Do you find yourself constantly feeling drained by the end of the workday? You’re not alone. Many people struggle with maintaining their energy levels at work, often due to habits and practices that can be adjusted. Here are four things you can avoid to help you feel more energised throughout your workday. Always Being “On” Between back-to-back meetings, an overflowing inbox and a constantly ringing phone it’s easy to feel overwhelmed. However, research shows that multitasking, or task switching, can cost up to 40% productivity. To combat this, block out specific times in your diary to tackle different tasks and stick to your schedule as much as possible. Minimise email notifications during focused work periods and consider setting ground rules with your team about when and how to communicate more effectively. Not Taking Breaks More and more people are skipping lunch and eating at their desk for multiple reasons - it’s the cultural norm, perceived work pressures or a desire to finish early. However, breaks are essential for recharging your energy. Make it a priority to block out your lunch break on your calendar and avoid eating at your desk. Furthermore, taking short microbreaks throughout the day have been proven to reduce stress and boost productivity. Overworking While busy times may sometimes require late nights, it is important to distinguish between hardworking and overworking. Hard work means achieving your goals through sustainable efforts, balancing productivity, achievement and well-being. However overworking means pushing yourself beyond healthy limits. Working extra hours or taking on too much work is often driven by fear of failure, work demands or a need to prove oneself. Reflect on what is driving your work habits and set boundaries with both yourself and others. Keeping Things Bottled Up Whether it’s frustration with a colleague or struggling to admit to your manager that you’re feeling overwhelmed, keeping your emotions bottled up can drain your energy. There are various reasons why we don’t feel comfortable opening up – culture, stigma and fear of negative consequences. However, a problem shared is a problem halved, so try expressing your feelings to your manager, co-worker or a trusted friend. Journaling can also be an effective way to process your thoughts and emotions. Feeling drained at work does not have to be the norm. By avoiding these pitfalls, you can create a healthier and more sustainable work routine. To learn more about this topic, you can attend Thrive and the ACA Professionals upcoming webinar ‘Managing your energy for better balance’ on Wednesday 11th September. See link to register below. https://bit.ly/3SXZ40j Written by: Gillian Bane, chartered accountant and workplace health and wellbeing consultant. You can find more information on her website www.wellwork360.com

  A survey commissioned by Uisce Éireann which published this week has found that costs remain both the primary driver and obstacle in SMEs taking sustainability action. The survey, which interviewed the owners of more than 350 small- and medium-sized businesses, sought their opinion on the importance of investing in sustainability for their businesses and customers. It also examined the barriers that currently exist to investment in the area.  The survey found that for seven in 10 SMEs said cost savings is the primary driver in decision-making on sustainable investment, but cost concerns remain the primary obstacle for almost 70% of SMEs. The survey also revealed that 9 in 10 businesses still intend to maintain or increase their investment in sustainable practices in the coming year, but there has been a slowdown overall in the number of businesses planning sustainability investments, falling from 20% in 2023 to 15% in Q2 2024.  75% of companies surveyed intend to maintain levels of investment, with 15% planning to increase it, but only 11% have accessed external expertise in the past 12 months. Speaking about the survey findings, David Broderick, Director of the Small Firms Association (SFA), said: “it is worth noting that small businesses are still operating in a high inflation economy with 68% of SMEs claiming that costs remain a primary barrier to investment.” The top three areas where SMEs are most actively tackling environmental issues are reducing their energy use, waste, and plastics. The proportion of businesses taking measures to conserve water is at its highest level in three years, with more than seven SMEs in 10 say they are conserving water, and a 10% decrease over the same period in the number who say it is ‘not on their radar’ (31% in 2022 to 28% in Q2 2024.)

In 2025, DORA will impose rigorous risk management standards on EU financial entities. Shane O’Neill offers five practical steps for compliance readiness From 17 January 2025, the Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) applies to all financial entities operating within the European Union. This wide-reaching legislation aims to strengthen the digital operational resilience of the financial services sector. Built upon five pillars, it contains rigorous requirements for information and communication technology (ICT) risk management, incident reporting, testing, third-party risk management and information sharing. Implementing DORA’s requirements can be overwhelming, and knowing where to begin can be difficult. Below are five practical steps that firms can take to become DORA-ready. Understand the principle of proportionality Because of the diverse nature of the financial services sector, DORA employs the principle of proportionality. This challenging but critical aspect of compliance means that entities’ regulatory requirements will differ depending on their size and risk profile and the scale, nature and complexity of their business. For example, large institutions providing multiple services, such as Ireland’s three-pillar banks, must establish a fully-fledged ICT risk management framework that addresses all appropriate areas from DORA’s Level 1 and Level 2 texts. However, smaller entities, such as boutique trading firms, can avail of a simplified ICT risk management framework covering only the areas relevant to their function, services and industry. Testing requirements also differ depending on proportionality. All entities must set up a general testing programme and comply with digital testing requirements, but through industry engagement with the Central Bank of Ireland (CBI) in recent months, the indication is that only about 10–15 institutions in Ireland will initially fall within scope of the advanced threat-led penetration testing requirements laid out in Articles 26 and 27. The application of proportionality seeks to create a high standard for the sector as a whole while protecting smaller organisations from unnecessary regulatory encumbrances. Since DORA does not take a one-size-fits-all approach to compliance, institutions