CONTROLS & RISK

What Is OFAC? Why Sanctions Screening Matters in Accounts Payable

Understanding the SDN List, vendor screening, and the internal controls that help keep prohibited payments out of Accounts Payable.

By Accounts Payable Professionals Group | October 10, 2026

The U.S. Treasury Building in Washington, D.C.,

Every Accounts Payable (AP) department has a responsibility to make sure payments go to legitimate vendors. One important part of this process is checking whether a vendor is subject to U.S. government sanctions.

That is where the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) comes in.

What Is OFAC?

OFAC is an agency within the U.S. Department of the Treasury. It administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions based on U.S. foreign policy and national security objectives.

These sanctions may target individuals, companies, organizations, and governments involved in terrorism, drug trafficking, weapons proliferation, or other activities that threaten U.S. interests.

For AP departments, the concern is straightforward: a payment to a prohibited party can violate federal law.

What Is the SDN List?

OFAC maintains the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN) List.

This list identifies individuals and organizations whose property and interests in property are generally blocked under U.S. sanctions.

U.S. businesses generally cannot conduct transactions with these parties unless authorized.

However, the SDN List is not the only resource AP departments should consider. OFAC also maintains other sanctions lists that carry different restrictions.

Why Vendor Screening Matters

Vendor screening should be part of an organization's internal control procedures.

Before establishing a new vendor, AP personnel should follow company procedures to determine whether the vendor presents sanctions-related risks.

Screening may also be appropriate when vendor information changes or before payments are released.

A company cannot assume that a vendor approved several years ago remains acceptable today. Sanctions lists change regularly.

Understanding the 50 Percent Rule

One important OFAC requirement is the 50 Percent Rule.

An entity that is owned 50 percent or more, directly or indirectly and in aggregate, by one or more blocked persons is generally considered blocked, even when the entity itself does not appear on the SDN List.

This makes vendor ownership information an important compliance consideration.

Read OFAC's official 50 Percent Rule guidance

Five Practical Controls for AP Departments

1. Screen new vendors according to the company's risk-based compliance procedures.
2. Review existing vendors periodically based on risk and sanctions-list changes.
3. Investigate potential matches before clearing alerts or releasing affected payments.
4. Maintain documentation of screening results, decisions, and approvals.
5. Escalate unresolved matches to the compliance or legal department.

A possible name match does not automatically mean a vendor is prohibited. Proper investigation is essential.

Where to Check OFAC Sanctions

The U.S. Treasury provides a free OFAC Sanctions List Search Tool , which searches both SDN and consolidated non-SDN lists.

Companies should also consult the official OFAC website for current regulations and guidance.

The Bottom Line

OFAC screening is more than a vendor onboarding task. It is an ongoing compliance responsibility that helps protect organizations from prohibited transactions, financial penalties, and reputational damage.

For Accounts Payable professionals, effective sanctions screening is another essential layer of strong internal controls.

From the APPG Archives

Accounts Payable Professionals Group first covered OFAC and the SDN List in January 2011. See how this important compliance topic was explained 15 years ago in our original article: What Is OFAC and the SDN List?

Official Sources and Further Reading

• U.S. Treasury: Office of Foreign Assets Control
• OFAC Sanctions List Search
• OFAC FAQ 401: The 50 Percent Rule
• A Framework for OFAC Compliance Commitments

Editorial Note: This article was developed with the assistance of artificial intelligence and edited, reviewed, and approved by Robert Ruhno, Executive Director of the Accounts Payable Professionals Group (APPG).

This article is intended for educational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Organizations should consult their compliance or legal professionals regarding applicable sanctions requirements.

APPG Leadership

Robert Ruhno

Executive Director

Robert leads APPG’s mission, editorial direction, member community, and efforts to advance the Accounts Payable profession.

Mariann Ruhno

Chief Education Officer

Mariann leads APPG’s education strategy, professional-development resources, and initiatives designed to help AP professionals strengthen their skills and careers.

Practical education, reporting, and community resources for Accounts Payable professionals.

