Executive Summary By 2026, Global Capability Center (GCC) will no longer be evaluated as offshore delivery constructs. They will be assessed as enterprise assets- capable of influencing growth, resilience, innovation velocity, and risk posture. CXOs today stand at the crossroads of pressure- be it margin compression and regulatory complexity or talent scarcity with accelerated digital disruption, in addition to this are the evolving geopolitical uncertainty. In the said context, GCCs are evolving as strategic arm – given they are intentionally designed, governed and integrated into an enterprise. In this blog we have explored forward looking view of GCCs in 2026, analyzing industry trends with a people-centric, value driven operating philosophy. It outlines how organizations can move beyond cost arbitrage to build GCCs that deliver sustainable enterprise advantage, reflecting Pierag’s belief that enduring performance is created when people, purpose, and strategy are aligned. The 2026 Reality: Why GCCs Are Now a Boardroom Priority The role of the GCC is undergoing structural redefinition. Three forces are driving this shift: 1. Enterprise Complexity Has Outpaced Traditional Models Global organizations now exist and operate in environments characterized by regulatory fragmentation, digital acceleration, and dispersed decision-making. Centralized headquarters alone cannot absorb this complexity. GCCs are increasingly expected to: Own end-to-end business capabilities Act as centers of judgment, not just execution Provide continuity and resilience across markets and cycles A testament to this strategic shift is India as it hosts the largest GCC ecosystem globally, with ~1,700+ centers driving nearly 55{7126ef689967c99f7e9a450841e77e615dc0e5bf9a33aadbab7cb6478499c2b3} of global GCC share. The market was valued at ~$64.6 billion in 2024 and is projected to exceed $100+ billion by 2030 2. Talent Has Become a Strategic Constraint Availability and screening of adaptable talent is now a growth constraint not just a support function issue. GCCs have now evolved into strategic and dynamic talent hub, shaping organization’s leadership pipeline, capability and knowledge base. Despite global visa and protectionist policy shifts (e.g., H-1B tightening), India’s deep and dynamic talent pool and cost advantage sustain multinational investment and near-term expansion. 3. Technology Without Governance Is a Risk Multiplier AI, automation and digital platforms are innovating faster than governance frameworks. GCCs are especially enabled to balance technological transformations with control, give governance frameworks are embedded by design. For CXOs, the GCC conversation in 2026 is no longer operational. It is strategic, financial, and reputational. Redefining GCC Value: The 2026 Mandate Leading organizations are reframing the GCC value proposition across four dimensions: Strategic Contribution - GCCs are transitioning from support roles to co-owners of outcomes - contributing directly to transformation initiatives, product innovation, and market expansion. Leadership and Decision Ownership - Conversation now is shifting from authority to capability. Mature GCC models in 2026 will become a hub of senior leadership not just nominal delivery roles. Compliance, Trust and Emerging Risk - With the updated and ever evolving geopolitical changes and strict global scrutiny, GCCs are becoming hubs of governance excellence, ensuring control and transparency across geographies. Measurable Enterprise Impact - Boards are not only setting goals for cost savings, but the expectation goes beyond in terms of value creation, resilience, and long-term commitment of growth in the competitive markets. Pierag’s View: Designing GCCs for Enduring Advantage Pierag approaches GCCs as long term enterprise investments rather than planned expansions. The philosophy that guides this long-term vision is straight and simple- organizations scale sustainably when their people are empowered, trusted, and purpose-aligned. People as Strategic Capital In 2026 and the years to come, talent pool will not just be a line item – they will be one of the most important pillars of strategy. Pierag’s GCC approach prioritizes- Leadership depth and readiness for succession Cultural flexibility and adaptability across boundaries Rigorous capability development and growth aligned to enterprise priorities and objectives This process and human focused approach enable GCCs to evolve their role from execution and delivery centers to strategic partners involved in decision making. Operating Models That Evolve with Enterprise Pierag understands that no two organizations are alike and thus supports flexible GCC pathways aligned to risk appetite and growth ambition: COCO for organizations seeking full ownership and operational control COPO for organizations retaining ownership while outsourcing day-to-day operations BOT for phased ownership and de-risked expansion in new markets These models are not endpoints - they are transitional pathways designed to mature with the organization. Governance Embedded from Day One With increasing regulatory compliances and need for data sensitivity, Pierag embeds security, governance and compliance by design into the GCC foundation – ensuring agility without unnecessary exposure. Structured Execution, Adaptive Thinking The simple four step GCC launch process- Evaluate, Design, Build, Operate is executed with discipline while keeping in mind continuous recalibration with evolving business needs and strategic changes. In 2026, the successful and mature GCCs will be those that are purpose-led, trusted and deeply integrated not only by the leadership but also by regulators and employees. Pierag’s stand is clear- sustainable enterprise advantage is built when GCCs are designed around people, integrity, and long-term value, not short-term efficiency. In doing so, organizations transform GCCs from operating leverage into enduring strategic assets.  

A Compilation Engagement involves applying accounting expertise to assist management in preparing and presenting financial information in the form of financial statements, without expressing any assurance on them. These are governed by SRS 4410 (Revised) and are often undertaken for small to mid-sized businesses where a full audit or review engagement is not required. Key considerations while performing a compilation engagement: • Ensure you are independent as required by relevant ethical standards. • Gain basic knowledge of the client’s business, industry, and accounting policies to compile relevant and accurate statements. • Clarify that management is responsible for the financial statements and the accuracy of the underlying data. • Do not perform audit or review procedures such as testing transactions or confirming balances. • Always obtain a written engagement letter detailing the nature and limitations of the engagement. • If the statements are to be used by third parties, ensure that the users understand no assurance is provided. • Clearly state in the compilation report that no assurance is provided.

