For decades, cybersecurity incidents have followed standardized procedures: threat identification, data exposure, account freezes and invoking insurance where available. Recovery, while painful, is possible. The rise of digital assets, however, disrupts this model and demands executive attention to new approaches.
In digital asset management, even a single cybersecurity failure can result in immediate and permanent loss. There is no password reset for a stolen private key, no fraud reversal, no central authority to restore access. When controls fail, value can be lost indefinitely, impacting your organization’s ability to deliver on its objectives.
The continued adoption of digital assets, including cryptocurrencies, tokenized securities, stablecoins, and blockchain‑based financial instruments, requires CISOs, and CEOs to reassess their organizations’ cybersecurity risk posture. While distributed ledger technologies are often considered inherently secure, significant losses still occur at points of centralization, such as exchanges, custodians, wallets, identity systems, and smart contract interfaces.
Concentration of Risk Outside the Blockchain
Building on these risks, it is clear that while core blockchain protocols have experienced relatively few direct compromises, most significant incidents occur at ecosystem access points. These access points include custodial platforms, key management systems, Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), and manual workflows. These components often resemble traditional IT systems but operate with irreversible transactions and immediate value transfer, enhancing the impact.
Key characteristics that elevate cyber risk regarding digital assets:
Private Key Compromise and Custody Failures
Loss or theft of private keys remains the single most severe digital asset risk. Unlike traditional financial accounts, compromised keys typically result in permanent asset loss, with no recovery mechanism. Once a transaction is signed with a compromised private key, the network executes it exactly as instructed. The system does not distinguish between legitimate users and threat actors. Control equals ownership.
Vulnerabilities in smart contracts may include coding or logic flaws, oracle manipulation (more to come on this topic!), and insecure upgrade mechanisms. All of which can enable threat actors to drain assets at scale, often within minutes of deployment. Additionally, with the use of open‑source dependencies, wallet providers, validators, and infrastructure vendors introduce indirect attack vectors that are difficult to monitor using traditional vendor risk programs.
Why Traditional Cybersecurity Models and Controls Fall Short
These unique risks help explain why traditional cybersecurity models and controls fall short. Treating wallets like bank accounts and applying traditional cybersecurity and other general IT controls will lead to failures and gaps within the environment. These gaps are visible to regulators, auditors, and investors and are no longer being accepted. Conventional cybersecurity programs were designed around identity‑based access, transaction reversibility, and centralized control. Digital assets invert these assumptions:
| Traditional IT Security | Digital Asset Reality |
| Password reset possible | Key loss = asset loss |
| Transactions reversible | Transactions final |
| Central authority | Trustless, Cryptographic control |
| Segmented environments | Public, adversarial networks |
| Key Threats: data breach vectors. Phishing, malware, APTs | Key Threats: smart contracts, key theft, bridge and 51% attacks |
| Focus on securing perimeters | Focus on cryptography and code |
Organizations that apply standard IT controls without adaptation remain exposed, even when formally compliant with legacy frameworks.
NIST‑Aligned Digital Asset Security Architecture
Leading institutions are extending NIST CSF 2.0 into digital asset environments by mapping the core functions Govern, Identify, Protect, Detect, Respond, and Recover to crypto‑specific risks. This includes considerations around cryptographic key lifecycle management, continuous transaction monitoring, Blockchain‑aware incident response playbooks, hardware‑backed key protection, and offline custody for high‑value assets, and multi-party approval and governance-driven transaction controls. The lens needs to be shifted from detection to prevention. This is not about adding more tools or processes. It is about redesigning the control environment to reflect the reality that mistakes cannot be undone.
Unlike traditional fraud detection, digital asset monitoring must operate pre‑execution rather than post‑settlement. Smart contracts cannot be treated like traditional contracts and rely on traditional controls and governance. Mature programs should align with the key concepts of NIST 2.0 Governance core function and should deploy:
Continuous monitoring for anomalous on‑chain behavior
Governance, Disclosure, and Regulatory Expectations
Regulators and standard‑setters now explicitly link cybersecurity governance to digital asset risk management. Expectations include:
Failure to demonstrate mature cybersecurity controls increasingly results in enforcement actions, fines, or restrictions on digital asset activities.
