Compare
Review available prior-year signals against current evidence.
Present potential changes and inconsistencies with the source context needed for professional resolution before the firm finalizes the return.
Review available prior-year signals against current evidence.
Surface potential changes, gaps, and consistency questions.
Gather facts and document the professional's resolution.
Keep material judgment and sign-off with the authorized reviewer.
Client requests are separated from the work.
Owners and deadlines require manual follow-up.
Review status is difficult to see.
Requests and documents stay with the client.
Owners, due dates, and next actions stay visible.
Review and delivery remain part of the workflow.
Keep prior/current evidence comparison visible and connected to the next action.
Make ownership, review readiness, corrections, and approvals clear to the team.
Keep severity and confidence context visible and connected to the next action.
Keep missing-information prompts visible and connected to the next action.
Make ownership, review readiness, corrections, and approvals clear to the team.
Make ownership, review readiness, corrections, and approvals clear to the team.
Evidence comparison, consistency flags, review summaries, and human-resolution workflow are implemented in the guided client-app preview.
Client context stays connected.
Team ownership stays visible.
Professional review stays in the workflow.
Choose one representative engagement and its handoffs.
Set the owners, stages, deadlines, and review steps.
Walk the workflow with the people who do the work.
Bring the proven workflow to the rest of the practice.
No. The workflow supports reviewers; it does not make or approve material tax decisions.
No. Results depend on available evidence and configured checks and do not guarantee accuracy or completeness.