←back to thread

56 points bmadduma | 4 comments | | HN request time: 3.328s | source

Working on automating small business finance (bookkeeping, reconciliation, basic reporting).

One thing I keep noticing: compared to programming, accounting often looks like the more automatable problem:

It’s rule-based Double entry, charts of accounts, tax rules, materiality thresholds. For most day-to-day transactions you’re not inventing new logic, you’re applying existing rules.

It’s verifiable The books either balance or they don’t. Ledgers either reconcile or they don’t. There’s almost always a “ground truth” to compare against (bank feeds, statements, prior periods).

It’s boring and repetitive Same vendors, same categories, same patterns every month. Humans hate this work. Software loves it.

With accounting, at least at the small-business level, most of the work feels like:

normalize data from banks / cards / invoices

apply deterministic or configurable rules

surface exceptions for human review

run consistency checks and reports

The truly hard parts (tax strategy, edge cases, messy history, talking to authorities) are a smaller fraction of the total hours but require humans. The grind is in the repetitive, rule-based stuff.

Show context
notahacker ◴[] No.46238924[source]
Lots of this is already being done (and using computers to check books balanced predates latest gen AI by some decades). But of course what accountants actually get paid for is tax strategy, edge cases, messy history and talking to authorities (or at least having their stamp of approval on it if the authorities come calling). There's plenty of market for writing software to automate aspects of invoice reconciliation or monitoring accounts for exceptions, but competition already exists...
replies(1): >>46242024 #
jononor ◴[] No.46242024[source]
At the SMB scale accountants are mostly paid to coach/pester/goade the employees to hand in the necessary paperwork in time. The accountants job is relatively quick from there on.
replies(2): >>46246393 #>>46304377 #
1. RaftPeople ◴[] No.46246393[source]
> At the SMB scale accountants are mostly paid to coach/pester/goade the employees to hand in the necessary paperwork in time.

The perfect job for AI.

replies(1): >>46253587 #
2. impendia ◴[] No.46253587[source]
I'm not sure if you're being sincere or sarcastic, but the whole reason that coaching, pestering, and goading works is that I value my relationship with the human who is doing it.
replies(1): >>46293723 #
3. AmbroseBierce ◴[] No.46293723[source]
So what you are saying it's that the AI accountant needs to mimick a human well enough to the point people value their relationship with it.
replies(1): >>46293800 #
4. manwe150 ◴[] No.46293800{3}[source]
No, you need to make the AI endure torture, so that the human has a reason to value it. Say late nights with less power and a little extra heat to stress it. But the usefulness of an AI assistant is that it doesn’t have feelings or consciousness to care about