Strategic Outlook
As digital assets continue to integrate into mainstream financial and enterprise operations, cybersecurity will remain the primary barrier to trust and scale. Organizations that treat digital asset security as an extension of traditional IT risk will struggle. Those that adopt crypto‑native controls, NIST‑aligned architectures, and governance‑driven oversight will be positioned to innovate securely.
How Centri Can Help
Centri helps executives navigate the complex risks that come with adopting digital assets by building programs that protect enterprise value, strengthen stakeholder trust, and support compliant growth. We work with leadership teams to establish clear governance, assess organizational readiness, and design risk‑management approaches that meet evolving regulatory expectations while enabling innovation.
Our team also helps organizations operate with confidence by developing practical frameworks for oversight, incident preparedness, and decision‑making around custody, transaction workflows, and partner dependencies. Whether you are exploring digital asset initiatives or scaling existing capabilities, Centri ensures your strategy is supported by controls and structures that reduce uncertainty and position your organization to move forward safely.
]]>The invite-only event will bring together more than 500 investors, executives, and growth-stage company leaders for a full day of programming focused on capital formation, emerging industry trends, and the dealmaking landscape in 2026. Presenting companies will deliver formal company presentations to an audience of qualified investors, while fireside chat participants will engage in moderated conversations designed to offer a deeper look at their businesses and the markets in which they operate. Participating companies will also be available for 1 on 1 investor meetings and networking throughout the day.
“This year’s participating companies represent some of the most compelling growth stories across the sectors driving today’s economy,” said Michael Aiello, CEO and Managing Partner of Centri Business Consulting. “They’re developing breakthrough therapeutics, building the infrastructure for the next generation of digital finance, applying artificial intelligence in ways that generate real business value, and pioneering clean technology solutions to some of the most pressing challenges of our time. For the investors, analysts, and business leaders in the room, this conference is an opportunity to get an informed, first-hand look at the companies shaping these markets. We are proud to provide a platform that brings both sides of that conversation together.”
Presenting and Fireside Companies
The following companies are scheduled to deliver formal presentations at the 2026 Centri Capital Conference:
237 Global | Technology | Private | 237global.com
AVAX One Technology Ltd. | Digital Assets | NAS: AVX | agriforcegs.com
Arrive AI Inc. | Technology | NAS: ARAI | arriveai.com
aTyr Pharma | Healthcare/Life Sciences | NAS:ATYR | atyrpharma.com
BitFufu | Digital Assets | NAS: FUFU | bitfufu.com
Chaince Digital | Financial Services | NAS: CD | chaincedigital.com
Citius Pharma | Healthcare/Life Sciences | NAS: CTXR | citiuspharma.com
CoinShares | Digital Assets | STO: CS | coinshares.com
DeFi Development Corp. | Digital Assets | NAS: DFDV | defidevcorp.com
Duos Technology | Technology | NAS: DUOT | duostechnologies.com
Emergence | Technology | Private | emergence.ai
EmphyCorp Pharmaceutical | Healthcare/Biotechnology | Private | EmphyCorp.com
Fortitude Mining | Digital Assets | Private | fortitudemining.com
Grayscale | Digital Assets | Private | grayscale.com
Hemogenyx | Healthcare/Biotechnology | LON: HEMO | hemogenyx.com
IPM Inc. | Technology/Software | NAS: IPM | ipm.com
Kalohexis | Healthcare/Life Sciences | Private | endevicabio.com
Kazia Therapeutics | Healthcare/Biotechnology | NAS: KZIA | kaziatherapeutics.com
Maxona Pharmaceuticals | Healthcare/Life Sciences | Private | maxonapharm.com
MVB Financial | Financial Services | NAS: MVBF | mvbbanking.com
Nerdy Inc. | Technology/EdTech | NYS: NRDY | nerdy.com
Orchestra BioMed | Healthcare/Life Sciences | NAS: OBIO | orchestrabiomed.com
Oova | Healthcare/Life Sciences | Private | oova.life
Qumulus AI | Technology | Private | qumulusai.com
Peraso | Technology | NAS:PRSO | perasoinc.com
PulseData AI | Healthcare/Biotechnology | Private | pulsedata.io
reAlpha Tech Corp. | Technology/PropTech | NAS: AIRE | realpha.com
Recycle Track Systems (RTS) | Technology/CleanTech | Private | rts.com
Seek Labs | Healthcare | Private | seeklabs.com
Streamex Corp. | Digital Assets |NAS: STEX | streamex.com
WorkGenius | Technology/Software | Private | workgenius.com
Participating Companies
The following companies are available to meet with investors at the 2026 Centri Capital Conference:
The 2026 Centri Capital Conference will also feature thought-provoking panel discussions covering the macro capital markets outlook, the IPO landscape, regulatory developments, digital assets and fintech, healthcare and life sciences, artificial intelligence, and energy and nuclear as an emerging investment theme. The conference is an invite-only event. For more information, please visit centriconsulting.com/capital-conference or contact [email protected].