The importance of transparent financial reporting cannot be overstated in today's complex business environment. Investors, lenders, and other capital providers rely heavily on financial statements to evaluate an entity's performance, assess its prospects for future cash flows, and benchmark it against peers. A critical component of this evaluation is understanding the composition of expenses, as they often reveal key insights into cost structures, operational efficiencies, and long-term sustainability. Historically, U.S. GAAP has not required consistent disaggregation of income statement expenses, which has led to diversity in reporting practices. This lack of standardization posed challenges for users in comparing financial results across entities and industries. Recognizing this gap, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) introduced the proposed Accounting Standards Update (ASU) Income Statement—Reporting Comprehensive Income—Expense Disaggregation Disclosures (Subtopic 220-40): Disaggregation of Income Statement Expenses in July 2023. After gathering extensive feedback through public comments and roundtable discussions, the FASB finalized the amendments in November 2024. These changes aim to enhance the decision-usefulness of financial reporting by requiring disaggregated expense disclosures within the footnotes of financial statements. In January 2025, the FASB issued Accounting Standard Updates No. 2025-01, Income Statement—Reporting Comprehensive Income—Expense Disaggregation Disclosures (Subtopic 220-40): Clarifying the Effective Date. The updates apply to all public business entities and are effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2026, and for interim reporting periods within annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2027, with early adoption permitted.

The importance of transparent financial reporting cannot be overstated in today's complex business environment. Investors, lenders, and other capital providers rely heavily on financial statements to evaluate an entity's performance, assess its prospects for future cash flows, and benchmark it against peers. A critical component of this evaluation is understanding the composition of expenses, as they often reveal key insights into cost structures, operational efficiencies, and long-term sustainability. Historically, U.S. GAAP has not required consistent disaggregation of income statement expenses, leading to diversity in reporting practices. This lack of standardization has posed challenges for users in comparing financial results across entities and industries. Recognizing this gap, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) introduced the proposed Accounting Standards Update (ASU) Income Statement—Reporting Comprehensive Income—Expense Disaggregation Disclosures (Subtopic 220-40): Disaggregation of Income Statement Expenses in July 2023. After gathering extensive feedback through public comments and roundtable discussions, the FASB finalized the amendments in November 2024. These changes aim to enhance the decision-usefulness of financial reporting by requiring disaggregated expense disclosures within the footnotes of financial statements. In January 2025, FASB issued Accounting Standard Updates No. 2025-01, Income Statement—Reporting Comprehensive Income—Expense Disaggregation Disclosures (Subtopic 220-40): Clarifying the Effective Date. The updates apply to all public business entities and shall be effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2026, and interim reporting periods within annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2027, with early adoption permitted.

Explore how audits empower healthcare providers to tackle AI risks, policy shifts, and pricing reforms with confidence.

Explore the fundamentals and practical relevance of review engagements in today’s financial landscape.

From market trends and HUD updates to our tailored audit approach, discover how you can enhance transparency, mitigate risk, and strengthen investor confidence in today’s real estate landscape.

Ensuring Financial Transparency and Regulatory Compliance for Nonprofits Nonprofit organizations play a vital role in creating impact, but ensuring financial transparency and regulatory compliance remains a challenge. Nonprofit organizations must comply with various financial and regulatory requirements to ensure transparency, accountability, and efficiency. At Pierag Consulting, we understand the complexities of nonprofit audits and here's the complete guide to help you with: Financial Statement Audits – Ensuring GAAP compliance, internal controls, and accurate financial reporting. Uniform Guidance Audits (Single Audits) – Key compliance areas for federally funded nonprofits. Grant Compliance Audits – Best practices for financial reporting, internal controls, and regulatory adherence. The Changing Landscape – Key legal updates impacting federal funding for nonprofits in 2025. Future Readiness – How nonprofits can adapt to shifting funding priorities, compliance measures, and technology adoption. With expert insights and strategic recommendations, we empower nonprofits to tackle financial and regulatory challenges effectively.

In today’s volatile economic environment, companies with outstanding debt are increasingly navigating complex restructuring situations. One of the most significant among these is the Troubled Debt Restructuring (TDR) under ASC 470-60, where a creditor grants a concession to a debtor experiencing financial difficulty. Understanding the accounting, governance, and strategic implications of a TDR can make the difference between a company’s collapse and its comeback. A TDR occurs when a creditor grants a concession to a debtor who is facing financial difficulty—concessions that would not normally be offered under standard lending terms. These concessions are made to preserve as much of the creditor's investment as possible. The rationale is that receiving partial repayment is better than receiving nothing at all. Therefore, if modifying the original terms is the only realistic way for a lender to recover any portion of the outstanding debt, the lender may agree to a TDR. From a financial reporting perspective, restructuring debt due to a borrower’s financial challenges creates significant accounting issues. Different accounting frameworks treat these situations in varied ways, especially when creditors grant concessions that would not otherwise be considered. Under US GAAP, these cases are formally classified as Troubled Debt Restructurings (TDRs) and are governed by specific guidance under ASC 470-60. In contrast, IFRS and Indian GAAP (IGAAP) approach such events more broadly through financial instrument or impairment standards, without explicitly using the term TDR. To highlight the differences, the following table provides a comparative overview of how these frameworks address debt restructuring in situations of borrower distress.