconduct. To identify and increase the transparency of those that seek to hide their ownership and control of these entities, many countries have introduced a register of beneficial ownership. Having a register ensures that the ultimate owners/controllers are identified, and that accurate and up-to-date information on a beneficial owner is readily accessible to authorised officers and other competent authorities that are entitled to the information under money laundering legislation. In Ireland, entities must maintain a register to comply with obligations under the 4th EU Anti-Money Laundering Directive (4AMLD), which was passed in May 2015 and subsequently amended by the 5th EU Anti-Money Laundering Directive (5AMLD), which was passed in May 2018. Who is a beneficial owner? A beneficial owner is defined in the directives and Irish legislation by reference to the entity type (e.g. trust, corporate entity, investment limited partnership). The different pieces of legislation should be consulted depending on the entity. Common threads in the definitions are ownership and control, whether direct or indirect, and a holding of more than 25% of the entity. Are there two registers? There are two separate registers in Ireland. While companies were required since 2016 to gather information and maintain an internal register of beneficial ownership, the 2019 beneficial ownership of corporate entities regulations (one of two sets of regulations passed in 2019 relevant to beneficial ownership) required relevant entities to file information in a central register. The Central Register of Beneficial Ownership of Companies and Industrial and Provident Societies, which falls under the remit of the registrar of the Companies Registration Office, was opened for filings in July 2019. Any companies/societies in existence on 22 June 2019 had until 22 November 2019 to file their beneficial ownership details, and the five-month timeline to register relevant entities remains. Similarly, certain other financial vehicles described below must maintain an internal beneficial ownership register. There are also legislative requirements to file information on the central register, the Beneficial Ownership Register for Certain Financial Vehicles. Under specific legislation, the Central Bank of Ireland is designated as the registrar responsible for maintaining this central register. Under EU anti-money laundering (AML) regulations that came into effect in 2020, Irish Collective Asset Management Vehicles (ICAVs), unit trusts and credit unions that were in existence when the AML regulations came into force were required to register by 25 December 2020. Under the Investment Limited Partnerships (Amendment) Act 2020, which was commenced recently, existing investment limited partnerships (ILPs) and common contractual funds (CCFs) have until 1 September 2021 to register. Under both pieces of legislation, new financial vehicles that come into existence following the legislation’s implementation have six months from the date of coming into existence to register. What details must be registered? The information that must be delivered to each registrar concerning each beneficial owner includes name, date of birth, nationality, residential address, and a statement of the nature and extent of the interest held or control exercised by each beneficial owner. For Central Bank registration, it must be stated if the person is currently a pre-approval controlled function (PCF) holder in the entity or at any other regulated financial services provider. For companies and industrial and provident societies, the 2019 regulations require a PPS number to be furnished for verification purposes. The 2020 Act also requires PPS numbers to verify the information delivered in the case of ILPs and CCFs. In the case of both registers, the registrar is not permitted to disclose PPS numbers and must store them securely. Relevant entities must keep the beneficial ownership register up-to-date, and this information must align with the information filed on the Central Register. Where change(s) occur, the entity has 14 days to deliver the information so that the relevant amendments are made to the Central Register. Who is entitled to access the information in the Central Register? There are two tiers of access to data in the Central Register: Unrestricted access to the information in the Central Register will be afforded to authorised officers within specific organisations (i.e. An Garda Síochána, the Financial Intelligence Unit of An Garda Síochána, the Revenue Commissioners, the Criminal Assets Bureau, the Central Bank of Ireland, and other Irish competent authorities engaged in the prevention, detection, or investigation of possible money laundering or terrorist financing. Restricted access to information in the Central Register will be made available to the general public and designated persons (e.g. a bank carrying out customer due diligence, save where the beneficial owner is a minor). Those with restricted access will be able to access the name, month and year of birth, nationality, country of residence, and the statement about the nature and extent of the beneficial interest held. The beneficial owner’s date of birth and address will not be available to those with restricted access. Data protection law Any information exchange and sharing mandated by the legislation must comply with data protection law. Personal data is defined in Section 69 of the Data Protection Act 2018, and information to be collected and held on the central registers can include personal data. The data protection obligations are expressly recognised in the 2019 Regulations and 2020 Act, both of which provide that the Data Protection Act 2018 shall apply to the access the registrar affords to a designated person and any member of the public in respect of the information in the central register. Sanctions Sanctions include a fine of up to €5,000 for a trustee and a fine not exceeding €500,000 or up to 12 months imprisonment in respect of corporate entities. Future developments It is expected that a separate central register in respect of the beneficial ownership of trusts will be implemented in due course, as required under the Directives. This is expected to materialise sooner rather than later – trust regulations published in 2019 already impose obligations on trustees to seek and obtain information from beneficial owners of trusts and establish internal registers of beneficial ownership. The Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) (Amendment) Act 2020 was signed into Irish law recently, and contains provisions in relation to trusts. It defines a “beneficial owner” and lists certain trusts that would be excluded from a future requirement to register. These provisions are being introduced in anticipation of the Minister for Finance introducing further regulation in the area and to address part of the overall transposition of 5AMLD into Irish law. In Dáil discussions on the provisions, the Minister made specific reference to the requirements in 5AMLD that all member states establish a central register of beneficial ownership of express trusts. On the international front, the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), an intergovernmental organisation that promotes policies to combat money laundering and terrorist financing and of which Ireland is a member, announced in February that it would review the global rules around beneficial ownership. The European Commission recently stated that it would closely monitor the setting up of the central bank account mechanisms and the beneficial ownership registers by member states to ensure that they are populated with high-quality data. The Directives require interconnection of member state registers, and work to interconnect the beneficial ownership registers has already started. The interconnection will be operational in 2021. Meanwhile, related EU regulation dealing with the EU Central Register’s technical specifications is expected to come into force soon. The requirement to keep and maintain a register for beneficial ownership is here to stay, and a central register for trusts will soon be a legal requirement. An understanding of the requirements is important if sanctions are to be avoided. An EU central register is imminent. This will put further pressure on individual countries to maintain registers with high-quality information, so expect the spotlight to continue to shine brightly when this comes into existence. Dee Moran is Professional Accountancy Leader at Chartered Accountants Ireland. Lilian Halpin is a Consultant at Chartered Accountants Ireland.

