Australians have never had easier access to tax information. A taxpayer can now ask an artificial intelligence platform about deductions, capital gains tax or investment structures and receive an instant, confident-sounding answer. Social media and so-called ‘finfluencers’ also offer quick tips, shortcuts and tax ‘hacks’ that can appear persuasive, especially at tax time.

But information is not the same as advice. Tax law is complex, fact-specific and often dependent on context. A technically correct statement may still be misleading if it is applied to the wrong taxpayer, the wrong income year or the wrong set of facts. That is why professional judgement matters more in an environment where answers are abundant.

Advised by AI

The ATO has warned taxpayers to be cautious about relying on AI-generated information, social media content and online tax commentary. These sources may be incomplete, outdated or based on overseas rules. They may also miss the practical questions that matter most:

1. What evidence is available?
2. What assumptions have been made?
3. Has the taxpayer’s full situation been considered?

Many accountants are already seeing this play out in practice. Clients arrive with AI-generated responses that look authoritative but overlook critical facts. Others have been influenced by videos promising deductions or loopholes that do not exist or do not apply to them.

Accountability remains central. Taxpayers are responsible for the accuracy of their returns, regardless whether information came from a friend, a website, a chatbot or a social media post. Registered tax practitioners also remain responsible for their advice and the work they sign off on. The Tax Practitioners Board’s guidance on AI reinforces that technology may assist research, drafting and analysis but it does not replace professional competence, confidentiality or ethical judgement.

The automation challenge

At the same time, regulators are using technology too. The ATO has described a future in which tax and super increasingly ‘just happen’. For taxpayers and advisers, that is not just a technology story, it’s a governance story. If tax reporting becomes increasingly automated, embedded in business systems and connected to third-party data, the quality of the inputs becomes even more important.

That means professional judgement must extend beyond interpreting the law. Advisers increasingly need to understand how information moves through client systems, software, payroll platforms, accounting ledgers and reporting tools. They need to ask whether the correct data is being captured, whether transactions are being coded appropriately, whether GST, PAYG, superannuation and income tax treatments are being applied consistently, and whether automated calculations can be checked and explained.

Automation can reduce manual work but it can also scale errors quickly. A recurring coding mistake, an incorrect payroll setting, a misclassified worker, a flawed assumption in tax software or an unchecked, AI-generated answer may produce results that appear neat and complete, while still being wrong.

This is why checking the automation process itself matters. Advisers and businesses should be able to verify how calculations are made, test whether outputs are reasonable, identify exceptions and trace figures back to source data. Controls, reconciliations and review processes are not administrative extras, they are essential safeguards in a digital tax system. Good tax governance becomes essential.

A need for reliable advice

Some suggest AI will reduce the need for tax advisers because information is now widely available. The opposite is true. When information is plentiful, clients need help determining what is reliable. When AI-generated content is persuasive, they need advisers who can separate fact from fiction. When compliance tools are more powerful, they need confidence their tax positions are technically correct and properly supported. And when reporting becomes automated, they need advisers who can test whether the automation is working as intended.

In a world where everyone seems to have tax advice and where tax administration is becoming increasingly digital, professional judgement has never mattered more.