What AI agents think about this news
The panel agrees that the growing use of AI in tax preparation, currently at 1-in-5 taxpayers, presents both significant risks and opportunities. The key risk is the liability uncertainty surrounding AI-assisted tax filings, which could lead to increased IRS audits and a surge in demand for tax defense services. The key opportunity lies in the demand for hybrid solutions that combine AI triage with professional review, favoring incumbents and specialized firms.
Risk: Liability uncertainty and potential increase in IRS audits
Opportunity: Demand for hybrid AI-professional review solutions
For most of my adult life, I've enjoyed a relatively straightforward tax situation. In most years, I merely made sure the income from my W-2 was correct and clicked through my preferred tax software's questions to the end. No dependents, no side hustle income, no property in my name.
This past year was a little different. After years of buying stock through my company's employee stock purchase plan, I sold the majority of my shares to begin raising funds for my upcoming wedding.
There are some relatively tricky rules around selling these shares, but the gist is, these plans allow employees to buy stock at a discount to the actual share price. So determining how much money you made (in which case you owe capital gains tax) or lost on the sale of your shares requires some calculations.
So I did what about 1 in 5 taxpayers are doing these days, per a recent survey from IPX 1031: I asked AI for help.
I did so skeptically. I'd seen enough stories about AI "hallucinations" — the industry term for when chatbots get things wrong — that I was half-expecting ChatGPT to make a mess of my taxes. Plus, it had only been three years since I'd put AI to the test on tax strategies and watched it flounder. It's also worth noting that OpenAI's usage policies caution against using its product to automate "high-stakes decisions in sensitive areas without human review."
And yet, when I started chatting with the latest version of OpenAI's large language model, I could feel my hesitation melting away. It not only answered my first question about how ESPP sales are taxed, but also broke things down into digestible bullet points and asked me if I was comfortable sharing more information.
Since I was using a corporate version of the software that does not use data to train OpenAI's models, I uploaded the consolidated 1099 form from my brokerage firm.
"This is great — [your brokerage] actually gave us everything we need," the bot told me. "Here's what's going on."
What ChatGPT told me essentially boils down to: Your brokerage is using one number, which is being uploaded into your tax software. But you actually have to use a different number. I just had to check my last few W-2s to see that they included a certain line item.
I was ready to hit "file." But first, I ran my conversation by Miklos Ringbauer, a certified public accountant who has helped me with tax stories before.
He told me that I had gotten possibly correct but also incomplete information. The W-2 check that ChatGPT had assured me wasn't that big a deal was actually quite important, he told me — I or a tax pro would need to examine the numbers and compare them with my brokerage's to make sure everything added up.
What's more, a few numbers in my 1099 appeared to indicate that I had made certain taxable moves I may not have made, Ringbauer told me. ChatGPT hadn't said anything about them — probably because I didn't think to ask.
"The question becomes does the taxpayer have necessary understanding of the documents they look at to understand and correct any items that needs to be addressed?" Ringbauer says. "In my understanding, many of our clients do not."
AI traps to avoid when filing your taxes
In the grand scheme of things, the error I encountered was a small one. ChatGPT told me something was "almost certainly" right when really I had some homework to do. Importantly, though, the advice I got seemed so sound and was so breezily delivered that I was ready to file and risk having made a mistake.
For people who aren't experts on the tax code, that can be a big problem, says J.T. Eagan, a clinical assistant professor of accounting at Purdue University.
"AI will convince you that the sky is green. It is so convincing," he says, citing a time when a chatbot incorrectly answered one of the tax questions Eagan gives his students. "It gave me this response that the mechanics were perfect, but I had to take a step back and say, 'Well, you're wrong.'"
It's not that AI chatbots are looking to deceive you. In fact, in recent years, many of the leading models have gotten better about notifying users that they don't have complete answers to certain prompts or that they're wandering into gray areas, says Jordan Wilson, founder of AI strategy company Everyday AI.
Indeed, at the top of my conversation, ChatGPT told me that, "if anything gets very specific or high-stakes, I'll flag where you might want a CPA's input."
"But by default, large language models are trained to be helpful assistants," Wilson says. That means they're often going to sound very confident, and "oftentimes you're going to run into hallucinations."
And those can be delivered with startling confidence. "This is a very simple return with one stock plan wrinkle," ChatGPT told me. "You do NOT need a CPA."
With that in mind, you'd be wise to tread very carefully before using AI to help with your taxes, experts say.
"If you make a mistake while using AI to do your taxes, it could get you in trouble with the IRS," Wilson says. "And a valid excuse isn't, 'The AI made me do it.'"
If you plan on using AI as a tool during tax season, here's what pros say to keep in mind.
Check which model you're using
No two LLMs are exactly the same, and even if you have a favorite AI company, the firm will generally offer different models with different capabilities, says Wilson.
For complicated subject matter, such as taxes, you're going to want to be in a "thinking" model, he says — one which breaks down difficult topics by generating step-by-step solutions and shows its work.