Dr Brian Keegan explains why having political deadlines isn’t always a good idea. Deadlines have always been a feature of commercial life, but the ubiquity of dates by which something must occur is a relatively recent facet of political life. Politics has always had its own cycles, from the duration of a monarch’s reign to recurring intervals by which general elections must be held. Mandatory due dates or precise intervals more often reflect an external rather than a domestic political imperative. In recent decades, commercial concerns over deadlines have spilt over into the political arena as government becomes bigger and more technocratic. Timeframes for decision-making are as much determined by foreign affairs as domestic factors. Having political deadlines isn’t always a good idea. While the obvious effect of imposing a deadline is to ensure the completion of a task, the act of establishing deadlines in itself may have a more subtle effect on the way we think about those tasks. Some years ago, researchers at the Carey Business School at John Hopkins University in the US carried out a study of how workers react to deadlines. They found that longer deadlines can lead people to believe that a particular assignment is harder than it actually is. That, in turn, can result in managers committing more resources to the work needed to meet the deadline. If this finding is correct, it suggests that the shorter the deadline, the less costly it might be to meet. The researchers also found that, when workers are faced with multiple deadlines (and few of us have the luxury to do only one thing at a time), people seem to prioritise less important assignments with immediate deadlines over more important pieces of work with more extended deadlines. There is an apparent human tendency to do what is urgent rather than what is important. While these findings have implications for management practice, they also have implications for the political system. The tendencies described by the researchers have been echoed in the handling by both the British and the European institutions of the Brexit process. The repeated extension of Brexit deadlines through 2019 created an impression that the process was more difficult than it actually was. In 2020, everything to do with the pandemic was urgent, so almost everything else received more political attention than the negotiations. Consequently, both sides allowed themselves extension after extension to negotiate the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, even though it should have been well within the capacity of Brussels and London to deal with both issues in parallel. The result was that we ended up with a barebones trade agreement between the UK and the EU, concluded on Christmas Eve. This outcome has been unnecessarily difficult for businesses to deal with. Customs and quality checks involve routine and paperwork – such processes may be unwelcome, but companies can generally cope with processes. The shortcomings are on the official side. The British Government is now repeating the same mistake by further pushing out deadlines associated with the Northern Ireland protocol and the checking of goods arriving into Great Britain from the EU. Far from relieving pressure on businesses, this will merely perpetuate the difficulties. It also makes the setting up of checks and controls by customs and trade officials and businesses alike appear more difficult. Political processes are rarely amenable to deadlines because the political process is not always about what should be done; it is also about what can be done. One of the lessons of Brexit is that we would be better served if the political process stopped trying to look like a business process.   Dr Brian Keegan is Director, Advocacy & Voice, at Chartered Accountants Ireland.

A recent C-suite barometer showed a surprising level of optimism among international business leaders. Mark Kennedy deciphers the findings to explain why short-term optimism will need to be buttressed by business transformation plans and long-term investment strategies if organisations are to thrive in a post-pandemic world. A report detailing over 500 global C-suite leaders’ views on their outlook for 2021 during a worldwide pandemic always had the potential to surprise. Despite the current economic uncertainty, the most surprising finding was the consistent presence of optimism globally, with 71% of respondents assessing the outlook for growth in 2021 as positive. At the beginning of the pandemic, we witnessed resilience and consistency as some business sectors adapted reasonably quickly. For established companies, there was a kind of ‘muscle memory’ approach to the crisis that unlocked lessons learned and business continuity measures that were initially adopted following the global economic crisis of 2008. Despite the unique nature of the pandemic, businesses that previously invested in crisis management strategies appeared to exhibit more resilience. The state approach to the pandemic was also a big differentiator, as tax and legislative aid mechanisms created a profoundly different context for business. Countries in Western Europe mostly saw the benefit of this approach. In contrast, other parts of the world, such as Africa, received noticeably less business aid, which resulted in less optimism for the future. Business transformation plans Confidence in managing and mitigating risk during the pandemic was undoubtedly a factor in respondents’ forward-looking business transformation plans. Economic and technology transformation trends scored highly, with 90% expecting to respond to technology and innovation trends and 78% confident in managing upcoming economic trends. Technology transformation was the most likely focus overall for large companies ($1 billion plus), with 54% of executives indicating a more-than-50% chance of implementing technology transformation plans. While the need to digitally transform businesses has been on the agenda for some time, the crisis appears to have accelerated plans. If we take the retail sector as an example, the need to meet the demand for online shopping during lockdown has added an urgency to prioritising digital strategies. Perhaps more surprising than what was high on the list of business transformation plans was what respondents considered a low priority. While the travel ban during lockdown highlighted the vast potential to reduce carbon emissions, only 20% of respondents said they expected climate risk to have the most significant impact on their business: the lowest on the list. This figure is slightly higher among Western Europe companies (25%), suggesting it is higher on executive agendas in that region. However, it is less than 20% in Latin America, Africa, Central and Eastern Europe and the Commonwealth Independent States (CEE/CIS), and the US.  One potential reason for climate risk attracting such a low score is the current lack of bottom-line accountability. Despite the growing need to mitigate climate change risk for business sustainability, leaders often treat it as an intangible business issue. They see it as being driven by regulatory momentum rather than a tangible business goal to be approached in the same way as technology or new service transformation plans. However, climate change will become a matter of profit and loss for many companies over the next ten years, either because it will influence how capital is obtained and the cost of infrastructure, or it will become an opportunity to do more business. It is a similar story with cultural change, which scored equally low on respondents’ business transformation plans. As mandatory reporting on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues becomes more widespread in both cases, businesses will need to consider these developments in business transformation plans. What is driving the business agenda? While technological transformation is the overarching theme, how businesses approach plans is often driven by regional and industry factors. In financial services, a high level of regulatory and compliance demands in Western Europe and the US is the driving force for banks and insurance companies launching digital strategies to automate and manage data management and reporting costs. In manufacturing, meanwhile, technology transformation drives improvements in efficiency and productivity. These regional differences were also evident when looking at investment plan timeframes. Businesses in Africa, for example, are looking at short-term transformation plans to drive profitability. In Europe and Asia, investment plans are put in place as strategic building blocks for the next decade and beyond. While this is not surprising when looking at the maturity of business development in each region, it also reflects the lack of state aid available to prop up economies and businesses in times of crisis. A further factor driving the business agenda is confidence in a company’s ability to respond to trends. In general, the barometer shows that businesses are optimistic in their ability to tackle most trends, with 90% either ‘very’ or ‘fairly’ confident in tackling challenges involving technology and innovation. Businesses in Asia-Pacific are more positive in their ability to respond to technology trends than in Western Europe, with 92% confident there compared to 85% in Western Europe, reflecting the vibrancy of the region’s technology start-up scene. However, executives are less confident in their businesses’ ability to respond to some other trends. 