LinkedIn X Facebook Instagram

Back to top ↑

IRS MILEAGE | TRAVEL & EXPENSE

IRS Mileage Rates vs. Gasoline Prices: What the 2026 Numbers Really Show

By Accounts Payable Professionals Group
Updated October 9, 2026

In April 2016, Accounts Payable Professionals Group asked a simple question: What happens when we plot IRS business mileage rates against average U.S. gasoline prices?

The original chart showed that the two move in related, but not identical, ways. Ten years later, the comparison is even more useful, especially after the IRS made a midyear adjustment in 2026.

IRS business mileage rates compared with U.S. gasoline prices. The 2026 gasoline figure is a weekly October snapshot, not a full-year average.

The IRS Raised Mileage Rates Twice in 2026

The business standard mileage rate began 2026 at 72.5 cents per mile, up from 70 cents in 2025. Following increases in fuel prices, the IRS raised it again to 76 cents per mile effective July 1, 2026.

That second change matters to Accounts Payable teams processing travel and expense reimbursements.

Mileage purpose	Jan. to June 2026	July to Dec. 2026
Business	72.5¢	76¢
Medical	20.5¢	23.5¢
Eligible moving	20.5¢	23.5¢
Charitable service	14¢	14¢

The IRS said the midyear revision was prompted by recent fuel-price increases. The charitable rate is set by law and did not change. Moving-expense deductions have strict eligibility rules. Source: IRS Announcement 2026-11.

What Gasoline Prices Tell Us

The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) reports that regular gasoline averaged $2.143 per gallon in 2016 and $3.097 in 2025.

For the week of October 5, 2026, the national average stood at $4.354 per gallon.

That last number is a weekly snapshot, not an annual average. It should not be treated as though it measures the same period as the 2016 and 2025 figures.

Even so, it illustrates why fuel costs are again a serious concern for employees who drive on company business.

For comparison, the IRS business mileage rate was 54 cents in 2016, 70 cents in 2025, and is now 76 cents for the second half of 2026.

The new rate is 22 cents higher than it was when APPG first published this comparison.

Why the Lines Do Not Match Perfectly

The IRS business mileage rate is not a gasoline-only allowance.

It is based on fixed and variable vehicle costs, including fuel, depreciation, insurance, tires, maintenance, and repairs.

Gasoline can change quickly. The mileage rate usually changes less often and reflects more than the price at the pump.

Consider 100 qualifying business miles in a car that averages 25 miles per gallon.

At the EIA's October 5 gasoline price, the fuel alone would cost about $17.42.

Using the second-half 2026 IRS business rate, 100 miles would calculate to $76.00.

The difference is not simply extra pay or profit. The standard mileage rate also accounts for other costs of using a personal vehicle for business.

What Accounts Payable Should Check

For companies using IRS rates as their reimbursement benchmark, the July increase creates an important expense-report control point:

1. Apply the correct effective date. Distinguish business travel before July 1 from travel on or after July 1, and follow the IRS rules for mileage allowances and payment dates.
2. Check the mileage record. Require the date, business purpose, trip details, and qualifying miles. Ordinary commuting should not be counted as business mileage.
3. Prevent double reimbursement. Make sure employees are not claiming gasoline paid on a company card and a full personal-vehicle mileage allowance for the same miles without an appropriate policy-based adjustment.
4. Coordinate AP, payroll, and policy owners. The IRS rate is an optional tax benchmark, not a universal federal requirement for every private employer to pay that exact amount. Applicable state law, company policy, and accountable-plan rules also matter.

A mileage reimbursement is only as reliable as the policy and documentation behind it.

Companies should also review how reimbursement software handles a midyear rate change, particularly if expense reports contain trips from both halves of 2026.

The Bigger Picture

APPG's 2016 chart raised a useful question, but the 2026 lesson is clearer: gasoline prices influence mileage rates without determining them dollar for dollar.

For AP professionals, the practical work is to use the correct rate, verify the business purpose, and keep reimbursements consistent and auditable.

Sources and Further Reading

• IRS Standard Mileage Rates
• IRS Midyear Mileage Announcement
• EIA Annual Gasoline Price History
• EIA Weekly Gasoline Prices
• IRS Publication 15
• APPG Original Article, April 2016

Editorial Note: This article was developed with the assistance of artificial intelligence and is subject to editorial review and approval by Accounts Payable Professionals Group.