]]>The ROTH Conference is widely recognized as one of the largest and most influential events in the mid-cap investment community, featuring 1-on-1 and small group meetings, analyst-selected fireside chats, and industry keynotes and panels. As a Platinum Sponsor, Centri will be prominently featured throughout the event’s programming.
As part of this year’s conference, Christopher Mora, Partner and Capital Markets Practice Leader at Centri, will serve as a presenter on the Capital Markets Update panel, scheduled for March 23 at 9:00 AM PT. The panel will bring together leading industry experts to discuss the current capital markets environment, the benefits and considerations of various financing structures, and the outlook for 2026.
Attendees will also have the opportunity to hear from, and meet with, executive leaders from 500 private and public companies in a variety of growth sectors, including Consumer, Technology & Media, Sustainability & Industrial Growth, AgTech, Energy, Metals & Mining, Healthcare, Services, and Insurance.
To kick off ROTH, Centri is hosting a Sips on the Shoreline Happy Hour Event for conference attendees at 180blu at the Ritz Carlton on Sunday, March 22nd, from 4:30 PM – 6:00 PM PT.
Centri is excited to sponsor this conference and is looking forward to connecting with various industry leaders from all over the country.
]]>Building on the success of last year’s inaugural event, the Centri Capital Conference has quickly established itself as a premier gathering for the capital markets and investment community. This year’s conference is expected to bring together 500+ attendees, including investment bankers, private equity investors, and venture capitalists, for a full day of company presentations, facilitated investor one-on-one meetings, and thought leadership from across the capital markets, within disruptive industries.
Centri is proud to be joined by an outstanding group of sponsors who represent the breadth of today’s capital markets ecosystem and bring a wealth of valuable expertise and perspective to the event. This year’s sponsors include:
Evening Reception Sponsor
The Money Channel New York City
Gold Sponsors
Donnelly Financial Solutions (DFIN)
Silver Sponsors
Bronze Sponsors
Ellenoff Grossman & Schole LLP
Promotional/Other
“We’re grateful for the support of our sponsors, whose partnership helps make this conference such a valuable experience for everyone involved,” says Michael Aiello, CEO and Managing Partner of Centri. “The roster of organizations we’ve assembled this year is a diverse group of industry leaders who bring real depth to the conversation. We’re building on a strong foundation from year one and excited to host another must-attend event.”
Additional information about the Centri Capital Conference will be announced in the coming weeks. Please note that it is an invite-only event, and registration is subject to approval.
Companies and investors interested in presenting, attending, or sponsoring the Second Annual Centri Capital Conference can register here or reach out to [email protected] for more information.
]]>In response, last week the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) released its first GenAI‑specific internal control guidance, Achieving Effective Internal Control Over Generative AI (2026). The publication adapts the COSO Internal Control–Integrated Framework (2013) to the unique risks, behaviors, and scalability of GenAI and introduces an eight‑capability model for organizations to design, implement, and monitor AI‑enabled controls. This is particularly critical when GenAI outputs influence financial reporting, disclosures, or the execution of internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR), where accuracy, reliability, and auditability are essential to support management’s assertions and audit reliance.