28% of companies are ‘not very’ or ‘not at all’ hopeful in dealing with the impact of climate change. This lack of confidence in responding to some trends may be down to the fact that, as discussed earlier, it is positioned lower down on the business transformation priority list. A further worrying response is executives’ lack of confidence to deal with social/political changes and public health challenges. While many businesses expect both trends to impact them in the next three to five years, a quarter of respondents are not confident in their ability to address them. Western European businesses are the least confident in dealing with social/political, climate and public health trends. Less than 65% declared themselves ‘very’ or ‘fairly’ confident for each. Asia-Pacific companies were much more optimistic than their Western European counterparts in responding to public health challenges – 77% of the former looked forward with optimism. This regional difference may reflect Asia-Pacific societies’ longer experience managing epidemics, like the SARS outbreak in 2003. Longer-term investment strategies It is important to recognise that the pandemic’s impact on investment plans is critical in moving from a short-term to longer-term outlook. The change in business priorities and how business is conducted since the crisis started has given CEOs across a wide range of sectors a clearer picture of why making long-term and sustainable investments is a sensible business decision. Interestingly, female respondents were more inclined to opt for longer-term investment strategies. Female leaders represent less than one-third of respondents, but with the number of female business leaders rising, the shift to longer-term investment planning is likely to increase. It signals a much-needed focus on long-term business sustainability. This shift to longer-term sustainability was highlighted by the number of respondents who consider investing in sustainability initiatives to be a relatively long-term business activity. It was rated the fourth longest-term out of 23 activities, behind external growth opportunities, corporate strategy, and research and development (R&D). However, company size and sector had an impact. For manufacturing companies, sustainability initiatives are the longest-term activity of all. This reflects the transition away from fossil fuels and towards more sustainable business models. Sustainability is seen as a long-term activity in the financial services sector, but sourcing new talent, government engagement, R&D, and maintaining IT systems are higher long-term priorities. It is interesting to note that sourcing new talent is seen as a long-term priority, particularly as the financial services sector is in a phase of disruption driven by technology and new entrants. While this may suggest that the industry sees sourcing new talent as increasingly difficult, it may also hint that financial services companies still see themselves as people industries first and foremost. The responses from technology and telecoms companies indicate that sustainability initiatives are viewed as one of the shortest-term activities in those sectors. External growth opportunities and regulatory issues are the two longest-term categories for this group, which considers acquiring customers as a longer-term activity than maintaining customers. It paints a picture of an industry that sees high growth as the key to its long-term and short-term future and one that is less concerned about its physical footprint and managing long-term external risks when compared to other, older industries. Of course, as new EU privacy laws become even more embedded, the technology sector may see regulation as both a short-term and long-term priority. Company size is a further factor. Larger ($1 billion plus) companies are most likely to consider sustainability as a longer-term business activity, reflecting that they have the resources to build a sustainability programme and the more significant external pressure on large and recognisable businesses to address sustainability issues. Executives from small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) still regard sustainability as a relatively long-term activity, but R&D, corporate strategy, and external growth are viewed as higher long-term priorities. Framing a reset strategy What can we learn from the barometer results, and does it help frame strategies as companies look to reset? Looking at differences as well as similarities can give CEOs some bell-weather trends to consider. Take the fact that the barometer portrays businesses as generally optimistic. This helps provide momentum and confidence for the growth outlook, even though executives will consider different growth strategies and action pathways. It is then a question of looking at that growth landscape in more detail, so plans are more robust. Another key takeaway from the barometer is that businesses across the spectrum are prioritising driving technological change in one form or another. This could be implementing technology to transform and improve productivity, reduce costs, capture a business advantage from, say, increased online demand for products and services, or using it to enrich and enhance marketing strategies. Again, it is about capitalising on specific trends within the business sector. One aspect of technological change to keep in focus is the need to mitigate risk. With increasing complexity in the data and privacy regulatory landscape, it is crucial that – similar to technology transformation plans – risk mitigation remains high on CEOs’ agendas.   With the barometer also highlighting a growing appetite for ESG themes, it is essential to keep track of sustainability issues – particularly when reporting. ESG reporting is still not a high enough priority for CEOs, but it will demand greater focus from a risk management perspective in the future. Also not to be overlooked is the opportunity for businesses to create strategic business advantage by becoming an early adopter of, for example, environmentally friendly solutions or applying ESG as a business differentiator. Finally, a more oblique takeaway from the barometer’s high level of business optimism was the importance of investing in resilience. As we saw from government and company reaction at the beginning of the pandemic, lessons of the last economic crisis appeared to have been learned, particularly on the importance of continuity and making businesses more resilient to shocks. There are many examples of companies achieving business continuity success, whether through the ability to add flexibility in the supply chain or rapidly adapt products to meet changing consumer and business needs. It is clear that, where CEOs take the time to fully understand business and regulatory trends and invest in forward-looking strategies such as resilience and sustainability, charting a course out of the crisis will not be driven by short-term optimism alone but a realistic long-term growth strategy. Mark Kennedy is Managing Partner at Mazars in Ireland.

Although significant challenges remain, the north-west region can look forward to better days ahead, writes Dawn McLaughlin. After one of the most challenging years in business, 2021 provides some cause for optimism in the north-west city region. The vaccination rollout across the globe gives us the best chance to get back to normal and truly get our recovery efforts underway. As a Chartered Accountant in practice and in my new role as President of the Londonderry Chamber of Commerce, I have seen first-hand the extreme pressures on businesses. Cash reserves are depleted, cash flow is becoming a major concern, and confidence is gone. After a year of COVID-19, the strains on entrepreneurs and businesses of all shapes and sizes are only increasing. The need for a government-led recovery strategy, developed in collaboration with business, is greater than ever. However, I also see reasons for positivity on the horizon. While the double blow of the pandemic and Brexit seriously affected local businesses, I believe we can recover and rebuild better in 2021 and beyond, given the opportunity and support to do so. One of the rare highlights of 2020 was the announcement of the Graduate Entry Medical School at Ulster University’s Magee Campus in Derry. Representing the culmination of years of hard work and campaigning, the new medical school, which will welcome its first students in September 2021, illustrates the strength of the north-west’s higher education offerings. In the new post-Brexit world, cross-border cooperation and collaboration will be as important as ever. In collaborating with our neighbours in Donegal and beyond, we are working to make the north-west city region a more robust economy and the best place on the island to set-up a business. An Taoiseach’s new Shared Island Initiative provides the opportunity to maximise the tangible benefits of all-island cooperation. Committing €500 million over five years for cross-border projects, we are making a strong case for investment to fund infrastructure projects like the A5 Western Transport Corridor, funding to expand Ulster University’s Magee Campus and other cross-border research projects. Along with the full rollout of the City Deal project, the Shared Island Initiative can unlock our city region’s full potential and drive the post-pandemic recovery. By giving our leaders and businesses the tools to rebuild and create a more thriving and bustling regional economy, we can attract new investment and create new, secure jobs. But, in the short- and medium-term, this will require serious commitment and courage from the Northern Ireland Executive, the UK Government, and the Irish Government to get our struggling businesses on the whole island through this rocky period and ensure that they survive and thrive. With institutions like Ulster University Business School, North-West Regional College and Letterkenny Institute of Technology, the north-west is fertile ground for world-leading research and development, attracting more students to our region. Chartered Accountants in the north-west should prepare for this regional growth, and look to our local further and higher education institutions to provide a stream of high-calibre students who might well be the next generation of Chartered Accountants. Dawn McLaughlin is Founder of Dawn McLaughlin & Co. Chartered Accountants  and President of Londonderry Chamber of Commerce.

