FREE one month of bookkeeping. Click for the discount code.
Corviniti/Services/Technical Accounting

Services / Technical Accounting

Technical Accounting

The judgment areas that drive restatements and SEC comments, with the accounting answers. This is what we research, conclude, and document for clients every week.

We research the position, land the conclusion, and write the memo your auditors can test without weeks of back-and-forth.

Or email info@corviniti.com · book a 30-minute call

On this page

Most restatements trace back to a short list of standards: revenue recognition, leases, business combinations, stock compensation, and the debt-versus-equity line. They share a trait: the guidance requires judgment, and judgment requires documentation. An undocumented position is indistinguishable from a guess when an auditor or regulator tests it.

Below are the five areas where our technical practice spends most of its time, with the framework and the answer for the fact patterns we see most, plus what an audit-ready memo actually contains. If your question is in one of these areas, the treatment section is a preview of the memo we would write.

Issue 01

Revenue recognition: the five steps and the two trapsASC 606

ASC 606 is a single model, but two judgments generate most of the findings: identifying the performance obligations (is this one promise or three) and principal versus agent (is revenue the gross billing or the net fee). Both change the top line, and the second can change it by multiples.

The treatment

Run the five steps against the actual contracts, not the sales deck. For performance obligations, promises are distinct when the customer can benefit from them separately and they are separately identifiable in context; bundles that are inputs to one combined output (a system plus essential integration) collapse into a single obligation with one pattern of recognition. For principal versus agent, the question is control of the specified good or service before transfer: inventory risk, discretion in pricing, and primary responsibility are indicators, not a checklist, and the conclusion is per specified good or service, so one arrangement can be gross for one component and net for another. Marketplace, advertising, and platform businesses live on this analysis: the difference between presenting gross media spend and a net take rate is the difference between two entirely different income statements. Then document standalone selling prices, variable consideration constraints, and modification accounting, and keep the memos current as contract terms evolve.

What we do: We analyze the actual contracts, conclude on obligations and gross versus net, and deliver the revenue memo and policy your auditors test.

From our engagements: for a digital advertising platform preparing to go public, the gross-versus-net conclusion on traffic acquisition costs shaped the revenue presentation investors saw in the S-1. That analysis was a memo the auditors and underwriters both tested.
Issue 02

Leases: finding them, classifying them, remeasuring themASC 842

The balance sheet now carries every lease, and the errors concentrate in three places: contracts nobody realized were leases (embedded leases in service and supply deals), incremental borrowing rates picked casually, and modifications and remeasurements booked late or not at all.

The treatment

Start with completeness: screen service, logistics, power, and manufacturing agreements for embedded leases, an identified asset the supplier cannot substitute plus customer control of its use, because the missed population is a bigger audit risk than the measurement of known leases. Classify at commencement (finance versus operating drives expense pattern, not balance sheet), and support the incremental borrowing rate with a real methodology: collateralized rate, lease term, currency, and entity credit, refreshed as rates move. Then run the events: modifications either create a separate contract or trigger remeasurement with an updated rate; term-option reassessments, impairments of right-of-use assets, and sublease accounting each have defined mechanics. A lease accounting policy plus a completeness control plus a modification log is the package that makes this area quiet at audit.

What we do: We run the embedded-lease screen, support the borrowing rate, and keep the modification log so lease accounting stays quiet at audit.

Issue 03

Business combinations: allocation, earnouts, and the screenASC 805

Deal accounting decides years of future earnings in a few weeks: what is a business versus an asset purchase, what fair values attach to intangibles, how earnouts are classified, and what happens inside the measurement period. Each is testable and each is commonly wrong.

The treatment

Run the screen test first: if substantially all the fair value sits in a single asset or similar-asset group, it is an asset acquisition with no goodwill and different contingent payment accounting. For true business combinations, allocate at fair value with valuation support for customer relationships, technology, and trade names, recognize deferred taxes on the basis differences, and note ASU 2021-08’s change: acquired contract assets and deferred revenue now come over at ASC 606 carrying basis rather than haircut fair value, which ended a generation of post-deal revenue dips. Earnouts to sellers are contingent consideration at fair value, remeasured through earnings, unless tied to continuing employment, in which case they are compensation. The measurement period caps at one year and only reaches back to facts existing at close; everything after is an error correction. Transaction costs expense as incurred. We write the allocation memo and coordinate the valuation so the first post-deal audit tests a documented position.

What we do: We write the allocation memo, coordinate the valuation, and map the deferred taxes into one opening balance sheet package.

Sitting on one of these questions right now? Send us the fact pattern and we will tell you what the memo would conclude.

Talk to an Expert
Issue 04

Stock compensation: conditions, modifications, and cheap stockASC 718

Equity compensation errors compound quietly: performance conditions expensed on the wrong trigger, modifications booked as new grants, repricings unaccounted for, and pre-IPO valuations that cannot survive the comparison to a deal or offering price.

The treatment

Sort every award’s vesting terms into the three categories, because the accounting diverges completely: service conditions expense ratably; performance conditions (milestones, exits, approvals) expense only when the outcome is probable, which for IPO- or sale-contingent vesting typically means a concentrated charge when the event occurs; market conditions (share price hurdles) are built into grant-date fair value via simulation and expensed regardless of achievement. Modifications, repricings, extended exercise windows, accelerations, are accounted for as an exchange: incremental fair value is additional expense, and Type III improbable-to-probable modifications remeasure entirely. For private companies, maintain contemporaneous 409A support and expect the cheap stock comparison against any subsequent financing or offering price. The award-by-award inventory with the condition classification is the workpaper that keeps this area clean.