Why COSO Issued New GenAI Guidance
At its core, COSO’s new guidance leaves organizations with a simple message: GenAI changes how internal controls need to work. These systems are not predictable, rule‑based technologies; they are dynamic, probabilistic, and can behave differently from one day to the next. COSO highlights that GenAI can be “confidently wrong,” evolve rapidly, scale mistakes as quickly as it scales value, and be used by virtually anyone in the business with minimal barriers.
Because of this, organizations can’t rely on traditional internal controls alone. The new guidance requires organizations to update their control environment, risk assessments, control activities, information flows, and monitoring processes to account for GenAI‑specific risks such as hallucinations, bias, model drift, data leakage, and rapid vendor‑driven changes.
COSO’s message is not “slow down your AI adoption.” It’s the opposite: deploy AI but do it responsibly without compromising accuracy and reliability. That means clearer objectives, stronger governance, better traceability, continuous monitoring, and defined accountability for how AI is used across business processes,enabling GenAI at scale in a risk‑controlled manner.
What Organizations Need to Rethink
GenAI does not replace the COSO framework; it changes how the framework is applied. COSO’s new GenAI guidance raises the bar for internal controls. AI now influences how controls are designed, how evidence is evaluated, and how governance and oversight function. This means rethinking SOX, AI governance, COSO alignment, risk and control design, and enhanced third‑party oversight to keep pace with GenAI adoption.
Here are some key considerations leaders should evaluate:
Six Steps to Apply COSO’s GenAI Guidance
To operationalize COSO’s guidance and strengthen GenAI governance, organizations should focus on six core activities that build structure, transparency, and control around how AI is deployed:
How Centri Can Help
Centri helps organizations approach AI risk management by building clearer governance structures, updating internal controls, and strengthening processes where AI influences day‑to‑day operations. Our teams work with management to identify use cases, assess how they intersect with key organizational functions, and develop a plan to support reliable performance.
Whether AI tools are built internally or provided by third parties, Centri helps create clarity, consistency, and confidence in how GenAI is used across the business.
]]>Standard Setter Updates
Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB)
January 14, 2026 Meeting
The Board added a project to its technical agenda to address the discount rate used to measure the projected benefit obligation under ASC 715, Compensation – Retirement Benefits, for market-return cash balance plans. The Board directed the staff to draft a proposed Accounting Standards Update for vote by written ballot. The Board also decided on a 60-day comment period for the proposed Update.
For more information, see the FASB’s Tentative Board Decisions.
January 28, 2026 Meeting
The Board discussed feedback received in response to the 2025 Invitation to Comment, Agenda Consultation. The Board directed the staff to perform additional research with the objective of harmonizing the variable interest entity (VIE) and voting interest entity (VOE) models to streamline VIE/VOE determination and eliminate unnecessary differences. The scope of this research also will involve pursuing potential improvements to the VIE disclosures.
The Board also added a project to its technical agenda to clarify GAAP by providing a definition of the term “common control” based on existing practice for certain areas of the Codification.
For more information, see the FASB’s Tentative Board Decisions.
February 4, 2026 Meeting
The Board discussed feedback received in response to the 2025 Invitation to Comment, Agenda Consultation. The Board directed the staff to perform additional research with the objective of simplifying the subsequent accounting for goodwill by (1) requiring impairment testing only upon a triggering event and (2) allowing goodwill to be tested for impairment at the operating segment level.
The Board added a project to its technical agenda to improve the accounting for certain tangible commodities inventories.
For more information, see the FASB’s Tentative Board Decisions.
Upcoming February 25, 2026 Meeting
The Board will discuss (a) a summary of the feedback received on risk management and hedge accounting in response to the 2025 Invitation to Comment, Agenda Consultation, and agenda requests and (b) the staff’s plan for addressing that feedback through a series of potential projects. In addition, the Board will determine whether to add a project to its technical agenda on targeted hedge accounting improvements and begin initial deliberations.