should begin their compliance journey with a scoping exercise to confirm the right-sized approach to meet the requirements without taking on needless regulatory burdens. Perform a holistic gap assessment DORA’s five pillars touch many components of business operations, so organisations should analyse their entire operating model to determine which groups and business functions the legislation affects. They should bring together the stakeholders from each affected area to ensure that everyone understands their role in the compliance journey. Business as usual will continue throughout the implementation timeline, and having a collaborative approach to the planning stage helps stakeholders align on DORA-related priorities and responsibilities from the get-go. When conducting the business-wide gap assessment, entities should also inspect existing processes to determine if they can be used for DORA compliance. All firms practise digital operational resilience to some extent, and with a comprehensive review, in many instances, they’ll discover that they can enhance some of their existing procedures to satisfy DORA requirements. Leveraging and improving existing procedures saves time and allows entities to focus their effort and resourcing on the areas where they’ll need to start from scratch to build practices that achieve compliance. Be strategic about remediation activities When building a remediation roadmap, entities should address the compliance areas that need the most work first. Drafting new frameworks, evaluating them against the legislation and scrutinising their effectiveness will take time. Areas with significant compliance gaps must be addressed thoroughly, and an imminent implementation deadline can create unnecessary pressure on employees. Whenever possible, businesses should align their remediation plans with existing transformation roadmaps. To remain competitive, many organisations are already executing transformation roadmaps –digital, operational, environmental, etc. These businesses should ground DORA changes within their existing plans. For instance, if a current transformation roadmap has a timeframe for updating contracts with third-party suppliers, the business should incorporate the additional contractual changes required by DORA as part of that review cycle. Document decision-making While the CBI expects firms to be as compliant as possible by 17 January 2025, it has also recognised that “the regulation of digital operational resilience is not a once-and-done exercise and that is optimal to adopt a multi-year, multifaceted perspective”. When implementing large-scale change programmes, certain business realities, such as the lengthy process for updating third-party contracts, may prevent organisations from implementing all required changes within the timeframe in place. The CBI will take such issues into account when evaluating compliance, but it has firm expectations that all entities will have established and begun work on an agreed implementation roadmap by the January deadline. Firms should, therefore, be prepared to give an account of their DORA decision-making process. Ensuring oversight and alignment through risk and compliance functions and objective review and challenge from internal audit will show the application of a holistic delivery model to meet DORA requirements. Plan to test digital operational resilience regularly DORA requires that firms test digital operational resilience regularly (with the principle of proportionality determining the frequency of the review cycle), so DORA frameworks need to stay top of mind within organisations even after implementation projects stand down next year. By increasing entity-wide awareness about maintaining digital operational resilience, businesses can help all employees understand that DORA frameworks shouldn’t exist in silos; they need to evolve alongside business practices. Any large-scale change – restructuring, operational changes, systems updates, etc. – should prompt an evaluation of the existing framework. For instance, if a firm decides to overhaul its technology systems in 2026, then the DORA framework – despite only being a year old – may need updating to ensure continued compliance and meet the evolving business model of today. Shane O'Neill is Partner in Consulting at Grant Thornton

While I’m the youngest President in Chartered Accountants Ireland’s history, it’s still over twenty years since I sat Leaving Cert Accounting. Despite this passage of time, I studied the same syllabus, frozen in time since the 1990s, as the students who received their results today. Juxtapose this stasis with the absolute transformation of the accountancy profession in the last twenty years and you can see the mismatch. Add to this the fact that the Irish accountancy profession made a €19.8 billion contribution to the Irish economy in 2022, supporting over 83,000 jobs in Ireland and generating €1.8 billion in tax revenues, and the mismatch starts to have significant material impact. Back to the 90s Senior cycle is where most young people first interact with accounting as a subject, and the passage of time has not been kind to it. Students effectively need to “unlearn” much of what they learn at senior cycle and learn the subject anew at third level and in their professional training. The need for companies to provide reliable and transparent information beyond financial metrics has increased exponentially in the last decade, and the dated syllabus does not reflect the work that accountants do, and will do, in a modern economy. I want to acknowledge the work teachers around the country do to bring it to life for students, but they are nonetheless bound by the syllabus. We work closely with Leaving Cert students through our online second level accounting programme Boot Camp which now runs in every county in Ireland. Feedback from teachers we speak to indicates that in some cases, students were more attracted to Business at Leaving Cert as they saw Accounting as requiring a particular skillset, i.e. needing to ‘be good at maths’ to perform well in it. In speaking to our ACA students, many pursued accounting at third level despite, not because of, their experience at second level. Perception is critical. Chartered Accountant Ireland research among Gen Z respondents shows a clear gap in terms of how accounting is perceived by school leavers versus those who had commenced their professional training. Terms such as challenging, numbers-based, and boring were used by the former, dropping dramatically among the latter when they engage with a modern curriculum with the latest advances in technology and emerging accounting practices. Impact on the talent pipeline Anecdotally, the talent pipeline problem is clear right across the profession, from practices of all size to industry, resulting in attraction and retention challenges. It is driven by a huge increase in competition