Finance Automation & AI Advisory
Finance DX / RPA & Generative AIRPA and generative AI for finance,
judged from the finance leader’s seat
A certified public accountant who has run closing, internal controls and head-office reporting at foreign-owned companies in Japan, and who currently heads the accounting function at a leading global RPA company. We start with the question that matters most: which processes should be automated, and which decisions should stay with people.
Does this sound familiar?
- Every month-end close is consumed by reconciling, re-keying and consolidating data in Excel
- Invoice and expense processing depends on one person, and stops when they are away
- You want to use RPA or generative AI, but do not know where to start
- Proposals from IT or vendors do not match how finance actually works
- You are unsure what happens to approvals, audit trails and internal controls once a process is automated, and whether you could explain it to your auditors
The question is not “can we automate it” but “should we”
Not every finance process is a good candidate for automation. Routine, high-volume work that follows clear rules usually is. Work that involves complex judgement, frequent exceptions, sensitive data or quality assurance should, depending on the design, stay with people.
| Good candidates for automation | Needs design, or should stay with people |
|---|---|
| Journal entry and posting for recurring vendors | Tax treatment, fixed-asset classification and period cut-off decisions |
| Bank, receivables and payables reconciliation | New vendors and non-standard transactions |
| Report preparation and data consolidation for head-office reporting | Approvals, review and audit evidence |
| Reading invoices and capturing the data | Exception handling and escalation |
Faster processing is worth nothing if the basis for a journal entry or the approval trail is lost along the way. We judge a design not only by hours saved, but by whether exception handling, review and control evidence survive it.
The accountant’s view
For foreign-owned companies, finance automation does not stop at the Japanese entity
Finance teams in foreign-owned subsidiaries carry requirements beyond Japanese accounting and tax: reporting to head office, reconciling to IFRS, working within a group-wide ERP, and absorbing system roll-outs driven from headquarters. If automation is designed around the local process alone, it will clash with group reporting and control requirements.
Our principal has served as head of accounting at the world’s largest luxury group and as head of finance and logistics at Zegna, running the finance function through ERP implementations and managing the relationship with head office. We design automation with head-office coordination, process standardisation and internal control in view, not just the Japanese books.
Engagement: Breitling Japan K.K. — Accounting and finance support during an SAP S/4HANA implementation
With an SAP S/4HANA implementation coinciding with the departure of the finance director, we supported financial reporting to head office, SAP S/4HANA-related work and finance documentation (read the client’s account). This was not an RPA or generative AI project, but running finance through an ERP transition is exactly the groundwork that finance automation depends on.
Luxury businesses will also find a dedicated page on the issues specific to the industry (Luxury Industry Advisory).
How we work
- Understand the process: current workflow, volumes, processing time and how often exceptions occur
- Assess suitability: score candidate processes on rule-based potential, volume, data sensitivity and control risk
- Prioritise and estimate ROI: current hours, expected savings, set-up cost, running cost and payback period
- Define proof-of-concept requirements: scope, acceptance criteria, exception handling and approval flow, in writing
- Work with vendors and IT: translate finance requirements for the technical side, and evaluate proposals from the finance side
- Embed and control: operating rules, audit evidence and monitoring
We do not build robots or AI systems ourselves. We work alongside the implementation partner or IT team you choose, with a clear division of roles.
Services
| Service | What it covers | Deliverables |
|---|---|---|
| Finance automation assessment (one-off) | Interviews and suitability assessment for two to four processes | Process inventory, automation suitability matrix, recommended next steps |
| Implementation readiness and requirements | Documenting the finance-side requirements before a proof of concept or full roll-out | Process flows, exception list, control requirements, acceptance criteria, vendor briefing pack |
| Ongoing advisory (monthly) | Post-implementation review meetings, KPI review, selecting the next processes | Monthly review notes, KPI report |
| In-house training and workshops | For finance managers: judging where AI fits, internal control, co-designing a proof of concept | Training materials (no client-specific information is used) |
Fees are quoted according to scope and deliverables. The initial 30-minute consultation is free of charge.
Finance from the inside, RPA and AI from the inside
Certified public accountant (Japan), licensed tax accountant and MBA (Oxford). After audit work at a Big Four firm, served as head of accounting at the world’s largest luxury group and as head of finance and logistics at Zegna, responsible for closing, internal controls and head-office reporting. Currently heads the accounting function at a leading global RPA company, where he is directly involved in evaluating and driving the use of RPA and generative AI in finance operations.
Our contribution is not technical development. It is the finance requirements, the order of priorities, and the operating and control perspective. We do not endorse or guarantee the products of the principal’s employer; tool selection is vendor-neutral.