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA)
Draft Updates to AICPA Equity Valuation Guide
On January 15, the AICPA’s Financial Reporting Executive Committee has released for comment a working draft of its Accounting and Valuation Guide, Valuation of Privately-Held-Company Equity Securities Issued as Compensation. Private companies should consider the draft updated guidance when valuing equity securities issued as compensation. While the guide is not authoritative, the revisions reflect what the AICPA’s Equity Securities Task Force views as best practices.
The working draft includes updates to chapter 6, Valuation of Equity Securities in Complex Capital Structures, which may have significant implications on valuations for financial reporting purposes. It also includes updates to chapter 8, Inferring Value from Transactions in a Private Company’s Securities, and chapter 9, Selected Accounting and Disclosure Matters, which were previously released for comment in June 2024.
Comments on the working draft are due by June 1, 2026.
International Accounting Standards Board
IASB Proposes Amendments to Fair Value Option for Certain Investments
On February 19, the IASB issued an exposure draft proposing narrow-scope amendments to clarify that an entity that has a main business activity of investing in particular types of assets (as set out in paragraph 49(a) of IFRS 18) is eligible to elect the fair value option in IAS 28 Investments in Associates and Joint Ventures. The proposed amendments aim to improve consistency in application and provide clarity ahead of the effective date of IFRS 18 Presentation and Disclosure in Financial Statements.
Comments are due by April 20, 2026.
SEC Regulatory Updates
SEC Proposes Amendments to Small Entity Definitions
On January 7, the SEC issued a proposed rule amending the definitions of “small business” and “small organization” for registered investment companies, investment advisers, and business development companies for purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. The proposal would raise the small entity thresholds for investment companies and advisers. It is designed to help the SEC better tailor its analyses to address the specific regulatory challenges that these small entities face so it can consider adapting its rulemaking accordingly. Additional information may be found on the SEC’s website. Comments are due by March 13, 2026.
SEC Staff Issues Statement on Tokenized Securities
On January 28, the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance, Division of Investment Management, and Division of Trading and Markets issued a joint statement to provide their views on tokenized securities. A tokenized security, as defined in the statement, is a financial instrument that meets the definition of “security” under the federal securities laws that is formatted as or represented by a crypto asset and for which the record of ownership is maintained in whole or in part on or through one or more crypto networks (e.g., blockchain or similar distributed ledger technology). The statement notes that tokenized securities generally fall into two categories: (1) securities tokenized by or on behalf of the issuers of such securities, and (2) third party-sponsored tokenized securities. The statement provides views on the application of federal securities laws to tokenized securities based on the model of tokenization, terms of structure, and rights of the holders.
SEC Proposes Amendments to Form N-PORT and Extends “Names Rule” Deadlines
On February 18, the SEC proposed amendments to Form N-PORT, the report used by certain registered investment companies to file monthly portfolio holdings with the SEC. The proposed amendments would:
Comments are due 60 days following publication in the Federal Register.
Additionally, the SEC extended the compliance dates for Form N-PORT reporting requirements related to the “Names Rule” to November 17, 2027 for fund groups with net assets of $10 billion or more and to May 18, 2028 for fund groups with less than $10 billion.
Other Regulatory Updates
European Commission
On January 8, the European Commission posted final amendments related to the EU Taxonomy Regulation in the Official Journal. The amendments will enter into force on January 28. The provisions may be applied to reports issued on or after January 1, 2026. Entities with fiscal years beginning in 2025 may elect not to apply the amendments.
The amendments are part of the Omnibus package of improvements and are intended to reduce administrative burden, improve the accuracy of key performance indicators (KPIs), and shorten and simplify the mandated reporting templates. They also permit financial entities to delay compliance with the EU Taxonomy Regulation for two years as long as they do not assert that they have sustainable activities.
California Air Resources Board (CARB)
On January 13, the CARB posted preliminary draft regulatory proposal documents that would amend existing regulations applicable to certain California electricity generators, industrial facilities, fuel suppliers, and electricity importers under the AB 32 Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006.