Having read the 1,246-page Trade and Cooperation Agreement, which was agreed to “in principle” by the EU and UK on Christmas Eve, Cróna Clohisey shares her thoughts on the critical elements causing concern and highlights areas that warrant further work. In recent weeks, there has been as much discussion about what the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) reached between the EU and UK on Christmas Eve doesn’t cover as what it does. The deal, spanning some 1,246 pages, threw up some surprises and certainly left a lot for discussion between the two sides in the months ahead. The main areas covered in the document include trade in goods and certain services, energy, aviation and road transport, fisheries, social security coordination, law enforcement, digital trade and intellectual property. Certain big-ticket items, including decisions relating to equivalence for financial services, the adequacy of the UK’s data protection regime, or an assessment of the UK’s sanitary and phytosanitary regime were excluded, however. These three areas, in particular, are unilateral decisions of the EU and were never subject to negotiation. The TCA does not govern trade in goods between Northern Ireland and the EU where the Protocol on Ireland and Northern Ireland will apply, bringing a whole other set of rules – not least in customs and VAT. Implementing, applying, and interpreting the TCA falls to the newly created Partnership Council. This political body will be co-chaired by a European Commission member and a UK government minister, and decisions will be made by mutual consent. Several specialised committees, including a trade partnership committee, will assist the Partnership Council. Therefore, it seems that negotiations between the EU and the UK on their future relationship are set to continue long into the future.  In this article, I will look at the TCA elements that are causing concern or require further work. Trade in goods and customs The real test for cross-border trade between the UK and EU is really just beginning, given that traffic at ports and borders is generally quieter in the weeks after Christmas. Still, problems with paperwork (which could never be removed by a free-trade agreement), health checks and systems were reported by many companies in the first few weeks of the year. We have heard reports of large retailers reporting shortages on their shelves with retailers in Northern Ireland significantly affected given the customs declarations required for goods brought into Northern Ireland from Great Britain – a requirement that seems to have taken some by surprise.   The TCA’s chapter on rules of origin is particularly cumbersome and has already hampered, and is expected to continue to hamper, existing supply chains. The ‘zero tariffs, zero quotas’ headline celebrating free trade is not all it seems, particularly when only eligible goods qualify for this approach. Rules of origin determine a product’s economic nationality and where products ‘originate’ is the fundamental basis for determining if tariffs apply. The TCA says that for products to benefit from zero tariffs and zero quotas, goods must be wholly obtained from, or manufactured, in the EU or UK or be substantially transformed or processed in the EU or UK in line with the specific origin rules that apply to the product being exported. Minor handling, unpacking and repacking won’t qualify as sufficiently processed. There could be issues for goods not wholly grown, farmed, fished or mined in either the UK or EU.  The amount of non-originating materials (i.e. materials not originating in either the EU or UK) that a product can have in order to still benefit from the TCA differs depending on the product. The annexes to the TCA set out the product-specific rules, and you will need to identify the commodity code as a starting point. Some products allow a maximum level of non-originating content (e.g. 50% of the ex-works selling price), but again this varies from product to product. If, for example, products are processed in the UK, the TCA states that EU origin materials and processing can be counted when considering whether UK exports to the EU meet rules of origin requirements. There is a qualifying production level, for example, called ‘cumulation’. Another nuance is that some rules of origin require that non-originating inputs used in the production of a good must have a different tariff heading, while some rules require a specific operation to take place in the UK for the goods to be classed as being of UK origin. For certain chemicals, for example, a chemical reaction must occur in the UK. It’s also important to remember that when goods are exported from a customs territory, origin status is lost (preferential origin status can only apply once). Take leather shoes originating in Spain as an example. When the shoes move from Spain to Great Britain and are then shipped to Ireland, they lose their EU preferential origin status when they leave Great Britain. Because they haven’t been processed or altered in Great Britain, they don’t have UK origin. Therefore, unless the goods move under a special and complicated customs procedure, duties arise on the goods entering Ireland. The now infamous case of Marks & Spencer’s Percy Pig confectionery is an example of this issue. These issues add to supply chain headaches and give rise to hidden costs. The rules are undoubtedly complex and don’t suit the UK’s significant role as a distribution hub. Business travel Free movement of people between the EU and UK ended on 1 January 2021. Of course, Irish and UK citizens are still free to live, travel and work in either country under the rules of the Common Travel Area (CTA). Beyond this category of people, immigration requirements – including securing permission to work and restrictions on the activities that can be performed as business travellers – are now a key consideration for UK nationals moving throughout the rest of the EU, including UK citizens residing in Ireland. Similar policies are in place for EU nationals seeking to travel to, and work in, the UK. The CTA allows short-term business visitors to enter either jurisdiction visa-free for 90 days in any given six-month period, but there are restrictions on the activities that can be performed. Activities such as meetings, conferences, trade exhibitions, and consultations are allowed. However, anything that involves selling goods or services directly to the public requires a work visa. The specific business situations where a visa is required are set out in the annexes to the TCA. The environment In a first for the EU, the fight against climate change has been included as an “essential element” in a bilateral agreement with a third country. This effectively means that if the EU or the UK were to withdraw from the Paris Agreement or take measures defeating its purpose, the other side would have the right to suspend or even terminate all or part of the TCA. The TCA paves the way for a joint framework for cooperation on renewable energy and other sustainable practices, as well as the creation of a new model for energy trading. However, it allows both sides to set their own climate and environmental policies in areas such as carbon emissions/carbon pricing, air quality, and biodiversity conservation. Divergence from respective environmental and climate laws will be monitored, but this area is not subject to the TCA’s main dispute resolution mechanism. It will instead be governed by a ‘Panel of Experts’ procedure. Time will tell how effective this will be. Data transfers Many businesses rely on the ability to transfer personal data about their customers or employees to offer goods and services across borders. A company based in Belfast, for example, might outsource its payroll processing to a company based in Galway. In this case, any restriction on this data’s ability to flow freely would act as a trade barrier. The EU and UK haven’t concluded a deal yet to allow data to continue to flow freely across