for talent from non-accounting roles; but also, this gap in perception of what accountants do. The accountancy profession is fundamental to Ireland’s economic prosperity. Our members support SMEs the length and breadth of the island, as well as playing a critical role in supporting investment from all corners of the world to Ireland. There is continued strong growth in demand for the services of the profession, but this demand can only be met if there is a strong pipeline of talent coming through, and this begins with our Leaving Cert students. I would say to students getting their exam results, employer demand for accountants is extremely strong. Salary levels for qualified accountants reflect this demand and the vitally important roles that accountants perform in all organisations. This demand continues to grow and so too does the range of opportunities. Reform is on the way This Institute has been engaged with the Department of Education for some time on the need to reform the Leaving Cert Accounting syllabus. Earlier this year we took our place on the National Council for Curriculum and Assessment’s Leaving Cert Accounting development group. We are now in the redevelopment process, but this change is so long overdue, and the rate at which the profession is innovating and transforming is in sharp contrast to the lack of agility over the last couple of decades at Department level in keeping pace.   It is envisaged that a revised specification for Leaving Cert Accounting will be introduced in schools from September 2026. It will provide a much-needed opportunity to ensure that the subject is relevant for students beyond second level education. And this is critical, as accountants are found across most business functions now, they are no longer confined to finance teams. There is an increased demand in industry roles, business process transformation, data analytics, regulatory technology, Fintech, compliance, risk management and ESG reporting. Senior cycle accounting of the future will feed a pipeline of students through the many entry routes into the profession, whether as school leavers or graduates, to meet this demand. So, the syllabus needs to reform, and then keep reforming. Remarkably, even with all the flaws of the current syllabus, accounting is the second most popular subject in the business suite for students in senior cycle and between 12-14% of students have been choosing the subject annually. It is exciting to imagine what a reformed syllabus could do to attract the best and brightest of our future business leaders.

Irish businesses in beef and forestry face challenges as new EU deforestation rules demand ‘deforestation-free’ certification, with severe penalties for non-compliance, writes Vivian Nathan Irish businesses, particularly those in the beef and forestry sectors, are set to encounter significant regulatory hurdles due to the new EU deforestation regulations. With the potential for severe penalties, the stakes have never been higher for Irish exporters. The EU Deforestation Regulation (EUDR), which will take effect on 30 December 2024, is designed to combat forest degradation by imposing strict compliance obligations on businesses trading in specific goods with the EU.   For Ireland, this means that companies exporting beef products, wood, and other related commodities will need to demonstrate that their products are ‘deforestation-free’. This regulation imposes stringent requirements on Irish businesses, particularly those in the beef and forestry sectors. Products such as  beef and processed beef items, and wood products must be certified as ‘deforestation-free’. This certification means they must not have been produced on land deforested after 31 December  2020. Failure to comply could result in severe penalties, including fines, confiscation of goods, and exclusion from public procurement opportunities. The impact on Ireland is significant due to its strong agricultural and forestry sectors. Farmers and businesses involved in beef production, wood processing, and other related industries will need to undertake rigorous due diligence to meet these new standards. This includes gathering geolocation data and other documentation to prove compliance. The new regulations represent a significant shift for Irish exporters, especially those in the beef and forestry industries. The penalties for non-compliance could severely impact businesses that do not take immediate action. Beef and processed beef products Items such as steaks, minced beef, liver, and canned luncheon meat must now be proven to come from sources that are not contributing to deforestation. Given Ireland’s significant beef export market, this regulation could place additional pressure on farmers and processors to ensure compliance. Forestry and wood products Products such as building materials (sheets of wood, laminated wood, wood flooring), wooden packaging (crates, pallets), and wooden household items (tableware, ornaments) must meet the stringent ‘deforestation-free’ criteria. The forestry sector, a cornerstone of rural Irish economies, will need to adapt quickly to avoid penalties. Other goods Chocolate products, coffee, printed materials (books, brochures, newspapers), and wooden furniture will also fall under the scope of the EUDR. For businesses exporting these goods, the compliance burden will be significant. Regulatory penalties The EUDR outlines a range of penalties for non-compliance, including: fines proportional to the environmental damage and value of the commodities, with escalating penalties for repeated offences; confiscation of non-compliant products and revenues from their sale; temporary exclusion from public procurement processes and access to public funding for up to 12 months; and prohibition from placing products on the market or exporting them in the event of serious or repeated infringements. Action required Businesses must start preparing now. The first step is understanding the EUDR’s impact on your operations and gathering the necessary data for the due diligence system (DDS). This includes verifying the geolocation of raw materials against the EUDR Map to confirm compliance. The EUDR is more than just a regulatory hurdle; it’s a transformative challenge for Irish exporters. By taking proactive steps, maintaining clear communication within supply chains, and ensuring all products meet the ‘deforestation-free’ criteria, businesses can safeguard their operations and continue to thrive in the European market. With the December 2024 deadline fast approaching, Irish businesses must adapt swiftly to the new regulations or face severe consequences in the EU market. Vivian Nathan is Chief Operating Officer at Baker Tilly Ireland