The draft proposal documents relate to the California Cap-and-Invest (formerly the Cap-and-Trade) Regulation. The proposed amendments are intended to reflect recent legislative changes that extend the program through 2045 and build on ongoing regulatory updates initiated in 2023. CARB also posted draft proposal documents related to the Mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Regulation (MRR), which supports data and compliance requirements of the Cap-and-Invest program.
Center for Audit Quality (CAQ)
The CAQ SEC Regulations Committee and its International Practices Task Force discussed recent inflation data for certain countries at its November 2025 meeting and issued a discussion document in January 2026 noting that Egypt no longer has a three-year cumulative inflation rate exceeding 100% in the most recent annual period reported. Egypt’s three‑year cumulative inflation rate was between 70% and 100% in the last calendar year. The discussion document also includes a list of countries whose three-year cumulative inflation rate continues to exceed 100% in the most recent annual period reported.
ASC 830, Foreign Currency Matters, requires a foreign entity in a highly inflationary economy to remeasure its financial statements using its parent’s reporting currency, as of the beginning of the reporting period, including interim reporting periods, following the period in which the economy becomes highly inflationary. An economy is considered highly inflationary when it has a cumulative inflation rate of approximately 100% or more over a three-year period.
Given global inflation trends, entities with foreign operations should continue monitoring inflation in countries in which they operate that have high levels of inflation.
While accounting clarity has arrived, tax clarity has not, particularly regarding U.S. crypto tax treatment and crypto reporting requirements. Organizations such as FASB have provided established guidance, but others, namely the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), are expected to address changes to tax treatment and potential reporting requirements for cryptocurrency. House representatives have returned from their holiday recess with a focus on enacting legislation by late summer to clarify how the tax code will treat the trade and/or creation of digital assets.
Crypto advocates have long sought assistance from policymakers to achieve greater clarity from the IRS. Members of Congress, including those on the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, have signaled interest in simplification and clarity—most recently at the Blockchain Association’s policy summit in December 2025. Both the crypto industry and bipartisan supporters agree that adapting the tax code to provide a comprehensive and durable approach is essential.
Proposed U.S. Crypto Tax Changes
The expected legislation aims to address several hotly debated topics, including:
| Topic | Current State | Proposed Change |
| De Minimis Exception for Small Transactions | No de minimis exemption exists; every transaction, even very small ones, can create a taxable event requiring gain/loss tracking. | – Introduces a $200 per transaction exemption (value + total gain) and a $5,000 annual cap. – Applies to stablecoins but not other cryptocurrencies. – Intended to reduce reporting burdens and encourage broader use. |
| Mark to Market Valuation of Digital Assets‑to‑Market Valuation of Digital Assets | Gains and losses are generally recognized only when assets are sold. There is no annual requirement to mark crypto to fair market value. | – Would allow traders to use mark to market accounting, recognizing unrealized gains/losses annually. – Could enable loss deductions against other income. |
| Tax Treatment of Staking Rewards | Staking rewards are taxed as ordinary income when received, based on fair market value at that time. | – Would tax staking rewards only upon sale, not when created. – Intended to simplify compliance and encourage participation in staking and exchange traded crypto products. |
What Does the De Minimis Exception Mean for Crypto Holders and Businesses?
Industry leaders have advocated for a de minimis exception for everyday crypto transactions, such as small purchases or fees tied to larger transactions. The goal: exempt certain transactions from taxation to encourage broader adoption of digital currencies and reduce reporting burdens. Leading proposals suggest:
The $200 limit would apply to dollar-pegged stablecoins with capital gains of less than $200 but would not provide a similar safe harbor for other cryptocurrencies.
Without such a rule, taxpayers could face the impractical task of tracking billions of microtransactions. However, some lawmakers oppose the concepts of de minimis-type exceptions, citing concerns that they could enable criminal activity or unfairly subsidize the industry.
Fair Value Complexities
Draft proposals indicate that cryptocurrency traders may be able to use mark-to-market accounting, which would require a taxpayer to recognize unrealized gains and losses based on the fair market value of securities at the end of each tax year.
Taxpayers could benefit from using these methods by allowing deductions for trading losses from income derived from other sources.
