Josi is AICPA's AI-powered accounting and auditing research assistant. It uses selected professional content, including material from the AICPA Online Professional Library, to help users find relevant guidance through a conversational interface. It can speed discovery, but it does not remove the need to read sources, apply professional judgment, or follow a firm's review process.
What is Josi?
The AICPA introduced Josi in October 2025 in collaboration with Slalom and Microsoft. According to the Journal of Accountancy, the tool accesses information in the AICPA Online Professional Library, including Professional Standards and Audit and Accounting Guides, with access to FASB codifications and PCAOB standards also described in the launch coverage.
That curated scope is an important difference from a general-purpose chatbot. A focused research environment can help an accountant locate relevant professional literature more efficiently and see where an answer came from. It does not guarantee that every response fits the facts, reporting period, jurisdiction, engagement, or firm's interpretation.
What Josi is designed to help with
Accelerated research
Ask a technical question in conversational language and identify potentially relevant standards, guides, and professional-library content.
Source discovery
Move from a summarized response to the underlying authoritative material that must be read and applied.
Issue orientation
Build an initial map of a topic, terminology, and areas requiring deeper research.
Workflow support
Reduce time spent searching across separate resources when the required content is included in the platform.
Why a curated research environment matters
Accounting research depends on authority, effective dates, facts, and context. General web search can surface outdated summaries, commentary, or material from the wrong jurisdiction. A curated tool can narrow that risk by limiting the research base and connecting responses to professional content.
Even so, the user remains responsible for validating the cited material. Standards change, exceptions matter, and a concise AI answer can omit conditions that alter the conclusion.
Professional-use reminder: Treat AI output as research assistance, not a final accounting or audit conclusion. Review the cited source, confirm effective dates and scope, document the reasoning, and use the firm's established consultation and approval procedures.
A practical review workflow
-
Frame the question precisely.
Include the transaction, entity type, period, jurisdiction, and decision the research must support. -
Inspect the sources.
Open the cited standard or guide instead of relying on the summary alone. -
Check authority and date.
Confirm that the material is authoritative for the engagement and effective for the period at issue. -
Test the conclusion against the facts.
Look for exceptions, elections, definitions, thresholds, and disclosure requirements. -
Document and review.
Record the sources and reasoning in accordance with firm policy, then obtain the required human review.
What the broader adoption data shows
Wolters Kluwer's 2025 Future Ready Accountant report states that 70% of U.S. firms use AI weekly and 78% plan to increase investment. The same report says 94% of U.S. firms offer advisory or consulting services. These are vendor-sponsored survey findings, not universal measures of every accounting firm, but they illustrate why research governance and staff training have become operational priorities.
Questions firms should answer before adoption
- Which engagements and research tasks may use the tool?
- What client or confidential information may be entered?
- How are sources, prompts, and conclusions documented?
- Who reviews work influenced by AI?
- How will staff be trained to recognize missing context and outdated guidance?
- How will the firm monitor product, content, access, and policy changes?
The likely impact: faster orientation, not automatic judgment
Josi reflects a useful direction for professional research: conversational access to a controlled body of accounting and auditing literature. The strongest use case is helping qualified professionals find and navigate guidance more efficiently. The value still depends on careful questions, source review, sound judgment, and accountable firm processes.