With the EU AI Act now in effect, businesses must navigate its regulatory challenges while unlocking AI's potential. Keith Power outlines three key strategies to ensure compliance and drive innovation With the introduction of the EU Artificial Intelligence Act, exactly three years after its first draft, organisations now face the challenge of understanding the business impact of this new regulation and determining appropriate measures to take. What contributes to this dynamic is, for the majority of organisations, thinking about the risk and compliance implications of AI while exploring its business potential. Here are three so-called steps to deal with both of these challenges. Step 1: Map your landscape of current and expected AI applications Top-down: Define current and foreseeable business opportunities and issues and compare these with the potential that generative AI technology offers. Bottom-up: Do a brainstorming session with appropriate representation of relevant business functions to identify potential AI use cases. The success factor in brainstorming is not overthinking it. Combine both categories of AI use cases and plot these against two dimensions:  overall business impact; and implementation effort required.  Highlight your ‘quick wins’ (high business impact, low implementation effort) and ‘high potentials’ (high business impact, high implementation effort) to get a strategic landscape of AI applications. Create an inventory of your current AI applications, in use and development, and add them to the strategic landscape of AI applications. Don’t forget third-party applications. The inventory should at least capture: the purpose and intended use of each AI system; the data it uses; its core functionality/workings; the processes, functions and (in)direct stakeholders it affects; and risk categorisation that is consistent with the EU AI Act. Result: A robust starting point for an AI strategy and a regulatory impact analysis. Step 2: Raise awareness and upskill employees For every job, function or role out there, the question is not if AI will change it, but when. Not having an AI strategy is not a sufficient reason to wait to offer employees upskilling opportunities or create a safe learning environment in which they can build skills in using AI and dealing with the risks of the technology. The latter is especially important because employees can start working with generative AI on their own initiative. Agile is the keyword here. Applying the latest generation of AI technology is like learning to work with a new colleague –  you have to spend time together to get attuned to each other.  What upskilling should focus on for now: Introduction to generative AI and its principles: This topic provides an overview of generative AI and explains its fundamental principles and applications. Employees will learn to understand the potential benefits and challenges associated with using generative AI. Responsible use of generative AI: This topic highlights the importance of responsible and ethical AI use. Employees will learn about risk considerations, including human impact, ethics, bias, fairness, privacy, and transparency, in the context of AI applications and the consequence(s) of their use. They will gain an understanding of the need to ensure that AI systems are developed and deployed in a responsible and accountable manner, in accordance with new legal requirements under the AI Act. Prompt engineering: This topic focuses on the concept of prompt engineering, which involves designing effective prompts or instructions to direct the behaviour of a generative AI model. Employees will learn how to craft prompts that produce desired outputs while avoiding unintended biases or undesirable outcomes. They will gain an understanding of the significance of prompt engineering for achieving reliable and ethical AI results. By covering these three key topics, organisations can provide employees with a comprehensive understanding of generative AI, responsible AI use, and the importance of prompt engineering for effective and ethical AI application. Result: An equipped workforce to execute the (future) AI strategy, to handle AI responsibly, and to shape, implement and comply with legal requirements. Step 3: Implement responsible use guidelines Responsible use of AI revolves around desired business conduct. First, it requires awareness and clarity about what that is and second, the ability to recognise the associated risks in practice and to respond effectively to them. Organisations should establish simple but clear and workable responsible use guidelines. These guidelines address what should always be done and/or what should never happen (i.e. the ‘non-negotiables’) when it comes to the use of AI and data.  To determine the working principles for daily use, organisations can draw inspiration from ethical AI principles, such as transparency, accountability, human oversight, and social and ecological well-being, as formulated in 2019 by the High-Level Expert Group of the European Commission. These principles provide broad guidance and usually need to be further operationalised to be workable in daily practice. When developing these guidelines for responsible use for the organisation, it is important to find an appropriate balance between setting boundaries and offering freedom for innovation within the organisation. Result: Clear criteria to guide the AI strategy and its execution, end-to-end through the organisational AI lifecycle. Keith Power is Partner at PwC

  Please click the link to read our company law news item of March 2024 when the General Scheme of the Companies (Corporate Governance, Enforcement and Regulatory Provisions) Bill 2024 (“General Scheme”) was published by the Department of Enterprise Trade and Employment (DETE). DETE has now published the Companies (Corporate Governance, Enforcement and Regulatory Provisions) Bill 2024 (“Bill”). The Bill includes substantially all the provisions of the General Scheme though it is worth noting that some of the provisions contained in the General Scheme in relation to the Corporate Enforcement Authority (CEA) are not included in the Bill. We set out below some additional points to our earlier note which may be of interest to readers. Readers should note that there are likely to be further amendments of the Bill as it progresses through the Houses of the Oireachtas. Provisions regarding registered office Changes are proposed in relation to a company’s registered office and electronic filing agents. These include the approval by the Registrar of Companies (“Registrar “) of a company as an electronic filing agent (EFA) and as a registered office agent. Trust and Company Service Providers (TCSPs) will only be approved as a registered office agent or an EFA where they have a TCSP authorisation under the Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Act 2010.Approval to act as an EFA or registered office agent will be withdrawn where a company ceases to hold a TCSP authorisation.   