Tax Treatment of Crypto Staking Rewards
Another major flashpoint is staking rewards. Bipartisan proposals may seek to tax staking rewards at the point of sale rather than gross ordinary income under current rules. Advocates hope this change will incentivize investment in crypto markets through exchange-traded products without requiring direct ownership of digital currencies.
Lawmakers acknowledge that while simplicity is the goal, it may not be the ultimate outcome. Those earning staking rewards should prepare for a shifting landscape.
U.S. Crypto Tax Legislation
As of now, legislation remains in development, balancing taxpayer reporting burdens with the need to regulate an emerging industry. Until clarity arrives, lawmakers fear that complexity and unclear guidance are only a benefit for those trying to exploit the tax code.
How Centri Can Help
With the potential for a changing tax landscape surrounding digital assets, the time to discuss the future of your business and how these pending changes will impact you is now. Our dedicated, skilled professionals collaborate with international and domestic token issuers, digital asset exchanges (including decentralized finance platforms), venture capital, miners, media, blockchain and enterprise platforms, and other leaders in the fintech space. This allows us to find solutions for your unique accounting and tax needs. Please contact us to explore how our expertise aligns with the specific needs of your company.
]]>That’s why sale-leaseback transactions are becoming more common across the AI infrastructure layer. When structured properly, they allow companies to unlock capital from owned assets while maintaining uninterrupted access to the infrastructure powering their AI workloads.
Why Sale-Leasebacks Are Gaining Traction in AI
For AI infrastructure companies, capital is often better deployed toward:
Rather than tying capital up in physical assets, companies sell assets, such as data centers or computer hardware, and lease them back.
The result?
Liquidity today without operational disruption tomorrow. However, AI infrastructure is not traditional real estate or equipment, and that difference matters.
What Makes AI Sale-Leasebacks More Complex?
AI infrastructure arrangements frequently include features that, while operationally reasonable, can unintentionally prevent sale accounting:
Under ASC 842, these features may indicate that the seller still retains the primary benefits and risks of ownership, meaning the transaction may be accounted for as a financing rather than a sale-leaseback.
That distinction has real implications for:
When AI Companies Should Evaluate Sale-Leaseback Accounting
AI infrastructure companies should pause and evaluate sale-leaseback structures carefully when they are:
In these scenarios, small structural details can materially change the accounting outcome.
Why Early Structuring Determines Sale-Leaseback Accounting Outcomes
The most common issues don’t arise during audits; they arise before contracts are signed.
Lease terms that make sense operationally can:
Once deals are executed, these issues are difficult—if not impossible—to unwind. Early alignment between operations, finance, legal, and accounting is critical.
How Centri Can Help
Centri works with AI infrastructure companies to ensure sale-leaseback transactions support growth, flexibility, and defensibility.
Centri is comprised of seasoned professionals with extensive GAAP and SEC reporting experience, including former international and Big 4 accounting firm partners, directors, senior managers, and managers. Our technical accounting professionals can assist companies by:
Our focus is practical: helping AI companies unlock capital without introducing hidden complexity that surfaces later during audits, financing, or transactions.
Please contact us to learn how we can support your organization’s lease accounting needs.
]]>Below, we outline three key areas companies should be focused on now.
On Friday, February 20, 2026, the Supreme Court nullified a large swath of tariffs imposed in recent years, potentially clearing the way for refund claims that could total well over $170 billion across affected companies. However, the Court did not address whether—or how—the federal government should return tariffs already collected.
As one justice noted in dissent, the refund process is likely to be “a mess.” At this stage:
Companies should be cautious about assuming recoverability or recognizing refunds in financial statements until there is greater clarity on process and probability of collection.
This ruling creates opportunity—but not certainty. Any refund strategy must be approached deliberately and defensively.
If refunds are received, the most significant risk lies in how the proceeds are allocated internally. While the importer of record paid the tariff, that entity may not have borne the economic cost. Tariff costs may have been:
Determining who is entitled to the refund raises immediate transfer pricing questions and potential audit exposure. Reallocating refunds may be viewed as a new intercompany transaction that must be arm’s length, properly characterized, and supported by contemporaneous documentation.