What we do: We build the award-by-award inventory with condition classification, account for modifications, and maintain the cheap stock bridge.

Issue 05

Debt versus equity: SAFEs, converts, warrants, preferredASC 480 / 815

Every instrument on a growth-stage cap table asks the same question: liability or equity? The answer controls whether the balance sheet carries a fair-value liability remeasured through earnings every quarter, and it is the first thing tested in any audit, financing, or filing.

The treatment

Run the waterfall in order and document each step: ASC 480 first (mandatorily redeemable instruments, obligations to issue a variable number of shares worth a fixed amount), then ASC 815-40 indexation (is the instrument indexed only to the entity’s own stock) and the equity classification conditions (share settlement within authorized limits, no cash-out events outside the entity’s control). In practice: most SAFEs fail equity classification and sit as fair-value liabilities; convertible notes after ASU 2020-06 mostly remain single liabilities with fewer bifurcations but a diluted EPS if-converted cost; warrants divide on their settlement terms, with holder-dependent provisions forcing liability treatment; redeemable preferred in private companies typically lands in temporary equity under the SEC’s framework once redemption is outside the company’s control. Every conclusion carries an EPS consequence, so the memo covers 480, 815, and 260 together. Write it at issuance; reconstructing intent two years later convinces nobody.

What we do: We classify each instrument at issuance in one memo covering ASC 480, 815, and the EPS consequences together.

From our engagements: our instrument memos routinely cover a full cap table in one document per instrument, through S-1 filings and first audits, including crowdfunded SAFEs, bridge notes, and IPO-contingent warrants.
Issue 06

What an audit-ready position memo actually containsDocumentation

The difference between a position that clears in a week and one that consumes a quarter is rarely the conclusion. It is whether the documentation lets a skeptical reader, an audit senior, a national office reviewer, an SEC accountant, walk from facts to answer without asking for anything.

The treatment

Every memo we issue carries the same spine: the facts, stated from the actual contracts with the relevant terms quoted, not summarized from memory; the question, framed as the accounting alternatives genuinely available; the guidance, cited to the Codification paragraphs that govern, including the ones that cut against the conclusion; the analysis, applying each criterion to the facts and addressing the counterarguments a reviewer would raise; the conclusion, with the journal entries, financial statement presentation, and disclosure it produces; and the sensitivity, what fact changes would flip the answer, which is what makes the memo durable as the business evolves. Attach the contracts. A memo built this way is testable evidence; anything less is a narrative the auditors must rebuild themselves, at your expense.

What we do: Every position we deliver follows this structure, with the contracts attached, so it stands as testable audit evidence.

How We Help

What we deliver

On a technical engagement, you get positions your auditors can test, not opinions in an email.

Position memosFacts, guidance, alternatives, conclusion, and disclosure impact, with the contracts attached.
Policies and templatesAccounting policies and recurring-transaction templates so the conclusion scales past the memo.
Journal entries and disclosureThe conclusion carried through to the entries, presentation, and footnotes.
Auditor resolutionWe present the position, field the national office questions, and close the item.

When companies bring us in

  • A transaction is closing and the accounting conclusion needs to exist before it does.
  • Your auditors raised a position question your team cannot resolve with documentation.
  • Revenue, instruments, leases, or stock comp have never been formally documented and an audit or filing is coming.
  • You want a standing technical function without hiring one.

Talk to an Expert

Our Experience

Where we have done this work

Engagement Notes

Revenue presentation with the top line at stake

Principal-versus-agent analysis for platform and advertising businesses where gross versus net presentation changes reported revenue by multiples: contract-level control analysis, indicator weighing, and the memo that supported the presentation through audit and a public filing.

Engagement Notes

Full cap table to filing-ready

Instrument-by-instrument classification for companies heading to audits and registration statements: SAFEs and crowdfunded variants, convertible bridge notes, warrants, and redeemable preferred, each memo covering ASC 480, 815, and the EPS consequences together, delivered in tracked-changes form for auditor review.

Contact Us

Contact Us to Learn More

Call: (347) 472-1115
Email: info@corviniti.com

The best way to get started is to complete the form below. Tell us a bit about your business and we will advise on how best to get started.

We will get back to you within 24 hours.

Ro Sokhi, CPA
Ro Sokhi, CPA
Founder · Big Four trained · 20+ years

We will get back to you within 24 hours.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does a technical accounting memo include?

The facts, the applicable guidance, the analysis of alternatives, and a documented conclusion. Our memos are written so an auditor can test the position without weeks of back-and-forth.

Can you work directly with our auditors on technical issues?

Yes. We present positions, respond to their national office questions, and resolve issues before they become findings. Companies bring us in precisely because we speak the same language.

We have a transaction closing soon. How fast can you turn a position?

Quickly. Transaction-driven memos are a core part of the practice, and we routinely deliver audit-ready positions inside transaction timelines.

Do you only write memos, or do you also book the accounting?

Both. We can stop at the position paper or carry the conclusion through journal entries, financial statement presentation, and disclosure.

Which standards generate the most issues for growth companies?

Revenue recognition under ASC 606, equity and convertible instruments, stock compensation including cheap stock, and business combinations. These four areas drive most restatements and SEC comments for pre-IPO and newly public companies.