Robert Ruhno | Executive Director

Accounts Payable Professionals Group

LinkedIn  ·  X  ·  Facebook

Back to top ↑

A/P HALL OF SHAME

A/P Hall of Shame | Accounts Payable Specialist Steals $434,000 Through Fake Refunds

By Accounts Payable Professionals Group

Photo: Kaboompics / Pexels | Graphic treatment: Accounts Payable Professionals Group

An accounts payable specialist at a St. Louis-area medical business was sentenced in April 2026 after admitting to stealing approximately $434,000 from his employer through fraudulent patient refunds.

According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Missouri , Talon Lewis, 33, worked as an accounts payable specialist and was responsible for uploading lists of patients who were owed refunds. The company used those lists to generate and mail refund checks.

Prosecutors said Lewis exploited that process by adding himself, friends and acquaintances to the refund lists, sometimes using fake names. The company then issued checks based on the manipulated information.

Lewis recruited 14 people to participate in the scheme. Those individuals received fraudulent refund checks and returned approximately 30% of the money to Lewis as a kickback, according to federal prosecutors. The scheme ran from October 2019 through at least February 2025.

Lewis pleaded guilty to one count of mail fraud in January 2026. On April 30, U.S. District Judge Rodney W. Sippel sentenced him to one year and one day in federal prison and ordered him to repay the approximately $434,000 that had been stolen.

The AP Control Failure

For accounts payable professionals, the case provides a textbook example of why no employee should have unchecked control over information that ultimately generates a payment.

Lewis did not need to create a sophisticated cyberattack or compromise the company's banking system. He manipulated information inside an ordinary business process.

If the person preparing or uploading a refund file can also influence who receives payments without an independent review, the organization has created an opportunity for fraud.

Controls That Could Reduce the Risk

• Independent approval of refund files before payments are generated
• Validation of recipient information against original customer or patient records
• Exception reports identifying new or changed payees
• Duplicate address and bank account monitoring
• Periodic audits of refunds and other non-standard payments
• Segregation of duties between payment preparation, approval and reconciliation
• Data analytics designed to identify unusual payment patterns

One especially useful control would be comparing employee information against payment recipients. Matching employee addresses, bank accounts, telephone numbers or other identifiers against vendor and refund records can expose suspicious relationships before losses become substantial.

Source

U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern District of Missouri, “Man Sentenced for Embezzling $434,000,” April 30, 2026.
Read the original U.S. Department of Justice announcement →

Accounts Payable Professionals Group
News, education and resources for accounts payable professionals.

GLOBAL AP COMPLIANCE

India Proposes Major E-Invoicing Changes: What Accounts Payable Needs to Know

New GST Council recommendations could expand electronic invoicing requirements and change how businesses manage reverse-charge transactions and input tax credits.

By Accounts Payable Professionals Group
October 9, 2026

Digital business processes are increasingly important to electronic invoicing and tax compliance. Photo by Ofspace LLC, Culture / Pexels.

India is considering important changes to its electronic invoicing and Goods and Services Tax (GST) requirements. The proposals could affect how accounts payable departments process certain purchases, record tax liabilities, and reconcile input tax credits.

The recommendations were announced following the 57th meeting of India's GST Council, held on October 8, 2026, in New Delhi.

The Council recommended extending electronic invoicing to certain transactions covered by the Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM), including qualifying purchases from unregistered suppliers and imports of services.

It also proposed changes designed to improve invoice reconciliation, GST return reporting, and the management of Input Tax Credit (ITC).

For accounts payable professionals working with Indian businesses, these developments deserve attention.

Understanding Reverse-Charge Transactions

Under normal GST procedures, a registered supplier generally collects the applicable tax from the customer and reports it to the government.

Under the Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM), the responsibility for paying GST moves to the purchaser or recipient.

This mechanism applies to specified transactions, including certain purchases from unregistered suppliers and imports of services.

For accounts payable, the difference matters. An invoice may require additional tax accounting even when the supplier has not charged GST.

AP departments must correctly identify these transactions and ensure that the appropriate tax treatment is recorded in the organization's ERP system.

Proposed Expansion of E-Invoicing

The GST Council recommended extending electronic invoicing to domestic supplies received from unregistered persons when the recipient is responsible for paying GST under the Reverse Charge Mechanism.