borders, but the EU has committed to a decision on the adequacy of the UK’s system (UK GDPR) by 30 June 2021. Until then, the UK will be treated as if it is still part of the EU on data protection grounds, and data can continue to flow freely between jurisdictions. If the EU doesn’t reach an adequacy agreement (although reports suggest that a deal is close), provisions such as standard contractual clauses may be needed in future transfers of data between the UK and EU. Financial services Currently, the UK has identical rules to the EU in terms of the regulation of financial services. Supplementary documentation published with the TCA states that the UK Treasury and European Commission aim to sign a cooperation agreement covering financial services regulation by March 2021. The EU has already deemed the UK equivalent for a time-limited basis in clearing and transaction settlement, while the UK has provided the EU with specific findings that would enable EU member states to conduct such business in the UK. Many other areas of the TCA will be digested and interpreted in the weeks and months ahead. Trade deals are predominantly about trade. Only time will tell if they go far enough in other areas such as environment, security and intelligence, or healthcare, for example. Let’s hope that in the long run, a deal is better than no-deal. POINT OF VIEW:  Barry Cullen, Silver Hill Duck Silver Hill Duck is a perfect example of a cross-border business and the various challenges posed by the new trading relationship between the EU and the UK. Silver Hill Duck is a duck manufacturing company based in Emyvale, Co. Monaghan, with operations in Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. The company controls all aspects of the breeding, farming, production and packaging of its famous Silver Hill Duck breed. Established in 1962, it has supplied the best Chinese restaurants in the UK for the past 40 years. During this time, the company has expanded its customer base to include retail and foodservice, including a range of raw and cooked products. Barry Cullen, Head of Sales at Silver Hill Duck and President of the Irish Exporters Association, shares the background to his company’s commercial decisions. “The UK was historically our largest market, and we took some steps before 1 January 2021 to avoid the expected delays that were predicted at the ports. This involved setting up a Northern Ireland company with the appropriate VAT and EORI numbers, and a customs clearance agent to handle the paperwork. Silver Hill also had to source a warehousing partner in the UK that could hold frozen stock for our UK customers. Trading with our fresh retail customers was suspended for the first few weeks in January due to the uncertainty around delays at ports and the documentation required. The first few weeks of 2021 has shown that this was a prudent decision, as it has become apparent that the UK is nowhere near ready for the new trading requirements. There are major delays at Holyhead with hauliers unable to access the Irish market due to incorrect paperwork and a COVID-19 testing regime that has exacerbated the problem. It’s a case of learning on the job as our sales team feels its way through the many documentation requirements to send a pallet of product to the UK. For example, despite having done due diligence for over three years, we were not aware of the REX system and the need to be registered to self-certify our goods. Even though there are no actual tariffs, the customs clearance costs are high at approximately €120 per order, regardless of size, if you act as exporter and importer for the UK customer. This will make much retail business commercially unviable and will have a significant knock-on effect on small- and medium-sized enterprises in the coming months. There will undoubtedly be a settling-in period for the new trading requirements, but the cost for traders, hauliers and suppliers is as yet uncertain.”   Cróna Clohisey is Public Policy Lead at Chartered Accountants Ireland.

Do ultra-low interest rates justify ultra-high stock market values? Cormac Lucey shares his thoughts as US tech stocks continue their astonishing rise. Are we experiencing a stock market bubble? The question arises because of the startling rebound in global stock market indices since last March and, in particular, because of the astonishing rise in value experienced by US tech companies. Since their March lows, the Nasdaq has nearly doubled, the NYSE FANG+ Index has risen by 150%, and Tesla has risen to an astounding 12.2 times its starting position. The other factor that suggests we are in the middle of an equity bubble is valuations. The best measure of underlying long-term valuation is the Cyclically Adjusted Price Earnings (CAPE) ratio. It overcomes the weakness of the traditional Price Earnings (PE) ratio, that cyclically inflated earnings can make a cyclically inflated price look reasonable, by replacing one year’s earnings with average earnings over the previous 10 years, adjusted for inflation. The US CAPE is currently 35. That level has only ever been seen before as the Nasdaq bubble peaked in 2000. After that, the US tech index fell by three quarters before eventually bottoming in early 2002. On one hand, Jeremy Grantham, founder of the GMO fund management group in Boston, reckons that US stock markets are in the final stages of a speculative bubble worthy of comparison with the dot-com bubble, the Great Crash of 1929, and the South Sea Bubble. On the other, Martin Wolf, a Financial Times columnist, doesn’t believe that we are currently experiencing a stock market bubble. He contends that equity prospects depend on the future course of corporate earnings and interest rates. He concludes that, provided the former are strong and the latter ultra-low, stock prices look reasonable. There’s the rub. Do ultra-low interest rates justify ultra-high stock market values? And how long will interest rates remain ultra-low? On the face of it, the value of equity assets should rise as interest rates fall. Interest rates are a vital component of valuation models in general, and the Capital Asset Pricing Model in particular. When interest rates fall, the discount rate used in these models decreases and the price of the equity asset should appreciate, assuming all other things remain equal. Today’s interest rate cuts by central banks may therefore be used to justify higher equity prices and CAPE ratios. But John Hussman, a fund manager and former professor of finance, argues that when people say extreme stock market valuations are “justified” by interest rates, they’re actually saying that it’s “reasonable” for investors to price the stock market for long-term returns of nearly zero because bonds are also priced for long-term returns of nearly zero. “What’s actually happening today,” he argues, “is that investors are so uncomfortable with near-zero bond market valuations that they’ve priced nearly every other asset class at levels that can be expected to produce near-zero, or negative, 10-12 year returns as well.” I agree with Hussman: US stocks are in a bubble. While equities may appear reasonably valued relative to bonds, in absolute terms their ultra-high valuations today suggest ultra-low investment returns over the coming 10-12 years for those who buy them now and hold onto them for several years. However, just because stocks are in a bubble doesn’t mean that they are about to fall. As the then-Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, said in 2006: the boom can get boomier. What should investors do? First, expect significant growth in short-term stock market volatility. The recent one-day 25% drop in the price of Bitcoin may be a straw in the wind. Second, the final market top may coincide with central banks allowing long-term interest rates to rise in the face of rising inflation expectations, perhaps in 2022. Until then, enjoy the boom getting boomier. Cormac Lucey is an economic commentator and lecturer at Chartered Accountants Ireland.