The Bill includes a new section to provide that the Registrar may require evidence to verify a company’s registered office address when a company is applying to register its constitution or submitting a change of registered office address. Where the Registrar has made such a request, the Registrar will not register the documents unless such evidence is provided. Loss of Audit Exemption As set out in our previous note, a change to the rules regarding loss of audit exemption for small companies which fail to file their annual return is proposed. The current position is that the exemption is lost after one failure to file. The change proposed is that the company will not be entitled to an audit exemption for the following two years where it fails to deliver its annual return and has previously failed to file an annual return, in compliance with section 343 of the Companies Act 2014, in any of the previous 5 financial years. Proposed subsection (2) provides that a company’s failure to deliver its first annual return or a previous failure to file an annual return before the commencement of the provision shall not be considered as a previous failure for the purposes of subsection (1). Provisions regarding the Corporate Enforcement Authority (CEA) Section 393 provides that an auditor must notify the CEA if during an audit the auditor comes into possession of information leading them to form the opinion that there are reasonable grounds to believe a category 1 or 2 offence under the Companies Act 2014 has been committed. The Bill proposes an extra subsection requiring the auditor to furnish the CEA with such copies of, or extracts from, those books and documents as the CEA may require, accompanied by a certificate of the statutory auditors, bearing their signatures, stating that the copies or extracts so furnished are a true copy of, or extract from, the original books or documents concerned. (Note: the draft wording in the Bill is slightly different to the draft in the General Scheme). Provisions relating to IAASA The Bill proposes changes to delete the requirement that IAASA approves the constitution and bye laws of each prescribed accountancy body. Approval of the investigation and disciplinary procedures and standards of each prescribed accountancy body, and any amendments to the approved investigation and disciplinary procedures and standards is still required. Provisions in the General Scheme concerning the issuance of interim notices by IAASA are also contained in the Bill, now referenced as interim direction required to protect [the] public. Other The proposed amendment which we referenced in our previous news item so that weekends and public holidays are excluded from the time counted towards the minimum 48-hour notice required to appoint proxies has not been included in the Bill. This information is provided as resources and information only and nothing in these pages purports to provide professional advice or definitive legal interpretation(s) or opinion(s) on the applicable legislation or legal or other matters referred to in the pages. If the reader is in doubt on any matter in this complex area further legal or other advice must be obtained. While every reasonable care has been taken by the Institute in the preparation of these pages, we do not guarantee the accuracy or veracity of any resource, guidance, information or opinion, or the appropriateness, suitability or applicability of any practice or procedure contained therein. The Institute is not responsible for any errors or omissions or for the results obtained from the use of the resources or information contained in these pages.  

The size criteria for companies are laid down in the Companies Act 2014. The thresholds have been increased since July 1, 2024. Please see an Institute news item of June 24, 2024 on Increased size limits for Irish companies signed into law. The new criteria apply to financial years beginning on or after January 1, 2024. Companies may elect to apply the adjusted thresholds to financial years on or after January 1, 2023. This change in size will mean that more companies will move into the micro and small categories and will thus benefit through abridged reporting requirements and the audit exemption. Certain companies specified in the legislation are excluded from the micro, small or medium company or group regime e.g.” ineligible companies” as defined in the legislation. Reader’s attention is also drawn to the dormant company audit exemption where the requirements of section 365 of the Companies Act, 2014 are satisfied. The new company thresholds are as follows: Size - company Original thresholds New thresholds   Does not exceed  two or more of the following criteria for current and preceding year Does not exceed  two or more of the following criteria for current and preceding year Micro company Balance sheet total €350,000 Turnover €700,000 Employees 10 Balance sheet total €450,000 Turnover €900,000 Employees 10 Small company Balance sheet total €6 million Turnover €12 million Employees 50 Balance sheet total €7.5 million Turnover €15 million Employees 50 Medium company Balance sheet total €20 million Turnover €40 million Employees 250 Balance sheet total €25 million Turnover €50 million Employees 250 Large company: a company that does not qualify as a small company, a micro company or a medium company under the Companies Act, 2014 is deemed to be a large company (Section 280H Companies Act,2014).       Size - group Original thresholds New thresholds   Does not exceed two or more of the following criteria for current and preceding year Does not exceed two or more of the following criteria for current and preceding year Small group Balance sheet total €6 million net (€7.2 million gross) Turnover: €12 million net (€14.4 million gross) Employees 50 Balance sheet total: €7.5 million net (€9 million gross) Turnover: €15 million net (€18 million gross) Employees 50 Medium group Balance sheet total €20 million net (€24 million gross) Turnover €40 million net (€48 million gross) Employees 250 Balance sheet total: €25 million net (€30 million gross) Turnover: €50 million net (€60 million gross) Employees 250   This information is provided as resources and information only and nothing in these pages purports to provide professional advice or definitive legal interpretation(s) or opinion(s) on the applicable legislation or legal or other matters referred to in the pages. If the reader is in doubt on any matter in this complex area further legal or other advice must be obtained. While every reasonable care has been taken by the Institute in the preparation of these pages, we do not guarantee the accuracy or veracity of any resource, guidance, information or opinion, or the appropriateness, suitability or applicability of any practice or procedure contained therein. The Institute is not responsible for any errors or omissions or for the results obtained from the use of the resources or information contained in these pages.