The recommendation also covers imports of services for taxpayers with aggregate annual turnover of ₹5 crore or more.

If implemented, the expansion could require affected businesses to review how their accounting systems identify, classify, and document these transactions.

India already operates an electronic invoice registration system for qualifying business transactions.

Expanding its scope would increase the importance of accurate supplier information, invoice classification, tax codes, and ERP integration.

AP teams should work with their tax and information technology departments to determine whether existing systems can support any new reporting requirements.

Changes to Input Tax Credit Reconciliation

The Council also recommended changes to improve how businesses reconcile GST liabilities and Input Tax Credit (ITC).

India's Invoice Management System (IMS) helps taxpayers review incoming invoice information used in preparing their ITC statements.

The proposed changes include formalizing the ability of recipients to accept, reject, or keep certain documents pending, subject to applicable conditions.

Other recommendations would improve the reporting and correction of ITC in GST returns.

These measures are intended to reduce differences between GST return information and the tax credits available to businesses.

For AP teams, accurate invoice information will remain essential.

Incorrect supplier details, duplicate invoices, missing documentation, and mismatched tax amounts can create reconciliation problems and delay the resolution of exceptions.

What AP Departments Should Review

Organizations operating in India should evaluate how the proposed changes could affect their existing accounts payable and tax compliance processes.

• Supplier classification: Identify registered and unregistered suppliers and maintain accurate vendor-master records.
• Reverse-charge processing: Review how qualifying transactions are identified, approved, and recorded.
• ERP configuration: Determine whether current systems can support additional electronic invoicing and reporting requirements.
• Invoice reconciliation: Review procedures for identifying and resolving differences between AP records and GST reporting data.
• Input Tax Credit: Coordinate with the tax department to ensure supporting documentation is accurate and complete.
• Internal controls: Confirm that changes to tax codes, supplier classifications, and invoice-processing rules follow established approval procedures.

When Will the Changes Take Effect?

The October 8 announcement contains recommendations from the GST Council. The proposed e-invoicing expansion should not yet be treated as a fully implemented requirement.

Additional legal amendments, notifications, and implementation guidance will determine when specific changes become mandatory.

The Council recommended introducing certain GST return reconciliation reforms beginning with the April 2027 return period.

That proposed timeline applies to the identified return-reconciliation reforms and should not be assumed to be the effective date for every recommendation announced at the meeting.

AP departments should monitor official government notifications and coordinate with tax specialists before changing compliance procedures.

The Bigger Picture for Accounts Payable

India's recommendations reflect a broader international movement toward structured electronic invoicing and more detailed transaction reporting.

As governments expand digital reporting requirements, AP departments will need accurate invoice data, reliable ERP integrations, and effective reconciliation procedures.

The proposed changes also highlight the importance of cooperation between accounts payable, tax, accounting, and information technology teams.

For AP professionals, understanding these requirements early can help reduce processing errors and prepare organizations for future compliance changes.

Sources and Further Reading

Government of India:
Recommendations of the 57th Meeting of the GST Council, October 8, 2026

GST Council:
Official GST Council Press Release Archive

National Informatics Centre:
India GST Electronic Invoicing System

Accounts Payable Professionals Group

Independent news, analysis, and professional resources for the global accounts payable community.

AP-Professionals.com

AP Automation & Payments

The Bank Portal Is Moving Into Your ERP

Illustration: Accounts Payable Professionals Group

BMO and Mastercard are bringing virtual card payments into ERP, procurement, and Accounts Payable systems, closing another gap between invoice approval and payment.

By Accounts Payable Professionals Group  |  October 3, 2026

For years, Accounts Payable teams have worked across several systems to complete a payment.

An invoice may be entered, approved, and posted inside an ERP or AP automation platform. But when it is time to pay the supplier, AP often has to move into a banking portal or another payment system.

That gap is starting to close.

BMO and Mastercard recently announced an embedded commercial payment capability for eligible BMO Corporate Card clients in the United States and Canada. The setup allows companies to use BMO Commercial virtual cards inside participating ERP, procurement, Accounts Payable, and travel management systems.

The service uses Mastercard Commercial Express, and availability depends on both client eligibility and whether the company’s software platform participates in the program.