Worked example: automating invoice processing
A design example based on a fictional company: the Japanese subsidiary of a foreign manufacturer, a finance team of four, around 300 supplier invoices a month. It follows the flow from receiving an invoice to posting the journal entry, in three steps: before, design decisions, and deliverables.
| Stage | What happens | The accountant’s view |
|---|---|---|
| Before | Invoices arrive by email and post. Staff read each one, decide the account and tax treatment by eye and key it into the ERP; a manager approves. Around 40 hours a month, concentrated at month-end, dependent on individuals | Key-person risk; evidence scattered across email; electronic record-keeping requirements not checked |
| Process inventory | Of 300 invoices: recurring vendors (rent, telecoms, outsourcing) 70%; ad hoc purchases 25%; items needing judgement (fixed assets, prepayments) 5% | Automation suitability matrix (rule-based potential × volume × control risk) |
| Design | 1. Check electronic record-keeping requirements on receipt 2. Capture data with AI-OCR 3. Suggest account and tax code using past entries and generative AI; route low-confidence cases to a person 4. Human approval 5. Post to the ERP 6. Retain logs and evidence | Decisions kept with people: consumption tax treatment (taxable, exempt, out of scope, qualified-invoice status), fixed-asset classification, period cut-off for prepayments and accruals, new vendors |
| Deliverables | Process flow, suitability matrix, simple ROI sheet (40 hours a month to an estimated 12; set-up, running cost and payback as placeholders), approval and control RACI | Judged on whether exception handling, review and evidence survive, not on hours saved alone |
| After (projected) | Recurring 70%: human check only; ad hoc 25%: review the suggested entry; 5%: handled by people as before | States explicitly why 100% automation is not the goal |
* This example uses a fictional company and fictional figures. It is not a record of an actual client engagement.
For reference: a publicly reported large-company programme
A major Japanese financial group has reported automating around 75% of its accounting workload with RPA across requests, approvals, journal entries and payment execution. It is now adding a flow for supplier invoices — checking electronic record-keeping requirements on the uploaded image, capturing data with AI-OCR, suggesting account and tax codes from historical data and generative AI, human approval, then posting to the ERP — with a target of more than 90% automation. Cases where the AI is not confident are routed to a person. (Reported by ITmedia Enterprise, 29 September 2025, and ASCII.jp, 22 September 2025.)
* Cited from public reporting. This firm was not involved in the programme.
What we do, and what we don’t
| We do | We don’t |
|---|---|
| Process inventory, suitability assessment, ROI estimates | Build RPA robots or generative AI systems |
| Requirements, exception handling and control requirements | Sell software or licences |
| Evaluate vendor proposals, coordinate with IT | Operate or maintain systems on your behalf |
| Post-implementation KPI review and control design | Recommend or guarantee any particular product |
Consulting services relating to finance automation are contracted through Inter-Arc Consulting Co., Ltd. Accounting and tax services are provided by Tamura Accounting Firm.
Information submitted through the contact form is received by Tamura Accounting Firm. Enquiries relating to consulting services are shared with Inter-Arc Consulting Co., Ltd. so that we can respond and make a proposal, and for no other purpose (see our privacy policy).
How to get started
- Send the contact form and select “AI & RPA for Finance”
- Free 30-minute consultation (online). We discuss your current process and the issues, and suggest whether and how we can help
- Quotation and engagement letter
- Assessment or requirements work begins
The conversation is more concrete if you can tell us roughly which process is involved, the monthly volume and the number of people on it. There is no need to send documents in advance.
Frequently asked questions
We have not chosen an RPA or AI tool yet. Can we still talk?
Yes. We are happy to start before any tool has been selected, and we do not assume any particular product.
Do we need to share our accounting data?
Not for the initial consultation. From the assessment stage onwards, we request only the minimum necessary, under a confidentiality agreement.
Can you handle the implementation as well?
No. We do not implement. We split roles with your implementation partner or IT team and take responsibility for the finance-side requirements and evaluation.
How long does it take?
An assessment covering two to four processes typically takes about a month. Requirements work depends on scope; we will give you a view in the initial consultation.
Where do you work?
Primarily online, anywhere in Japan. On-site visits are possible in and around Tokyo. We work in English or Japanese.
Who is the contracting party?
Consulting services are contracted through Inter-Arc Consulting Co., Ltd.; accounting and tax services through Tamura Accounting Firm.
Who holds the personal information I submit?
Tamura Accounting Firm receives it. Enquiries about consulting services are shared with Inter-Arc Consulting Co., Ltd. so that we can respond and make a proposal. See our privacy policy for details.