“Auto Enrolment has been talked about for decades – now it is finally happening.” The words of Social Protection Minister Heather Humphreys after the Automatic Enrolment Retirement Savings System Bill passed through the Houses of the Oireachtas. Ireland is one step closer to catching up with every other OECD country that already has some form of auto-enrolment. It might be finally happening, but when is less clear. Momentum is needed to avoid the work of the last two decades being squandered. Two-thirds of Chartered Accountants Ireland’s members work in business, many of whom will be required to put such a scheme in place for their employees. The most recent formal communication from government suggests a start date sometime in 2025. And yet, putting in place the infrastructure to facilitate a system of pensions auto-enrolment is a mammoth task, and the list of outstanding deliverables at Department level is concerning before it even comes time for businesses to act. Hurdles to clear The legislative hurdle has now been cleared, but the Department of Social Protection has only in recent weeks appointed a company to build and run the new system. We are encouraged to see they have chosen a company that has a record of success in building the UK equivalent. We urge the Department to now expedite the appointment of a firm to manage the underlying investments. In recent weeks, it was reported that the Department of Finance has raised concerns that the auto enrolment legislation has been framed in a way that will force the regulator to apply a lower standard of oversight than that imposed on firms in the private pensions market. Other details also need to be clarified. In recent months, this Institute has requested such clarity in several areas. Many employers with staff who are likely to come within the remit of auto-enrolment will already have occupational pension schemes in place. To avoid the administrative complexity of setting up and operating a second staff pension scheme under auto enrolment, such employers may instead offer to extend participation in their current pension scheme to currently non-pensionable employees. However, if even just one of these employees refused to join the staff scheme in favour of being automatically enrolled, the employer would still be compelled to undertake the cost of setting up and operating a second scheme. We also sought more information around the meaning of “employee”, defined in the legislation as “a person in receipt of emoluments”. Such a definition would extend to individuals already in full-time pensionable employment who also undertake additional work who will therefore be required to contribute to a second pension scheme. Communication is going to be key The government’s recent SME package put a premium on the importance of consultation and dialogue with SMEs and other groups before introducing new legislation or policy affecting them. Auto enrolment is an opportunity to put this into practice. The government now needs to publish a road map and stick to it. While feedback was invited as part of an initial public consultation in 2018, since then only a very basic four-page guidance note for employers has been issued by government. To gain and maintain momentum, extensive and continuous stakeholder engagement is needed - not least with employers and payroll providers, upon whom the successful operation of the new system will be largely dependent. In a survey of small businesses conducted by Chartered Accountants Ireland, almost 90% felt that businesses had not been adequately informed of the steps needed to be taken by them to comply with pensions auto-enrolment in time for an early 2025 start date. Interestingly, three quarters of those surveyed will be required to introduce the new pension scheme, and for many this will be alongside their existing occupational pensions. Businesses need to see what the journey to implementation will look like. In a high-cost environment, this will give much needed reassurance and help to allay concerns. What is a realistic timeline? In its pre-legislative scrutiny report on the Bill introducing auto-enrolment, the Joint Committee on Social Protection recommended a two-year lead-in period, following the Bill being signed into law, to allow sufficient time for implementation. Payroll providers have been consistent in highlighting the need for an initial pilot phase to facilitate testing of the new system and to allow sufficient time to assimilate auto enrolment with current payroll systems. Neither of these fit into a 2025 implementation timeline. If officials truly want auto-enrolment to be a success, this timeline should be revisited and a 2026 or beyond start date announced. They may wish to avoid yet another postponement to the launch of auto enrolment but what should really matter here is getting it done right and giving businesses a chance to adapt. This additional time needs to be wisely used, by facilitating ongoing dialogue between departments, third party partners in implementation, and the many business groups and stakeholders who have walked this long road to auto enrolment.

In an era of digital surveillance, employees resort to performative tactics like "mouse shuffling." True productivity thrives on trust, communication, and effective people management—not monitoring, writes Moira Dunne Have you heard of the ‘mouse shuffle’ or coffee badging’ or ‘productivity theatre’ yet? These terms refer to tactics used by employees to show that they are working hard. Why? Because they work in companies where surveillance tools are used to monitor performance. Where working visibility is valued more than actual productivity. Monitoring our employees A recent Forbes survey found that 43 percent of American employees say their online activity is being monitored in 2024. What are we doing? Why are we monitoring people and using surveillance tools? Where did it all go wrong? As a Productivity Consultant passionate about helping businesses improve by achieving productivity through employee motivation, engagement and empowerment, reading about performative tactics, surveillance and mistrust sadden me greatly. When and, perhaps more importantly, why did employers revert to such old-school thinking –  that being seen equals working hard? Of course, the shift to remote working since the pandemic has changed how we work, but matching that with intelligent thinking and planning will help us understand the implications of that change. Leaders should consider adopting an ‘old-school’ strategy to boost productivity – good old-fashioned people management! This involves communication, building one-to-one relationships, providing clear goals and direction, setting weekly targets, empowering people, and providing constructive feedback and training. Productivity tools Managers and team leaders have a key role in enabling productivity. Many of the barriers can be reduced or removed by good communication, clarity