For AP teams, the biggest change is where the payment happens.

What this changes for Accounts Payable

Embedded payments can bring invoice approval and payment execution closer together.

Instead of moving payment instructions between systems, AP may be able to manage more of the process inside its existing software.

That can reduce manual entry, limit file transfers, and make reconciliation easier. It can also support straight-through processing by connecting more steps in the invoice-to-payment cycle.

Virtual cards can also add payment-level controls. Companies may be able to set a specific payment amount or other transaction limits before the card is issued, giving Finance more control without adding another manual approval step.

That can help payments move quickly while keeping tighter control over how funds are used.

Controls still matter

A faster process still needs strong controls.

When payment tools are built directly into ERP or AP systems, companies need to review who can create suppliers, approve invoices, change payment information, and release payments.

Segregation of duties remains important.

Approval limits, user access, audit trails, and exception reporting should be reviewed as payment activity moves deeper into the ERP.

The goal should be fewer manual steps without removing important safeguards.

The bigger shift

This announcement points to a larger change in Accounts Payable.

BMO and Mastercard are part of a broader move toward embedding payment execution inside enterprise software. As more of the invoice-to-pay cycle stays inside the ERP or AP platform, the traditional line between accounting software and payment infrastructure becomes less clear.

ERP and AP platforms are becoming more than systems for recording transactions. They are becoming places where invoice capture, approval, matching, payment, and reconciliation can all take place.

As this model expands, AP teams may spend less time moving payments between systems and more time managing exceptions, controls, and payment policy.

That could shift more of the AP role from payment processing toward payment oversight.

APPG Takeaway

Embedded payments may help AP teams reduce system handoffs, improve visibility, and move closer to true straight-through processing.

But the benefit will depend on how well companies balance speed with control.

As payment execution moves inside the ERP, strong access controls, approval rules, and audit trails will become even more important.

Sources & Further Reading

BMO Financial Group
BMO and Mastercard Enable Embedded Commercial Payments Directly Within Enterprise Software Across North America
Published October 1, 2026

Mastercard
Mastercard and BMO Enable Embedded Commercial Payments Directly Within Enterprise Software Across North America
Published October 1, 2026

This article is an independent Accounts Payable Professionals Group analysis of the BMO and Mastercard announcement. APPG is not affiliated with or endorsed by BMO or Mastercard.

Explore more from APPG: Accounts Payable  |  AP Automation  |  Automation Watch  |  Controls & Risk

Editorial Note: This article was developed with the assistance of artificial intelligence and reviewed and approved by Robert Ruhno, Executive Director of the Accounts Payable Professionals Group, and Mariann Ruhno, Chief Education Officer of the Accounts Payable Professionals Group.

APPG Leadership

Robert Ruhno

Executive Director

Robert leads APPG's mission, editorial direction, member community, and efforts to advance the Accounts Payable profession.

Mariann Ruhno

Chief Education Officer

Mariann leads APPG's education strategy, professional-development resources, and initiatives designed to help AP professionals strengthen their skills and careers.

The Accounts Payable Professionals Group provides practical education, industry information, professional development, and community for Accounts Payable professionals.

LinkedIn  |  X  |  Facebook  |  Instagram

Back to top ↑

AP Automation & Payments

When Electronic AP Still Isn’t Straight-Through

New research from the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland examines the barriers preventing businesses from achieving true straight-through processing.

New Federal Reserve research shows why electronic invoices and payments do not always produce true straight-through processing.

By Accounts Payable Professionals Group  |  October 2, 2026

Accounts payable departments have spent years replacing paper invoices, manual data entry, and checks with electronic systems. Yet employees still spend time correcting invoice data, moving information between systems, resolving exceptions, and matching payments.

New research from the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland explains why.

Published September 25, 2026, the research examines the barriers preventing businesses from achieving true straight-through processing (STP). STP means a business transaction can move from one stage to the next with little or no manual intervention.

Read the Original Federal Reserve Research

B2B Payments: Business Processing and Challenges to Achieving Straight-Through Processing
Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland | September 25, 2026

STP Is Bigger Than Invoice Automation

The Cleveland Fed divides a B2B transaction into five phases:

Supplier Onboarding  →  Procurement & Delivery  →  Invoicing  →  Payment  →  Reconciliation

Each phase can introduce manual work. Automating invoice capture alone, therefore, does not create STP.

