Technology, Transparency and the Future of State Tax Enforcement
If there was one message that came through loud and clear at the 2026 Southeastern Association of Tax Administrators (SEATA) Annual Meeting, it was this: state tax departments are becoming much more sophisticated in how they identify risk, select audits, and enforce compliance. Throughout the conference, tax commissioners and state revenue agents highlighted how artificial intelligence (AI), advanced analytics and new technology tools are reshaping tax administration across the Southeast for all types of state taxes. The Conference included state tax commissioners and revenue agents from Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Florida, Kentucky, Mississippi, West Virginia and Virginia.
These changes matter for manufacturers, multistate businesses and tax practitioners because enforcement is becoming increasingly data-driven. State agencies are investing in technology that can analyze large volumes of taxpayer data, identify anomalies, detect potential fraud and prioritize examinations more efficiently. As these capabilities continue to evolve, taxpayers should expect states to identify potential compliance issues earlier and focus audit resources where they believe risk is highest.
Another topic that generated considerable discussion was transfer pricing. For multistate businesses, this is an area worth watching closely because states are dedicating more resources to reviewing related-party transactions, royalty arrangements, management fees, financing structures and economic substance considerations. Tax administrators emphasized the importance of maintaining robust documentation and being prepared to support intercompany transactions during audit examinations.
Beneficial ownership transparency was another recurring theme. Tax officials discussed the challenges associated with identifying taxpayers operating through layered ownership structures and other arrangements that can obscure true ownership. Combined with expanding data-sharing initiatives and litigation-driven policy developments, these discussions suggest states are continuing to enhance their ability to identify compliance risks and strengthen enforcement efforts.
Overall, the conference reinforced that state tax agencies are becoming more sophisticated, more technology-driven and more efficient in their compliance efforts. Proactive compliance reviews, strong documentation, accurate reporting and periodic tax health checks remain some of the best tools taxpayers can use to manage state tax risk in an increasingly complex environment.
Beyond the broader conference themes, several state-specific discussions and observations stood out. Here are a few items that practitioners may want to keep on their radar.
Alabama Department of Revenue Commissioner Mary Martin Mitchell discussed ongoing efforts to automate collections and lien processes. The increased use of electronic collection tools and automated enforcement mechanisms suggests the state is continuing to modernize its collections function.
Why it matters: Taxpayers with outstanding liabilities may experience faster lien filings and accelerated enforcement activity.
Arkansas highlighted its tax fraud identification and prevention program, including the use of analytics and technology to identify suspicious returns and fraudulent activity. The state also shared approaches designed to help delinquent businesses return to sales tax compliance.
Why it matters: Arkansas appears to be balancing stronger enforcement with proactive compliance outreach.
While no Florida-specific technical presentation was identified on the public agenda, the conference-wide emphasis on AI-driven audit selection, fraud detection, beneficial ownership transparency and data analytics is particularly relevant given Florida’s reliance on sales and use tax revenues.
Why it matters: Florida practitioners may see continued expansion of analytics-based sales and use tax audit initiatives.
Georgia Department of Revenue Commissioner David Burgess participated in discussions regarding agency priorities and tax administration challenges. The broader focus on modernization and compliance technology suggests continued investment in advanced enforcement tools.
Why it matters: Georgia is likely to continue embracing data-driven audit selection methodologies.
Mississippi Commissioner Chris Graham participated in discussions concerning tax administration modernization. Conference discussions suggest a continued focus on improving efficiency through technology and analytics.
Why it matters: Taxpayers should anticipate continued refinement of audit and compliance programs.
Although no North Carolina-specific presentation was identified, the state remains active in taxpayer service modernization and interstate cooperation initiatives.
Why it matters: Practitioners should monitor corporate income tax sourcing developments, marketplace facilitator compliance, technology modernization projects and interstate data-sharing initiatives.
While no Virginia-specific presentation was publicly identified, Virginia has historically been active in areas such as transfer pricing, audit controversy and income tax policy, making conference discussions on these topics particularly relevant.
Why it matters: Virginia often serves as an early indicator of emerging trends in state tax administration.
West Virginia remains actively engaged within SEATA. Although no major state-specific updates were highlighted, discussions involving modernization and interstate collaboration indicate a continued focus on enhancing tax administration processes.
Why it matters: Practitioners should continue monitoring modernization and electronic compliance initiatives.
For taxpayers and practitioners, the message from this year’s SEATA conference was clear: technology-driven enforcement is becoming an increasingly important part of state tax administration. Revenue departments are using technology to analyze more data, identify audit leads faster and focus resources where they believe risk is highest. Across nearly every session, common themes included AI and advanced analytics, transfer pricing enforcement, fraud detection, beneficial ownership transparency and modernization of collections functions.
For taxpayers and SALT practitioners, that means strong documentation, proactive compliance reviews, accurate reporting and periodic tax health checks are more important than ever. The shift toward technology-enabled tax administration is already influencing how states approach compliance and audit activity throughout the Southeast.
Businesses operating across multiple states should monitor these evolving enforcement trends and assess whether existing compliance, documentation and audit-preparedness processes remain sufficient.
This article is based on publicly available information and discussions from the 2026 SEATA Annual Meeting and reflects the author’s observations and analysis on emerging state tax administration trends.
For more information on this topic, please contact a member of our team.
Effective July 1, 2026, New York City is enacting a surcharge on high-value, non-primary residences within New York City as part of Governor Kathy Hochul’s budget. The pied-a-terre tax, as it is commonly referred to, affects one, two and three family dwellings exceeding a specified value (see below) and are not used as a primary…
Aircraft Transactions Face a Fragmented State Tax Landscape State sales and use tax treatment of aircraft transactions continues to evolve, creating a complex and increasingly fragmented landscape for taxpayers. An aircraft is uniquely impacted by state tax rules due to its mobility and multi-state use, which can trigger tax obligations across jurisdictions at different points…
On June 29, 2026, Governor Gavin Newsom signed Senate Bill 122 (SB 122), the budget trailer bill for the 2026–27 fiscal year, expanding California’s sales and use tax base to include certain digital software transactions, effective January 1, 2027. Under the new legislation, California’s 7.25% statewide sales and use tax, plus any applicable local district…