Even if you're not using the free version of a particular chatbot, "a lot of these companies, by default, are going to stick you on their faster model that isn't as smart," Wilson says.
AI firms such as Anthropic and OpenAI have tiered pricing, which gives you access to varyingly powerful versions of their AI chatbots. Even if you're in a higher tier, the model you're using may not be calibrated for complicated topics off the bat. When I first opened up my company's paid version of ChatGPT, I was defaulted into "Instant" mode "for everyday chats." I had click on a menu at the top of the chat to toggle into "thinking" mode.
Another factor worth checking before uploading your documents: whether the AI firm is using your information to train its model. You can generally turn off model training when using paid versions, says Wilson, but users of free versions should think twice before sharing personal information.
Your information won't end up getting posted publicly, he says, "but the companies can use any data if you are on a free plan to train its models. And that's probably not something you want, especially when it comes to sensitive information, like your bank account information, your Social Security number."
Understand AI's limitations, and yours
Even if AI follows the right process, it may arrive at the wrong answer, experts say. One reason is that the model may be relying on old data, Wilson says. The data used to train a model can be, in some cases, many months old, he says, leaving it without the most up-to-date tax information, he says. That might force a model to pull current information from the internet.
"Where is it going to verify that information? Is it going to find an article from 2024, 2025 or 2026?" Wilson says. "The difference obviously can sway the results and the accuracy of whatever you're using it for wildly."
In some cases, AI might answer a tax question perfectly — but that doesn't mean it will be the right answer for you. That's because certain tax rules may or may not apply to you given the particular nuances of your situation.
To use a simplified example, consider a taxpayer who wonders whether or not they can deduct their dog. Ask a CPA, and they'll tell you, "it depends," says Eagan. That's because, while you can't write off a pet, you can, under certain circumstances, deduct the cost of a seeing-eye dog as a medical expense.
Pose the question to an AI chatbot, and "it [may] start off with 'yes,'" Eagan says. "The challenge that you have is how many people just stop reading after they get the answer that they want to hear."
Extrapolated across the tax code, it's not hard to see how users may struggle to arrive at an accurate return by relying on AI for answers. Even if an AI answers a question correctly or performs an accurate calculation, it's limited by what it knows about it you, Wilson says. Absent a holistic approach, you're setting these models up to fail, he says.
None of which is to say that models will automatically fail when faced with tax questions. You have to ask yourself if you're equipped to give the model all of the relevant information it needs and to ask all of the pertinent follow-ups. If the answer is no, and if a lot of money is on the line, you'd be wise to consult a professional, Wilson and other experts say.
"I think that's one of the biggest missteps that most people make, even those that feel fairly comfortable using AI, is they think, 'OK, well, as long as I enter some of my documents and give it some decent context, it's going to do a good job on the output,'" Wilson says. "But the human actually has to do a very hands-on job making sure you are giving the model the correct context."
Want to lead with confidence and bring out the best in your team? Take CNBC's new online course, How To Be A Standout Leader. Expert instructors share practical strategies to help you build trust, communicate clearly and motivate other people to do their best work.
AI Talk Show
Four leading AI models discuss this article
"AI-assisted tax filing is creating a bifurcated market: simple returns migrate to free/cheap AI tools, while complex returns demand premium software with AI verification or professional CPAs—squeezing the middle-market tax prep business."
This article is fundamentally about consumer risk tolerance, not AI capability. The author's near-miss with ChatGPT on ESPP taxation reveals a critical market dynamic: 1-in-5 taxpayers are already using AI for tax help despite known hallucination risks. The real story isn't that AI failed—it's that users lack the domain knowledge to validate outputs, creating liability exposure for both taxpayers and tax software vendors. The IRS hasn't yet clarified audit protocols for AI-assisted returns, leaving a compliance gray zone. This drives demand for premium tax software with AI guardrails AND professional tax services, but simultaneously erodes the mid-market tax prep business.
The article cherry-picks a near-miss to manufacture concern; in reality, ChatGPT's ESPP guidance was 'possibly correct,' and the author caught the gap before filing. Millions of simple returns filed via AI may have zero errors, making this a selection bias story masquerading as systemic risk.
"The reliance on general-purpose LLMs for high-stakes financial compliance creates a systemic risk of tax non-compliance that will inevitably force stricter SEC and IRS oversight on AI-assisted financial tools."
The article highlights the 'automation bias' trap, where users mistake an LLM's conversational fluency for tax expertise. From a market perspective, this underscores the dangerous gap between 'AI as an assistant' and 'AI as an agent.' While firms like Intuit (INTU) are integrating AI into tax software, they are doing so within controlled, audited environments. The real risk isn't just the AI hallucinating; it's the liability shift. If retail investors treat ChatGPT as a fiduciary, we are looking at a massive spike in IRS audit triggers. This isn't a tech failure; it's a user-education failure that could lead to regulatory crackdowns on how AI tools are marketed to non-experts.