A Simple AP Example

Imagine a supplier sends a $5,000 invoice against a $5,000 purchase order. The goods have been received.

The invoice automatically matches the PO and receipt, posts to the ERP, moves into the payment run, reaches the bank, and is reconciled without AP manually moving or rekeying the transaction.

That is straight-through processing.

Where Automation Breaks

The Fed identifies several barriers that prevent businesses from reaching this level of automation.

Invoice formats are fragmented. Paper and PDF invoices may require data entry or extraction. Even electronic invoices can require manual handling when their format is incompatible with the buyer’s AP system.

Supplier portals create friction. A portal may automate invoice delivery for the buyer while creating work for suppliers that must manage many customer portals. The Fed describes this problem as supplier portal fatigue.

ERP and payment systems do not always communicate. Legacy systems may not connect directly with banks or support modern payment formats. AP employees may still need to transfer payment instructions or payment information manually.

Payment and remittance information can become separated. When remittance data travels separately from the payment, suppliers may have to manually determine which invoices were paid. Missing or incorrect invoice information can create additional reconciliation exceptions.

Payment standards also differ. ACH, cards, wires, and instant payments can use different message formats. Moving information between those formats can create errors, lost data, and processing delays.

Can AI Solve It?

AI, machine learning, and optical character recognition can help extract invoice and remittance information from different formats.

But the Fed cautions that automated extraction remains imperfect. Human review and corrections may still be required, while the technology itself adds cost and complexity.

AI can help bridge broken processes, but it does not automatically fix the underlying architecture.

What AP Should Take Away

AP leaders should look beyond the invoice when measuring automation.

• Can suppliers be onboarded electronically?
• Can invoice data enter the ERP without rekeying?
• Can invoices match and route automatically?
• Can approved payments reach the bank without another manual process?
• Can payment and remittance information be reconciled automatically?

If employees repeatedly copy, rekey, download, upload, translate, or manually match information between these stages, the process is not truly straight-through.

The Cleveland Fed’s research gives AP professionals an important way to rethink automation.

True STP is not simply touchless invoice processing. It requires connecting the entire supplier-to-reconciliation process.

That makes integration, interoperability, master data, payment information, and exception management just as important as invoice capture.

Sources & Further Reading

Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
B2B Payments: Business Processing and Challenges to Achieving Straight-Through Processing
Published September 25, 2026

Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
B2B Payments: A Gradual Shift from Checks to Electronic Payment Methods

The Federal Reserve research also references work from the Business Payments Coalition, Nacha, Accredited Standards Committee X9, Digital Business Networks Alliance, Association for Financial Professionals, and other payments-industry sources. The complete bibliography and supporting references are available in the original Cleveland Fed research.

This article is an independent Accounts Payable Professionals Group executive summary of research published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland. APPG is not affiliated with or endorsed by the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland or the Federal Reserve System.

State of Accounts Payable 2027 Study

APPG Industry Research

What Does Accounts Payable Really Look Like Heading Into 2027?

APPG has launched the State of Accounts Payable 2027 study to hear directly from the professionals doing the work.

Accounts Payable Professionals Group  |  October 1, 2026

State of Accounts Payable 2027

Help APPG build a clearer benchmark for the Accounts Payable profession.

The survey takes approximately 6 to 8 minutes and is open to AP professionals, AP leaders, and finance professionals responsible for Accounts Payable.

Take the 2027 AP Survey

Accounts Payable is changing quickly.

Automation is handling more invoice processing. Artificial intelligence is beginning to enter AP workflows. Fraud threats continue to evolve. ERP platforms are becoming more connected, and finance leaders are asking AP departments to accomplish more with the technology and staff they already have.

But what does Accounts Payable actually look like inside organizations today?

The Accounts Payable Professionals Group wants to find out.

APPG has launched the State of Accounts Payable 2027 study, an industry survey designed to gather the experiences, challenges, technologies, controls, and priorities of Accounts Payable professionals across industries and organizations.

The goal is straightforward: hear directly from the people doing the work.

Building a Clearer Picture of Accounts Payable

There is no single operating model for Accounts Payable.