With international tax reform progressing at unprecedented speed, Susan Kilty explains why Irish businesses must continue to participate actively in the discussion. With all the global uncertainty that Ireland is facing due to COVID-19 and Brexit, there is a risk that the OECD global tax reforms – the other major threat to Irish business and the economy – will be pushed further down the corporate agenda. But to do so would be very risky. Ireland must engage with this process now, at both the political and corporate level. The world of international tax is in a state of extreme flux as governments grapple with changes in the way multinationals do business. It is worth reiterating that Ireland has attracted healthy levels of foreign direct investment (FDI) over the past 30 years, and the multinational community has contributed significantly to our economic success. According to the OECD, Ireland received more foreign direct investment in the first half of this year than any other country. Along with Ireland’s near-iconic 12.5% tax rate, a crucial element in our continuing ability to attract international investment is the stability and transparency of the corporate tax regime here. Investors from abroad who establish activities in Ireland tend to be quite sensitive to changes in the taxation system. They like certainty and stability in a tax code, which is why Ireland presents such an attractive proposition. Ireland cannot afford to lose FDI as a result of turbulence in the global tax landscape at this time. As corporation tax accounts for almost 18% of Ireland’s total tax take, any change to the regime threatens to seriously undermine the attractiveness of our FDI model and negatively impact our revenue-raising ability. The crux of the matter is that we, and many other countries, apply 20th century tax systems to 21st century e-commerce business models. Businesses have an increasingly digital presence, and many no longer trade out of brick and mortar locations. This is not limited to so-called technology companies, but can be seen across industries and in businesses of all sizes. Businesses sell freely across borders without ever needing to set up operations abroad. This new digital way of trading is not always captured in our analogue tax rules, and the rules must be realigned with the reality of modern e-commerce. However, to tax a multinational business, you need a multinational set of rules. This is where the OECD comes in, but the uncertain shape that the new rules might take brings more uncertainty for businesses at a time when it is least needed. Many clients cite the changing international tax environment as one of the top threats to potential revenue growth. And although countries now face enormous bills for COVID-19, one sure thing is that BEPS, OECD and tax reform will not go away. International corporate tax reform is happening, and it will impact many businesses and our economy. Companies need to stay on top of these changes and prioritise the issues that will affect them. OECD proposals The OECD proposals offer a two-pillar solution: one pillar to re-allocate taxing rights and ensure that profits are recorded where sales take place, and a second pillar to ensure that a minimum tax rate is paid. At the time of writing, a public consultation is open for stakeholders to share their views with the OECD on the proposals that were recently summarised by way of two “blueprint” documents, one for each pillar. Pillar One seeks to give market jurisdictions increased taxing rights (and, therefore, increased taxable income and revenues). It aims to attribute a portion of the profits of certain multinational groups to the jurisdictions in which their customers are based. It does this by introducing a new formulaic allocation mechanism for profits while ensuring that limited risk distributors take a fair share of profits. Several questions remain as to how the Pillar One proposals, which constitute a significant change from the current rules, will be applied. Pillar Two, on the other hand, seeks to impose a floor for minimum tax rates across the globe. This proposal is very complicated. It is much more than a case of setting a minimum rate of tax. It is made up partially of a system that requires shareholders of companies that pay low or no tax to “tax back” the profits to ensure that they are subject to a minimum rate. At the same time, rules will apply to ensure that payments made to related parties in low-tax-paying or no-tax-paying countries are subject to a withholding tax. Finally, it can alter the application of double tax treaty relief for companies in low-tax-paying or no-tax-paying countries. Agreeing on the application and implementation of this pillar will be incredibly difficult from a global consensus point of view. Several supposed “safety nets” in Pillar Two are also likely to be of limited application. For example, assuming that the minimum tax rate is set at 12.5%, this does not mean that businesses subject to tax in Ireland will escape further tax. Similarly, assuming that the US GILTI (global intangible low-taxed income) rules are grandfathered in the OECD’s proposal, this does not mean that the US GILTI tax applies as a tax-in-kind tax for Pillar Two purposes. Pillar Two poses a significant threat to Ireland, as it reduces the competitiveness of our 12.5% rate to attract FDI and, coupled with the Pillar One profit re-allocations, could reduce our corporate tax take. The OECD estimates that once one or both of the pillars are introduced, companies will pay more tax overall at a global level, but where this tax falls is up for negotiation – and this is why early engagement by all stakeholders is critical. While the new proposals will undoubtedly have an impact, it is not certain that Ireland’s corporation tax receipts will fall off a cliff. Ireland has already gained significantly in terms of investment from the first phase of OECD tax reform, and this has helped to drive a significant increase in corporate tax revenue. But the risks must nevertheless be addressed. There is, of course, the risk that the redistribution of tax under the rules directly under Pillar One and indirectly via Pillar Two will impact our corporate tax take. But even if the rules have no impact on a company’s tax bill, they could still impose a considerable burden from an administrative perspective, and the complexity of the rules cannot be overestimated. At a time when businesses are grappling with other tax changes, led by the EU and domestic policy changes, this would be a substantial additional burden on the business community. The OECD is progressing the rules at unprecedented speed in terms of international tax reform. The momentum behind the process comes from a political desire for a fair tax system that works for modern business. However, does this rapidity risk the international political process marching ahead of the technical tax work? This is where Ireland, both government and corporate, needs to play a vital role. While the consultation period on both pillars is open, the focus for stakeholders should be on consulting with the OECD on the technical elements of its plan. Considering the OECD’s stated objective to have a political consensus by mid-2021, this could be one of the last opportunities for stakeholders to have a say in writing the rules. The interplay between the OECD and the US Treasury cannot be ignored when considering the OECD’s ability to get the proposals over the line. The US Treasury decided to step away from the consultation process with the OECD for a period in mid-2020. This, of course, raised questions around whether the OECD proposals could generate a solution that countries would be willing to implement. Added to this, the OECD has always positioned Pillar One and Pillar Two as an overall package of measures and has stressed that one pillar would not be able to move forward without the other. The “nothing is decided until everything is decided” basis of moving forward is a risky move, but the OECD recently rowed back on this stance. If the OECD fails to reach a political consensus by 2021, we could very well see the EU act ‘en bloc’ to introduce a tax on companies with “digital” activities. This could result in differing rules within, and outside of, the EU. It would also increase global trade tensions, all of which would not be good for our competitiveness. As a small open economy, Ireland will always be susceptible to any barriers to global trade. A multilateral deal brokered by the OECD therefore remains the best option – the last thing we want to see is the EU accelerating its own tax reform or, worse still, countries taking unilateral action. For the Irish Government, providing certainty where possible about the future direction of tax is critical. Where we have a lead is in how we provide that stability and guidance where we can. The upcoming Corporate Tax Roadmap from the Department of Finance will be an opportunity to give assurances in these uncertain times. Next steps for business