A taxpayer can pay the exact amount agreed as principal tax and still discover years later that the tax ledger shows principal outstanding and interest continuing to accumulate. That problem sat at the centre of CARE International in Uganda v Uganda Revenue Authority , TAT Application No. 353 of 2025, decided by Uganda's Tax Appeals Tribunal on 7 September 2026. The ruling is important for finance and tax teams because it moves the discussion beyond whether tax was paid. It asks the next control question: how was the payment actually allocated on the taxpayer's ledger? FGL takeaway: Paying a tax assessment is not the final control. The payment must also be reconciled to the tax authority's ledger, including how the amount was split between principal tax, penal tax and interest. The dispute in brief CARE International in Uganda is a non-profit international organisation involved in humanitarian activities and emergency response. The underly...

The practical answer IAS 16 is not mainly a rule about calculating depreciation. It is a decision process that starts when money is spent and continues until the asset leaves the books. The accountant must decide whether the expenditure creates or improves a resource that will be used for more than one period, which costs belong in the asset, when the asset is ready for use, how its significant parts are consumed, and when an impairment or disposal entry is required. The everyday discipline is simple: identify the asset, build a supported cost, record the available-for-use date, separate significant components, choose a consumption pattern, review estimates and reconcile the fixed-asset register to the general ledger. A mathematically correct depreciation charge can still be wrong if any earlier decision was wrong. What IAS 16 covers IAS 16 applies to tangible items held for production, supply, rental or administration that are expected to be used for more than one period. Co...

The short answer. A growing business needs controls that keep decisions, transactions and evidence reliable as the number of people, systems, suppliers and customers increases. The aim is not to create bureaucracy. It is to identify the risks that could prevent the business from meeting its objectives, assign responsibility, design proportionate checks, keep evidence and correct failures promptly. Informal controls often work while the owner sees most transactions and a small team shares the same information. Growth weakens that visibility. Approvals become less clear, access rights accumulate, reconciliations fall behind and exceptions are resolved through private messages rather than documented processes. At that point, trust still matters, but trust alone cannot show whether a transaction was authorised, recorded correctly and reviewed. Scope: General / International Last reviewed: 24 October 2026 Scope and authority This guide explains internal control as a management...

FGL CASE BRIEF Governance & Internal Controls KPMG Australia: What the Confidential Information Scandal Teaches About Governance, Independence and Oversight Forum / Authority: Australian Parliament, ASIC investigations and related regulatory scrutiny Organisation: KPMG Australia Decision Area: Governance, audit independence, whistleblower handling and confidential information management Jurisdiction: Australia Content Type: FGL Governance Case Brief 1. What Happened? In 2026, KPMG Australia faced significant public scrutiny following allegations that confidential information obtained through audit relationships had been shared internally and used in connection with efforts to secure audit engagements. The matter expanded beyond the original allegations. Questions emerged regarding the handling of whistleblower concerns, the adequacy of internal investigations, leadership accountability and the effectiveness of governance oversight within the firm. The c...

Forum: Uganda Registration Services Bureau Case: Company Petition 54012 of 2026 Decision date: 18 September 2026 Citation: 2026 UGRSB 49 What happened The dispute concerned the removal of a director from Global Outreach Development East Africa Limited and the validity of changes reflected in the company register. The petitioner also sought relief on the basis of oppression. The Registrar first considered whether the petitioner had the legal standing required to pursue that remedy. The decision ultimately separated two questions: whether the petitioner qualified to pursue an oppression claim as a member of the company, and whether the process used to remove the director was legally valid. ULII summarises the decision as finding that the Registrar lacked jurisdiction to entertain the oppression claim because the petitioner lacked the required membership standing. However, the Registrar still found that the director removal had been unlawfully procured and ordere...

The practical answer IFRS 16 requires most lessees to recognise a right-of-use asset and a lease liability. The difficult work happens before the journal entry: finding all contracts that may contain leases, identifying the asset, assessing who controls its use, determining the enforceable lease term, separating service components and obtaining a supportable discount rate. A reliable process follows the contract from legal terms to accounting judgments, a present-value calculation, an approved lease schedule and periodic reconciliation. Posting equal monthly rent expense without this analysis is not the normal lessee model under IFRS 16, except when a recognition exemption is properly applied. First identify a lease A contract is or contains a lease when it conveys the right to control the use of an identified asset for a period of time in exchange for consideration. A contract called a service agreement may contain a lease, while a contract called a lease may include substan...

The Evergrande and PwC story is easy to dismiss as a problem involving a very large Chinese property developer and an international audit network. That would miss the practical lesson. The same pressures that appear in large corporate failures can also exist in a growing Ugandan company: demanding sales targets, debt-funded expansion, weak documentation, dominant founders, restricted access to information, management-selected evidence and accountants who feel unable to challenge senior leaders. The central lesson is straightforward. An external audit is important, but it is not a substitute for honest accounting, reliable transaction evidence, effective internal controls, informed directors and professional judgement. A clean audit opinion cannot make an incomplete project complete, turn a deposit into earned revenue or convert an unsupported journal entry into a genuine business transaction. This article explains what regulators have already established, what remains unresolved in c...