Further, U.S. and foreign tax authorities may take conflicting views on where the income belongs, increasing the risk of double taxation.
Compounding the challenge, many companies lack robust historical documentation tying tariff costs to specific entities or risk bearers.
Refund dollars are not “free money.” Allocation decisions must align with transfer pricing principles and be defensible under audit.
In response to tariffs, many companies previously:
Unwinding or revisiting these strategies is complex and risky. Changes made to mitigate tariffs were often carefully documented to demonstrate business purpose and compliance with tax and customs rules. Reversing course may create inconsistencies across tax, customs, and financial reporting; trigger scrutiny from one or more tax authorities and require redocumentation and remodeling.
At the same time, tariffs are not going away. Following the Court’s decision, new global tariffs and additional investigations have already been announced. Companies are operating in a “new normal” where tariff volatility is a recurring planning constraint rather than a temporary disruption.
Companies must balance refund planning with the reality that tariffs—and tariff mitigation—remain a long-term strategic issue.
How Centri Can Help
The Supreme Court decision presents a potential upside, but it also introduces meaningful tax, transfer pricing, and operational complexity. Companies that act thoughtfully—grounded in documentation, economic substance, and consistency—will be best positioned to navigate refunds and ongoing tariff uncertainty.
At Centri, our team of Tax Advisory experts have the knowledge and expertise to help your business navigate the new requirements. Contact us to learn more.
]]>Since its founding in 2011, Centri’s success has been fueled by a culture that values collaboration and innovation. The firm’s momentum further demonstrates its commitment to evolving alongside its broad client base, while maintaining the high-quality, hands-on service that defines the Centri experience.
“We’re proud to start the year off by recognizing team members who exemplify Centri’s core values,” said Michael Aiello, CEO and Managing Partner of Centri. “These promotions highlight the depth of talent across the firm and our ongoing investment in our people.”
These promotions include:
Partners: Katherine McShane and Rich Sowalsky.
Senior Managers and Managers: Jake Allen, Joe Cooney, Sabrina Crane, Lisa Davis, James DiGiovanni, Matt Innocenti, Chris Menture, Julian Perez, Caroline Perry, and Jamie Roberts.
Senior Associates, Experienced Associates & Generalists: Anna Aldcowski, Keylee Brown, Evan Dolphin, Anthony Duran, Evelina Golaszewski, Ian Harvey, Drew Krause, Nujhat Nabeela, Jessica Pungitore, Kailey Stockinger, Kristi Thomas, and Hannah Vargo.
]]>The evening will spotlight groundbreaking medical innovation, honor the 2026 Innovator Award recipients, and recognize outstanding leaders and patient advocates whose work continues to move the industry forward. We’re excited to connect with the BioNJ community and celebrate the collaboration, leadership, and innovation driving meaningful impact across the life sciences ecosystem.
Centri team members Pavlo Ageyev, Blake Roberts, and Nikki Frazier will be in attendance.
]]>Rich has played a pivotal role in building and expanding Centri’s IT Risk & Cybersecurity advisory services, guiding clients through complex compliance requirements and strengthening internal control frameworks. His leadership and technical expertise have positioned Centri as a trusted partner for organizations seeking robust risk management solutions.
“Rich’s promotion to Partner and leader of our Risk Advisory practice marks an exciting milestone for Centri,” says Michael Aiello, CEO & Managing Partner of Centri. “His vision and dedication to client success have been instrumental in growing this critical service area. We are confident that under Rich’s leadership, our Risk Advisory practice will continue to thrive.”
Rich added, “I am honored to take on this new role and lead Centri’s Risk Advisory practice. We have an incredible team, and I’m excited to keep helping clients tackle today’s complex risk challenges while driving innovation and growth.”
Rich holds a Bachelor’s degree in Accounting and is a Certified Information Systems Auditor (CISA). He is a member of ISACA (Information Systems Audit and Control Association), the Institute of Internal Auditors (IIA), and the Pennsylvania Institute of Certified Public Accountants (PICPA). He has extensive experience advising clients on internal controls and cybersecurity, SOX compliance and internal audit, and risk management strategies across diverse industries.
]]>