The public consultation will be critical for businesses to have their say in shaping the rules. Ireland Inc. must continue to engage constructively with the OECD to try to shape the outcome so that we maintain a corporate tax system that is fit for purpose, is at the forefront of global standards, and works for businesses located here. Doing so would ensure that we articulate the position of small open economies like our own. Each impacted business must take the opportunity to comment on the proposals, as this may be the last chance to have a say. Indeed, what comes out of the consultation period may be the architecture of the rules for the future. We know that difficult decisions must be made at home and abroad in terms of the new tax landscape, and made with additional pressures we could not have foreseen 12 months ago. Although it may seem that much is out of our control, Irish businesses must continue to participate actively in the discussions and ensure that their concerns are heard. The game may be in the final quarter, but the ball is in our hands. Susan Kilty is a Partner at PwC Ireland and leads the firm’s tax practice. Point of view: Fergal O'Brien Since the start of the BEPS process in 2013, Irish business has recognised the importance of the work to our business model and the country’s future prosperity. At its core, BEPS has seen a further alignment of business substance and tax structures at a global level. This has resulted in an often under-appreciated surge in business investment, quality job creation and, ultimately, higher tax revenue for the Irish State. With its strong history as a successful location for foreign direct investment, and substance in world-class manufacturing and international services, Ireland was well-placed to benefit from the new global order. The boom in business investment, which last year reached over €3 billion every week, and increase in the corporate tax yield from €4 billion in 2013 to €11 billion in 2019, are evidence of the further embedding of business substance in the Irish economy. The current round of BEPS negotiations will have further significant implications for the Irish economy, and particularly for the rapidly growing digital economy. Ibec is working directly with the OECD to ensure that any further changes to corporation tax recognise the central role of business substance and locations of real value creation. Fergal O’Brien is Director of Policy and Public Affairs at Ibec.  Point of view: Norah Collender The OECD’s proposals to address the challenges of the digitalised economy will have a disproportionate negative impact on small, open exporter economies like Ireland. Earlier consultation papers issued by the OECD on taxing the digitalised economy suggested that smaller economies could benefit from international tax reform emanating from the OECD. However, the OECD now openly admits that bigger countries stand to benefit from its proposals more than smaller countries, and the carrot has turned into the stick in terms of what will happen if smaller countries do not support the OECD. Ireland is acutely aware of the dangers ahead if countries take unilateral action to achieve their vision of international tax reform. But that does not mean that countries like Ireland should be rushed into accepting international tax rules that fundamentally hamstring Irish taxing rights. Genuine consensus must be reached to ensure that international tax reform is sustainable in the long-term. Likewise, the new tax rules must be manageable from the multinational’s perspective and from the perspective of the tax authority tasked with administrating the rules. A rushed outcome to the important work of the OECD will make for tax laws that participating countries, tax authorities, and the all-important taxpayer may not be able to withstand in the long-term. Norah Collender is Professional Tax Leader at Chartered Accountants Ireland. Point of view: Seamus Coffey How Pillar One and Pillar Two of the OECD BEPS Project will ultimately impact Ireland is uncertain. One sure thing, however, is that there will be changes to tax payments. This will be a combination of a change in the location of where taxes are paid and perhaps also an increase in tax payments in some instances. But there will likely be both winners and losers. From an Irish perspective, there might have been some comfort in that the loser could have been the residual claimant – the country at the end of the chain that gets to claim taxing rights on the profits left after other countries have made their claim. As US companies are the largest source of Irish corporation tax revenue, it might have been felt that most of the losses would fall on the US. However, significant amounts of intellectual property have been on-shored here. Ireland, therefore, has become a residual claimant for the taxing rights to some of the profits of these companies. At present, Ireland is not collecting significant taxes from these profits as capital allowances are claimed. If BEPS results in a significant reallocation of these profits, we might never collect much tax on them. Seamus Coffey is a lecturer in the Department of Economics in University College Cork and former Chair of the Irish Fiscal Advisory Council.

Torunn Dahl and Glenn Gillard share the secrets to purposeful inclusion, which in these challenging times is more important than ever. Good leadership has never been easy. If it were, we would all be good leaders most of the time and organisations would not need to spend millions each year developing leadership skills. In reality, leadership is always a delicate balance of making the best decisions possible given the information to hand while taking into account the context, the strategic imperatives of the organisation, and the stakeholders involved in or impacted by the decisions being made. Operating in an environment of enormous unpredictability, wrought by a pandemic, makes this challenging task even harder. Never before has that well-worn phrase from financial services advertisements, ‘past performance does not guarantee future success’, been truer. There is no quick guide to leadership for these times. We can choose many possible routes to survive or thrive in the period ahead, as we learn to operate in an environment of ongoing uncertainty and volatility. This article will outline some steps you can take to ensure the route you choose is one of inclusive leadership, to the benefit of all your key stakeholders. A new social contract In the August issue of Accountancy Ireland, our colleagues outlined how people at the start of their accountancy careers seek a broad sense of purpose in the work they do. Similarly, in society, we have seen a significant change in people’s awareness of – and lack of tolerance for – the inequalities that exist in society. There is an opportunity to reset the path we are on as a society, to reduce systemic inequalities and become more purpose-led. Last year, 200 global CEOs, including Punit Renjen of Deloitte, signed a statement of purpose. It confirmed that a corporation’s purpose is to serve all its stakeholders – employees, clients and society. The COVID-19 pandemic and the Black Lives Matter movement have reinforced the message from the general public that business cannot be a neutral bystander. Business should, and can, be at the heart of this new social contract, and business leaders need to embrace this change. This reset to how society operates and meets the expectations of its citizens will require different types of leaders to navigate and drive the changes. In addition to the critical skills associated with good leaders such as strategic thinking, commercial acumen, decisiveness and effective communication, leaders will need to understand how to be genuinely inclusive in a broad sense. They will need to understand how a change to the social contract could impact their talent pipelines, customer relationships and supply chains. How will the decisions they make today impact their ability to retain customers, attract staff, reduce their carbon impact and sustain their business viability into the future? A model of inclusive leadership provides a framework for leaders to think about the thought process and the actions they need to consider to navigate the difficult decisions they now face. In the section below, we outline the six signature traits of an inclusive leader, as identified by Deloitte, and some suggested practical steps a leader can take to operate inclusively. The six signature traits Inclusive leadership is about treating people fairly and leveraging the thinking of diverse groups of people. While leaders must treat their people fairly, a genuinely inclusive leader in a new social contract will seek to ensure that people outside the organisation are also treated fairly. They will do this by providing opportunities for them to join the organisation or sell their goods/services to the organisation on fair terms. The examples below focus on what an inclusive leader can do inside their organisation. 