Some organizations have highly automated invoice environments with electronic invoicing, automated matching, workflow routing, integrated ERP systems, and electronic payments.

Other organizations still depend heavily on email, spreadsheets, PDFs, manual approvals, and human intervention throughout the invoice lifecycle.

Some AP departments are beginning to experiment with artificial intelligence and autonomous workflows. Others are still working through ERP upgrades, staffing shortages, vendor master controls, payment fraud risks, or basic invoice automation.

Those differences matter.

Discussions about the future of AP can sometimes focus heavily on what technology can do. APPG wants to better understand what organizations are actually doing.

The State of Accounts Payable 2027 study examines:

• AP automation and artificial intelligence
• Invoice processing and operating models
• Fraud prevention and payment controls
• ERP systems and AP technology
• Staffing and investment
• Current Accounts Payable challenges
• Priorities for the year ahead

Why AP Professionals Should Have a Voice

Accounts Payable professionals experience operational change differently depending on their organization, industry, invoice volume, ERP, technology environment, and responsibilities.

An AP specialist processing invoices may see problems that a finance executive never encounters directly.

An AP manager may be dealing with staffing, exception management, internal controls, month-end close, vendor escalations, and payment performance.

A director, controller, or broader finance leader may be deciding where the organization should invest in automation, controls, artificial intelligence, or process improvement.

All of those perspectives are important.

APPG wants the study to reflect the profession as broadly as possible, from professionals working directly with invoices and vendors to the people managing AP departments and broader finance operations.

The more professionals who participate, the more useful the resulting benchmark can become.

“The goal is straightforward: hear directly from the people doing the work.”

From Survey Responses to an APPG Industry Report

The survey is only the first step.

APPG plans to use the responses to develop the State of Accounts Payable 2027 Report, providing AP professionals with a clearer picture of where the profession stands as organizations enter 2027.

The report is intended to identify patterns across the profession.

• Where is AP automation actually being used?
• How much influence is artificial intelligence beginning to have?
• Which AP processes remain highly manual?
• How concerned are professionals about payment and vendor fraud?
• Are organizations investing enough in Accounts Payable technology and staffing?
• What are AP departments prioritizing for 2027?

Answers to questions like these can help professionals compare their own environments with what is happening elsewhere in the profession.

They can also help move the AP conversation beyond assumptions.

The Profession Should Help Define Its Own Future

Accounts Payable has traditionally been measured through invoices processed, payment timeliness, exception rates, discounts captured, duplicate payments, and other operational metrics.

Those measures remain important.

But AP is increasingly connected to working capital, fraud prevention, supplier relationships, data quality, compliance, automation, artificial intelligence, and broader financial transformation.

Understanding where the profession is going requires listening to the people responsible for those processes.

That is what the State of Accounts Payable 2027 study is designed to do.

Your Experience Matters

Take Part in the State of Accounts Payable 2027 Study

Whether you work directly in AP, manage an AP team, or lead a broader finance function, your perspective can help APPG build a better benchmark for the profession.

The survey takes approximately 6 to 8 minutes.

Complete the Survey

Please share the study with other Accounts Payable professionals in your network. The more voices represented, the more useful the final report can be.

APPG Takeaway

Accounts Payable is entering another period of significant change. The State of Accounts Payable 2027 study is designed to document that change through the experience of the professionals living it every day.

Explore more from APPG:
Accounts Payable  |  AP Automation  |  Controls & Risk  |  AP News

Editorial Note: This article was developed with the assistance of artificial intelligence and reviewed and approved by Robert Ruhno, Executive Director of the Accounts Payable Professionals Group, and Mariann Ruhno, Chief Education Officer of the Accounts Payable Professionals Group.

APPG Leadership

Robert Ruhno

Executive Director

Robert leads APPG's mission, editorial direction, member community, and efforts to advance the Accounts Payable profession.

Mariann Ruhno

Chief Education Officer

Mariann leads APPG's education strategy, professional-development resources, and initiatives designed to help AP professionals strengthen their skills and careers.

The Accounts Payable Professionals Group provides practical education, industry information, professional development, and community for Accounts Payable professionals.

LinkedIn X Facebook Instagram

Back to top ↑