and allowing people to protect time for their priority work. Empowering employees is key to their productivity and well-being, and by providing tools to aid their productivity, you show your team that you’re all in this together, trusting them to achieve the organisation’s goals. Here are five ways to help employees feel empowered and productive: Reduce meetings and improve decisions, actions and follow-up; Put a smart email practice in place so less time is spent on email each day; Agree on team and individual priorities and plans every week; Identify distractions within the team (such as other departments taking resources, etc) and work to reduce them; and Minimise time spent on low-value activities. You need to work with your team to identify any productivity barriers and stress factors. Good people management We don’t need heavy-handed monitoring tools to manage our employees. We need human connection, leadership and to learn to trust our employees when they aren’t in our immediate eyeline. In his Forbes article about mouse shuffling, organisational consultant David Campbell stresses that only when companies start trusting employees more and focus on the work they produce—not on how much they seem to be working—will trends like the ‘mouse shuffle’ fade away. He predicts that better work-life balance and happier employees would be the result. “Businesses should measure success by results, not by how much time someone seems to be working,” Campbell advises. “They should trust employees to manage their time and focus on achieving their goals, rather than simply being online all the time.” Moira Dunne is Founder of beproductive.ie

As the global economy faces constrained growth, high inflation, and regulatory pressures, the food industry must adapt to rising costs, technological disruptions, and geopolitical volatility, says Brian MacSweeney The 2024 economic outlook paints a mixed picture. Constrained growth across the leading economies, stubbornly high inflation, and slowness to ease the tightened monetary policy cycle mean industries are facing challenging operating environments. The food industry is no different and its relationship with these macro-economic factors is complex. For many years, the developed world has generally had a stable supply of cheap high-quality food. Recently, the status quo has been challenged. Brexit, war, labour shortages, supply chain disruption, regulation and climate change mean that the complex interlinkage will continue, but it will be more volatile than stable. Here are some of the global micro-trends and the impact they are having on the food and beverage sector. Labour availability and cost The current global labour trend is marked by shortages and increased costs. This has a ripple effect, slowing food production and distribution, and ultimately increasing the price of food. An example is the recent minimum wage increase in California for fast-food workers. This was an important step towards better living standards for workers, but the corollary is higher food prices. Fast food prices across chains in California are increasing. At a time of higher inflation, this disproportionately affects cohorts from socially disadvantaged backgrounds which is a key trend globally in the industry.  Commodity prices and inflation The FAO Food Price Index (FFPI) for June 2024 stood at 120.6 points. To put this into perspective, the FFPI averaged 125.7 points in 2021, which was a 28.1 percent increase over 2020. Therefore, the current FFPI is lower than the average for 2021, but it is still relatively high compared to historical standards. This is driven by various macroeconomic factors including climate. The poor cocoa harvest in Ghana and Ivory Coast has caused cocoa prices to spike. Coffee, too, has experienced a similar fate, with futures of coffee spiking due to heatwaves affecting major producers in South-East Asia. While we await general inflation to subside due to continuing government interest rate intervention, events like climate keep food prices elevated.  Policy and regulation Europe leads the way when it comes to the regulation of food where labelling, nitrate levels, flavour use, and unfair trade practices all have been legislated over the last number of years. The introduction of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) in the EU is having a transformative effect. While regulation means well, it can impact food yield and cost. In terms of price, not every government is explicitly regulating food prices, but because the cost of food is one of the clear ways the population sees inflation impacting their wallets, governments are intervening because they want the price of food kept flat or even reduced. Recently, the Canadian Prime Minister summoned CEOs of Canada’s five largest retailers and gave them a deadline to reduce the price of food, warning they would be subject to heavier regulation if they didn’t comply. Similar conversations are happening in various jurisdictions around the world, putting real pressure on the margins and cash flow.  Geo-politics Geopolitical instability, particularly war, has a profound impact on consumers and producers alike. For example, the impact of Brexit on food availability in the UK and the effect of the war in Ukraine on grain prices are well documented. The simple diversion of shipping from the Strait of Hormuz because of Houthi attacks that disrupt vital shipping routes to around the Horn of Africa has added days to supply chains and cost increases for consumers. These events are becoming more frequent making outlooks more unpredictable.  Disruption and technological advancement The pace of technological advancement is a significant challenge but also an enormous opportunity. AI and weight suppressing medications are key emerging disruptors. AI can significantly impact the value chain right from crop yield monitoring to customer experience. Weight loss drugs, such as Wegovy and Ozempic are not widely available in Ireland, but the pipeline of new alternatives including orally ingested drugs may alter consumer eating habits and food preferences, leading to a decrease in the consumption of high-calorie snacks and fast food. This disruption is a prominent agenda item for the boards considering their product offerings and strategies.  Optimism and opportunity Despite the challenging macro environment, we are beginning to see an easing of inflationary pressures due to the tight monetary policies pursued by central banks around the world. As inflation calms, monetary policy and interest rates will fall. This will drive a renewed consumer demand which will stimulate economic growth. The food industry is well-versed in managing economic cycles and has always been resilient and adaptable. It has consistently demonstrated its ability to evolve through challenges and changes over the years. During this period, there is huge opportunity for the Irish food industry. Already, Ireland is leading the way in sustainability. The acquisition profile of our companies is strategic and niche in sectors like food preservation, for example. The integration between food and energy companies is becoming more pronounced, with solar farms emerging alongside food plants and ongoing trials for bio-methane production – this is to solve the emissions problem. Moreover, our universities are spearheading cutting-edge research and fostering strong industry collaborations. While the landscape presents its challenges, it also offers great opportunities. As always, the future holds promise and potential for those ready to adapt.  Brian MacSweeney is a Audit Partner at KPMG

