Defined cutoffs
Avoid explaining an export-timing difference as an evidence failure.
Proposed workflow 05 / Explain the population difference
Your engine. Your GL.
One reviewable bridge.
Compare tax-engine treatment, GL exempt sales and exemption evidence for an agreed period. Give each difference a reason and an owner.
Research-stage concept · illustrative product preview
EXEMPTLINK / MONTHLY RECONCILIATIONCONCEPT PREVIEW
Illustrative mobile scene
Three populations, one difference
Use a labeled three-row table before the difference note.
Human review requiredDEMO — SYNTHETIC DATAFinite sequence · reviewed states
Primary owner
Controller and indirect-tax lead
Inputs
Bounded historical engine, GL and exemption exports with agreed entity/period mappings.
Proposed output
A population bridge, difference register, assigned owner and review status.
The job it owns
Monthly tax-engine versus GL/exemption reconciliation.
Each offer is an independent managed-workflow hypothesis. The initial scope is historical evidence for one US state.
Control totals
Numbers and bar lengths agree with the actual sample populations.
No book changes
The proposal produces a review register, with no GL or tax-return write.
The work, step by step
From source to
reviewable output.
Align the populations
Agree period, entity, currency, credits, reversals and cutoffs.
Trace the difference
Connect each unmatched item to a source row and cause.
Assign the review
Record the next action without changing books or returns.
Synthetic product evidence
Three totals.
One explained difference.
The sample’s USD 900 difference is not a tax liability or recovered amount. The 100-sale linkage pilot cannot stand in for a complete monthly GL population.
Open sample reportHow value is tested
Measure what your
current workflow misses.
Which reconciliation control already exists, and what incremental review does the pilot add?
Existing coverage
Capture current-suite alerts, configured modules and the reviewer’s usual process for the same sample.
Incremental findings
Count tax-lead-confirmed, previously unidentified, remediable gaps. Record false positives, omissions and review effort.
A purchase decision
Proceed only with tax-owner sign-off and a signed, funded audit-prep pilot. Stop when the incumbent already closes the job at lower cost.
Workflow questions
Know the boundary.
What does the USD 900 example mean?
The fictional engine export omits TX-096. GL and evidence sample totals are USD 16,000; the engine total is USD 15,100. The difference needs review.
Is this included automatically in the first pilot?
No. Each workflow is tested independently. Reconciliation additionally requires properly bounded monthly exports.
Can this workflow change returns or source systems?
No. The starting scope is permissioned historical evidence and human review. The preview does not execute outbound actions or system writes.
A bounded first step
Test this workflow
with your tax owner.
A population bridge, difference register, assigned owner and review status. Start with a scoped conversation before sharing any records.
Discuss monthly reconciliation
Proposed pilot · no records required to start