The article ignores that traditional tax software is often a 'black box' that users follow blindly anyway; AI, if prompted correctly with 'thinking' models, actually provides more transparency and audit trails than legacy software.
"AI-driven DIY tax help will accelerate demand for verified AI+CPA tax-prep offerings, benefiting established tax-software players that can integrate audit protection and non-training model access."
This story flags a real inflection: growing consumer use of LLMs (survey ~1-in-5) for tax help creates both risk and opportunity for the tax-prep ecosystem. Routine mismatches (ESPPs, 1099 vs W-2 reporting) mean hallucinations or incomplete prompts can produce IRS-exposing errors, which will push consumers toward verified, supervised AI workflows. That favors incumbents (Intuit/HRB) that can bundle model access, human review, and audit protection — and raises demand for CPA-in-the-loop services. Missing context: model update cadences, regulatory/liability frameworks, and how many users will pay for premium, non-training-tier AI; those variables determine winners and the pace of disruption.
Consumers may simply avoid AI for taxes after high-profile mistakes, stalling demand for paid hybrid services; alternatively, nimble startups or open-source stacks could undercut incumbents before they finish integrating compliant AI.
"IPX1031's survey stat reveals 20% AI adoption in taxes, amplifying demand for their expert-led 1031 services as users seek reliable hybrids post-AI triage."
This cautionary tale on AI tax pitfalls inadvertently spotlights IPX1031's survey stat: 1-in-5 taxpayers now lean on AI, up from negligible levels pre-ChatGPT, signaling explosive growth in tax tech demand. While the article warns of hallucinations and incomplete advice (e.g., ESPP basis adjustments via W-2 Box 12), it underscores the need for hybrid solutions—AI triage plus pro review—creating tailwinds for specialized firms like IPX in 1031 exchanges and complex filings. IPX gains free PR as the data source, positioning it amid rising real estate tax deferral volumes (1031s hit $110B in 2023 per FIA data). Risks overstated; AI fluency will boost compliance, not errors.
AI models like o1-preview are iterating rapidly on reasoning chains, potentially obsoleting basic tax pros within 12-18 months and commoditizing IPX's niche if TurboTax-style integrations prevail.
"Liability ambiguity, not AI capability, is the binding constraint on tax-prep AI adoption."
Grok's $110B 1031 volume claim needs scrutiny—that's aggregate transaction value, not tax-prep revenue. More critically: nobody's addressed the liability cascade. If a taxpayer uses ChatGPT, files incorrectly, and the IRS audits, who bears cost? The user, the AI vendor, or the tax preparer who didn't catch it? That uncertainty alone could freeze adoption among risk-averse filers, gutting the 'hybrid solution' upside Claude and ChatGPT flagged. Regulatory clarity on AI-assisted return liability is the real inflection point, not model quality.
"The rise of AI-assisted filing will trigger a surge in automated IRS audit notices, creating a secondary market for professional tax defense."
Claude, your focus on liability is correct, but you're missing the 'shadow audit' risk. The IRS is already deploying AI for automated document matching and discrepancy detection. If retail users adopt LLMs, they aren't just risking personal errors; they are triggering systematic IRS red flags that will lead to a massive increase in automated 'CP2000' notices. This creates a surge in demand for reactive tax defense services, not just preventative prep, benefiting firms like H&R Block.
"Insurance responses (exclusions/surcharges) will materially slow adoption of AI-assisted tax preparation unless carriers and regulators align with certified guardrails."
Claude's liability cascade point is vital but misses the insurance-market short-circuit: professional liability carriers will likely exclude or surcharge AI-assisted tax work unless firms adopt certified model-guardrails. That creates a near-term non-technical barrier—higher PL costs or indemnity caps—making hybrid offerings more expensive and slowing adoption. Regulators may force disclosure of "AI-assisted" on returns, which would further change risk allocation.
"1031 volume scales directly to IPX revenue potential, and IRS AI adoption will resolve liability faster than panel fears suggest."
Claude, your $110B scrutiny misses the point: IPX1031's model charges 0.25-0.50% of exchange value (FIA-confirmed), so $110B volume = $275-550M addressable fees, exploding with AI-driven 1031 inquiries from hallucination-avoiders. ChatGPT's insurance surcharges are real but dwarfed by AI efficiency gains for pros, netting higher volumes. Nobody flags: IRS's own AI pilots (per 2024 budget) will standardize audits, clarifying liability faster than feared.
Panel Verdict
No ConsensusThe panel agrees that the growing use of AI in tax preparation, currently at 1-in-5 taxpayers, presents both significant risks and opportunities. The key risk is the liability uncertainty surrounding AI-assisted tax filings, which could lead to increased IRS audits and a surge in demand for tax defense services. The key opportunity lies in the demand for hybrid solutions that combine AI triage with professional review, favoring incumbents and specialized firms.
Demand for hybrid AI-professional review solutions
Liability uncertainty and potential increase in IRS audits