Despite severe economic challenges, Northern Ireland has avoided the wave of corporate failures seen in England and Wales, though future risks remain uncertain, writes Gareth Latimer Since the onset of the global pandemic in March 2020, assessing the restructuring market has become increasingly important. This is evident by the recent publication of The Northern Ireland Labour Market Report and The Company Insolvency Statistics for Northern Ireland, which gives a detailed analysis of redundancies and insolvencies in Northern Ireland. Below, we discuss what this trend could mean. Redundancies and insolvencies in Northern Ireland Published in July this year, The Northern Ireland Labour Market Report has put the annual number of confirmed redundancies in Northern Ireland up to June 2024 at 2,560 – almost double the figure for the previous year (1,340). Similarly, The Company Insolvency Statistics for Northern Ireland for June 2024 highlighted 17 corporate insolvencies in June 2024, which was 13 percent higher than in June 2023. Understanding the statistics As with any statistics, we must delve beyond the headlines to see their impact on the Northern Ireland market. The raw numbers tell one story, but the underlying trends and their broader implications reveal much more about our economic landscape. Initial predictions and government intervention When the COVID-19 pandemic hit the UK in March 2020, some commentators predicted a ‘tsunami of corporate failures and mass redundancies’. Thanks to the introduction of the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme, commonly known as the Furlough Scheme, the predicted large number of redundancies did not occur. Additional liquidity measures Several other liquidity measures, including the Bounce Back Loan Scheme (BBLS) and the Coronavirus Business Interruption Loan Scheme (CBILS) also played their part in staving off the large number of corporate failures many had predicted. Financial lifelines, in the form of loans and grants, were available to allow companies to survive the various lockdowns and the unprecedented drop in GDP in April and June 2020. However, having recovered from the economic effects of the pandemic, we then had the Russia-Ukraine war and the subsequent energy crisis. High inflation and interest rates followed. It is no wonder, then, that companies have been struggling. New insolvency procedures To help companies facing insolvency, two new procedures were created when The Corporate Insolvency and Governance Act 2020, which also applied to Northern Ireland, was implemented. Company moratorium: Designed to give struggling businesses formal breathing space in which to explore rescue and restructuring options, free from creditor and other legal action. Except in certain circumstances, insolvency proceedings cannot be instigated against a company during the moratorium period. Restructuring plans: Introduced to support viable companies struggling with unmanageable debt obligations. These plans allow the court to sanction a plan that binds creditors to a structuring plan if it is deemed fair and equitable. Creditors vote on the plan, but the court can impose it on dissenting classes of creditors (cram down) if the necessary conditions are met. However, despite the introduction of these new procedures, between 26 June 2020 and 30 June 2024, there was only one moratorium in Northern Ireland and no restructuring plans. The figures suggest that these options may hold less relevance for the Northern Ireland market compared to more traditional restructuring options. Labour market report insights One might have expected the Northern Ireland Labour Market Report to paint a bleak picture. The UK economy slipped into a mild recession in 2023, and the cost of living crisis continues. However, the anticipated surge in redundancies due to corporate failures has not materialised.  In fact, the unemployment rate in Northern Ireland for March to May 2024 fell over the quarter and the year to 2 percent. It is useful here to analyse and compare the June 2024 insolvency statistics. Northern Ireland saw 17 company insolvencies. And while each of these cases demonstrates financial distress for the company and employees involved, considering the economic backdrop, one might have anticipated a higher number of corporate failures. Indeed, this picture contrasts sharply with the headline insolvency statistics from England and Wales, where registered company insolvencies in June 2024 reached 2,361 – 16 percent higher than in May 2024 and 17 percent higher June 2023. The number of company insolvencies in England and Wales have remained much higher than those seen both during the COVID-19 pandemic and between 2014 and 2019. The disparity suggests that Northern Ireland’s insolvency rate is proportionately lower than that of England and Wales. Whether this resilience will hold, or if the rising tide of corporate failures in England and Wales will eventually reach these shores, remains to be seen. Future outlook with new government Given the recent Labour Party landslide victory in the UK, many are wondering how this shift will impact corporate failures and job redundancies. The new Chancellor, Rachel Reeves, is poised to play a crucial role. A former Bank of England employee, Reeves has continually stressed the importance of fiscal discipline, and given the current state of public finances, she may have no choice. It appears that the economic strategy is to grow the economy, and this will improve the Treasury coffers; easy to say but harder to deliver. The future It seems that in 2024, Northern Ireland has been somewhat insulated from the wave of corporate failures sweeping through England and Wales. While specific factors contribute to this relative calm, the recent reports suggest that, despite ongoing economic pressures, we’ve seen more of a ripple than a tsunami of insolvencies. Thankfully, the anticipated surge in corporate failures has not materialised. Clearly, this is positive news for the economy. Yet, with the recent economic headwinds, one can’t help but wonder if we are simply delaying the inevitable. Will 2025 finally bring the wave of corporate failures some have been expecting? Only time will tell. Gareth Latimer is a Director at Grant Thornton NI