1. Commitment. Highly inclusive leaders are committed to the inclusion agenda because these objectives align with their personal value systems and because they believe in the business case and moral case for inclusion. Practical steps: Put inclusion on the agenda at your meetings and hold people to account on actions agreed. Set targets, and encourage debate and discussion around what the right targets are and how to meet them. Attend diversity and inclusion events within and outside your organisation. Share new knowledge with your teams and outline the actions you will take. Reference an inclusion story or moment as part of every presentation you make. 2. Courage. Highly inclusive leaders speak up and challenge the status quo. They don’t walk past inequality; they challenge it. They are willing to admit to their own vulnerabilities and remain humble about their strengths and weaknesses. Practical steps: Speak up and challenge any inappropriate behaviour you see or hear. Others may feel equally uncomfortable and are likely watching to see whether you condone (through silence) or challenge the behaviour. Apply a diversity lens to everything you do – use a checklist if necessary as a prompt. Think about your next event or meeting. Who is talking? What images are being presented? Which metrics are being used? Do they all support an inclusive environment? 3. Cognisance. Highly inclusive leaders are aware that they, and everyone else, have biases that impact their judgement. They seek to ensure that processes are put in place to manage and overcome these blind spots and to create fairer opportunities for all. Practical steps: Seek to identify your own biases. Take the Harvard Implicit Association Test or pay attention to who you naturally gravitate towards and with whom you feel less comfortable. Pay attention to your inner voice and initial judgements and ask yourself whether biases are coming into play. We all have them! Use structured processes and criteria when making decisions that relate to people (hiring, promotions or performance, for example) to ensure objective criteria are used rather than generalised impressions. 4. Curiosity. Highly inclusive leaders keep an open mind and have a desire to learn more about others. They want to understand how they view and experience the world. They also demonstrate tolerance for ambiguity and change. Practical steps: Seek out someone on your team you don’t know well or who has a different background to yours. Put in time for coffee to connect and learn more about them. They could be the perfect person for your next project or have valuable perspectives on a problem you’re grappling with. Invite different people to present to your team or organisation to broaden everyone’s perspective. Remember to suspend judgement when listening to other perspectives; seek to listen actively and understand. Acknowledge what they are saying and respect their viewpoint. 5. Cultural intelligence. Highly inclusive leaders are confident and effective in cross-cultural interactions. They may feel uncomfortable in the situation but are willing to move out of their comfort zone and focus on learning, seeking to build their cultural intelligence. Practical steps: Start by focusing on a culture or area that interests you. Search for articles and podcasts that will broaden your understanding and seek out people who can answer your questions and build on what you have learnt. Encourage people within your teams and organisation to build out their cultural intelligence, supporting mobility opportunities where relevant. 6. Collaboration. Highly inclusive leaders empower individuals to deliver their best, in addition to working across diverse groups of people to drive better solutions built from a diversity of thought. Practical steps: Let others speak first. Ensure that you have heard from everyone in the group, actively encouraging people to contribute if they haven’t already done so. Find common ground and articulate a shared purpose and objective for the group that everyone can rally around. Create physical and/or virtual opportunities for interactions that encourage sharing and collaboration. Purposeful inclusion in a pandemic The COVID-19 pandemic presents both challenges and opportunities in building an inclusive culture and following-up on commitments our businesses have made to be more inclusive. The last few months have stretched everyone and how we act as leaders, now and in the months ahead, will influence how well our organisations, our people, and we personally come through this pandemic. It may be tempting to take a short-term view and focus solely on profits and cash flow to the detriment of suppliers, employees and the local community. But those who take a longer and more inclusive view are likely to reap the rewards, as will their communities. As organisations transition to being more purpose-led than solely profit-focused, their ability to navigate the current environment inclusively to the benefit of society more broadly will be a real test of their authentic commitment to this cause. Using the traits above, we will now explore some of these challenges and opportunities. Commitment: In the short-term, it is easy to step away from the commitments we have made. Many organisations have implemented, or are looking at, measures such as reducing headcount, suspending bonuses and promotions, and deferring hiring decisions. It is important to consider these decisions in the context of inclusion and look at how these measures are implemented and affect the future shape of the organisation. During the last recession, we saw a significant reversal of some of our key diversity measures, as women stepped away from the workforce to work in the home and as many employers reverted to traditional talent pools for staff. Cognisance: Biases can quickly step back into our thinking when faced with tough decisions or working under pressure. In the working from home environment, anecdotal research already indicates biases towards female participation. As women are traditionally viewed as the primary home-maker the risk of ‘killing with kindness’ escalates as individuals make assumptions as to whether someone can handle the workload or should be given specific work because of their family situation. While having progressive policies to support people during the pandemic has been important, this must be monitored so that it does not feed through to future decisions around performance, promotion and recognition. We must recognise, and seek to work through, these potential biases. Collaboration: During this pandemic, many organisations have reported increased engagement from staff and a greater sense of belonging. However, as the lockdown measures persist and remote working is more prolonged, maintaining a sense of ‘team’ and keeping people connected becomes a more significant challenge. Through organisation-wide collaboration, new models and methods for engagement, networking and social interaction can be developed. Indeed, there is a real opportunity to break away from our default methods of corporate social interaction in Ireland, which focus heavily on the dinner and pub scene and favour those willing (and able) to socialise after hours. Capturing new ways of interacting and building them into a new, more inclusive culture is an opportunity to redefine the workplace for many that traditionally felt excluded. Courage: Undoubtedly, the forced working from home arrangement arising from the pandemic presents a real opportunity to rethink how we look at biases around presenteeism, flexible working, and the office culture, and to re-imagine fundamentals like the daily commute and international travel. While these benefits seem obvious at this point, it will require courage to stay the course and implement the necessary changes so that these benefits can be retained as we move out of the pandemic. For example, if we are to move to more hybrid models with a greater level of remote working mixed with in-office teams, maintaining the inclusiveness of a meeting for those in-office and those at home will need to be supported by real leadership. The fear that we fall back into the old ways, where if you are not in the room you are not really participating, is already being expressed by many as they assess whether they could continue to work remotely into the future. Redefined leadership The relationship between community, employees and businesses has changed, and as leaders, we will be held accountable by our people. Truly inclusive leaders will thrive in this environment and make an impact not just within their own business, but across the community. The pandemic has challenged the way we look at the world and our role within it. We now need to seize the opportunities presented, and avoid the pitfalls, to create more inclusive organisations.  Torunn Dahl is Head of Talent, Learning and Inclusion at Deloitte. Glenn Gillard is a Partner at Deloitte and member of Council at Chartered Accountants Ireland.