Skip to main content
FGL Knowledge Desk · Assurance & accountability

Governance & Controls

Internal audit, risk, internal controls, board oversight and accountability translated into practical organisational decisions.

Internal auditControls & evidenceBoard oversightRisk & accountability

Governance becomes useful when it changes how decisions are made, challenged, documented and monitored. This desk brings together internal audit, controls, risk, accountability and real cases where governance systems worked — or failed.

Internal audit and assurance

Internal audit is treated as an assurance and early-warning function, not a policing exercise.

FGL Case Briefs: real events and professional lessons → Case Brief: When an ERP Go-Live Breaks the Financial Control Chain → Automation for Finance Teams: controls, evidence and responsible automation →

Corporate governance and organisational behaviour

Boards, management systems and culture are connected: formal structures are only as strong as the behaviour operating through them.

Culture

Organizational Culture: The Foundation Management Often Ignores

Why culture is not merely an HR subject and how it shapes control, accountability and performance.

Read article → Related desk

Leadership & Culture

Explore the people, behaviours and leadership choices that sit beneath formal governance structures.

Explore desk →

Risk, controls and evidence

Controls should reduce preventable risk while preserving clear evidence that a process operated as intended.

Reconciliation controls

Reconciling ERP Sales, VAT Sales and Income Tax Returns

A practical example of how reconciliation design connects system data, reporting and tax evidence.

Read guide → Automation controls

Automation for Finance Teams

Automation is useful only when ownership, validation, exception handling and audit trails remain clear.

Read article →

Learn through cases

Case briefs convert real failures, disputes and regulator findings into short, sourced professional lessons.

Open the FGL Case Brief library →
Governance principle: FGL does not treat stronger controls as more bureaucracy by default. The objective is proportional control — clear responsibilities, reliable evidence, appropriate challenge and processes that help the organisation make better decisions.
Looking for a specific older item?Use the Blogger governance search →

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ernst & Young v URA: VAT on Imported Services and the UGX 3.48 Billion Assessment

By
Jurisdiction: Uganda · Decision: Commercial Court, Civil Appeal No. 26 of 2022 · Judgment date: 11 June 2026 · FGL review: September 2026 Uganda's Commercial Court has upheld a VAT assessment of UGX 3,482,492,210 against Ernst & Young Uganda in a dispute over services received from non-resident group entities and other foreign service providers. The decision is important because it gives businesses a current judicial example of how Uganda's imported-services VAT rules can apply to cross-border support, technology and professional-service arrangements. What the case was about In Ernst and Young v Uganda Revenue Authority , Civil Appeal No. 26 of 2022, the dispute concerned services obtained from entities outside Uganda, including members of the wider EY network and third-party foreign suppliers. URA treated the services as imported services and assessed VAT for the period January 2014 to June 2018. EY challenged the treatment, including arguments about where the s...
1 comment
Read more

Stanbic-URA Transfer-Pricing Dispute: What Finance Teams Should Learn While the Case Is Pending

By
Jurisdiction: Uganda · Topic: Transfer pricing and tax dispute management · Status: Pending before the Tax Appeals Tribunal at the time of this FGL review · FGL review: 21 September 2026 Stanbic Bank Uganda Limited and Stanbic Uganda Holdings Limited are contesting a major transfer-pricing assessment by the Uganda Revenue Authority (URA). Public reporting places the working dispute figure at approximately UGX 117.8 billion , and the Tax Appeals Tribunal listed TAT Application No. 170 of 2025 for conferencing in June 2026. This article does not attempt to decide who is right. The dispute is still being litigated. Instead, it uses the publicly available record to explain what finance teams can learn about related-party charges, evidence, tax governance and the management of unresolved assessments. What the dispute is about The dispute arises from URA's review of related-party transactions involving Stanbic's Ugandan operations and entities within the wider...
Post a Comment
Read more

Reconciling ERP Sales, EFRIS, VAT and Income Tax Returns: A Practical Guide

By
Scope: Uganda · Topic: Revenue reconciliation across ERP, EFRIS, VAT and income tax · FGL review: September 2026 Sales should be explainable across every system a business uses, but they will not always be numerically identical. An ERP may record invoices and journals, EFRIS records fiscal documents, VAT follows statutory supply rules, financial statements apply accounting standards, and the income-tax return applies tax rules to annual business income. The control objective is therefore not to force all four numbers to match. It is to build a documented bridge that explains why they differ, whether each difference is valid, and what evidence supports it. Why the numbers can legitimately differ A difference can arise from timing, classification, system configuration or tax treatment. Common examples include advance billings, deferred income, unbilled revenue, credit notes, exempt or zero-rated supplies, manual journals, foreign-currency treatment, customer-contra...
Post a Comment
Read more