30 Claude Prompts for Financial Controllers

You are a controller who writes the monthly variance commentary that goes into the board reporting package. <context> I have budget and actual figures for the period and need a clear narrative explaining what moved and why. </context> <inputs> - Line items with budget and actual: [PASTE LINE ITEMS, BUDGET, ACTUAL] - Materiality threshold: [DOLLAR OR PERCENT THRESHOLD] - Known business drivers: [LIST OF KNOWN DRIVERS, E.G. HEADCOUNT DELAY, PRICE INCREASE] - Reporting period: [MONTH AND YEAR] </inputs> <task> Write variance commentary for every line item above the materiality threshold, explaining the dollar and percent variance and the likely driver. </task> <constraints> Do not comment on line items below the threshold. State the direction of the variance in plain terms, favorable or unfavorable, before explaining it. Avoid vague causes like "timing differences" unless a specific date or event is given. </constraints> <format> Return a table with columns: Line Item, Budget, Actual, Variance $, Variance %, Commentary. </format>

You are a controller digging into a variance that nobody on the team has explained yet. <context> A cost center came in significantly over budget this month and I need a structured way to find the root cause before I report on it. </context> <inputs> - Cost center: [COST CENTER NAME] - Budget amount: [BUDGET AMOUNT] - Actual amount: [ACTUAL AMOUNT] - Sub-accounts within this cost center: [LIST OF SUB ACCOUNTS] - Anything unusual you already noticed: [ANY NOTES, OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Produce an investigation plan that lists the most likely causes in order of probability, the specific data pull needed to confirm or rule out each one, and who to ask. </task> <constraints> Order causes from most to least likely given a cost overrun of this type. Each cause must include a concrete data check, not just "review the account". </constraints> <format> Return a numbered list of hypotheses, each with: Hypothesis, Data Check Needed, Who to Ask. </format>

You are a controller tracking whether a recurring variance is getting better or worse over time. <context> One expense line has missed budget for several months in a row and leadership wants to know if the trend is improving. </context> <inputs> - Line item: [LINE ITEM NAME] - Monthly budget and actual for the last 6 months: [PASTE 6 MONTHS OF BUDGET AND ACTUAL] - Any corrective actions already taken: [LIST OF ACTIONS, OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Analyze the trend across the 6 months, state whether the variance is widening, narrowing, or flat, and assess whether the corrective actions appear to be working. </task> <constraints> Base the trend call strictly on the numbers given. If the data is too noisy to call a clear trend, say so directly instead of forcing a conclusion. </constraints> <format> Return a short summary paragraph, then a table of the 6 months with running variance percent, then a one-line verdict labeled "Trend Verdict". </format>

You are a controller who needs department managers without a finance background to actually understand their budget variances. <context> I send variance reports to department heads but they often do not act on them because the finance terms do not land. </context> <inputs> - Department: [DEPARTMENT NAME] - Variance details: [PASTE VARIANCE DETAILS AND AMOUNTS] - Manager's role and background: [ROLE, E.G. NON-FINANCE OPERATIONS MANAGER] - Action you want them to take: [DESIRED ACTION] </inputs> <task> Rewrite the variance explanation in plain language a non-finance manager will understand in under a minute, and end with the specific action you want them to take. </task> <constraints> No accounting jargon like "accrual" or "reclass" without a one-line plain definition next to it. Keep the whole message under 150 words. </constraints> <format> Return a short message ready to send, with the ask bolded at the end. </format>

You are a controller preparing questions for the FP&A team ahead of the forecast update. <context> Before FP&A finalizes the reforecast, I want to send them a sharp list of questions based on the variances I am seeing in actuals. </context> <inputs> - Key variances observed: [LIST OF VARIANCES WITH AMOUNTS] - Current forecast assumptions I am questioning: [LIST OF ASSUMPTIONS] - Forecast period in question: [QUARTER OR MONTH] </inputs> <task> Draft a list of pointed questions for FP&A that connect each variance to a specific forecast assumption that may need updating. </task> <constraints> Each question must reference a specific number from the inputs, not a general assumption. Limit to 8 questions maximum, ranked by dollar impact. </constraints> <format> Return a numbered list of questions, each followed in parentheses by the dollar impact it relates to. </format>

You are a controller responsible for documenting accounting policy for auditors and new staff. <context> We changed how a product line is sold and I need to document the revenue recognition treatment before quarter end. </context> <inputs> - Product or service: [PRODUCT OR SERVICE NAME] - Contract terms: [KEY CONTRACT TERMS, E.G. TERM LENGTH, DELIVERABLES] - Applicable standard: [ASC 606 / IFRS 15 / OTHER] - Judgment areas: [LIST OF JUDGMENT CALLS, E.G. STANDALONE SELLING PRICE] </inputs> <task> Write a policy memo that identifies the performance obligations, states the recognition pattern, and documents the judgment made on each unclear area. </task> <constraints> Reference the applicable standard by section where relevant. State each judgment as a decision made, with the reasoning, not as an open question. </constraints> <format> Return a memo with sections: Background, Performance Obligations, Recognition Pattern, Judgments and Rationale, Conclusion. </format>

You are a controller weighing two acceptable accounting treatments before recommending one to the CFO. <context> We have a transaction that could reasonably be accounted for two different ways and I need a clear comparison before deciding. </context> <inputs> - Transaction description: [DESCRIBE THE TRANSACTION] - Treatment A: [DESCRIBE TREATMENT A] - Treatment B: [DESCRIBE TREATMENT B] - Financial statement impact areas of concern: [E.G. EBITDA, COVENANTS, TAX] </inputs> <task> Compare the two treatments on financial statement impact, audit defensibility, and consistency with how similar transactions were treated before, then give a recommendation. </task> <constraints> State a clear recommendation at the end, do not leave it open ended. Flag anything that would need auditor pre-clearance. </constraints> <format> Return a comparison table with rows for each impact area and columns for Treatment A and Treatment B, followed by a Recommendation paragraph. </format>

You are a controller updating the fixed asset and capitalization policy for internally developed software. <context> Our engineering team is building internal tools and I need a clear policy for what costs get capitalized versus expensed. </context> <inputs> - Type of software: [INTERNAL TOOL / CUSTOMER FACING PRODUCT] - Development stages used internally: [E.G. PRELIMINARY, APPLICATION DEVELOPMENT, POST IMPLEMENTATION] - Applicable guidance: [ASC 350-40 / OTHER] - Current capitalization threshold: [DOLLAR THRESHOLD] </inputs> <task> Write a capitalization policy that maps each development stage to capitalize or expense treatment and states the dollar threshold for applying it. </task> <constraints> Be specific about which activities within each stage qualify, for example distinguishing coding from testing from post-launch maintenance. Avoid restating the standard without applying it to this company's process. </constraints> <format> Return a policy document with sections: Purpose, Scope, Stage-by-Stage Treatment Table, Threshold and Approval, Examples. </format>

You are a controller documenting a one-time exception to standard accounting policy. <context> We need to deviate from our normal policy for a specific transaction this quarter and I have to document why that is acceptable. </context> <inputs> - Standard policy: [DESCRIBE THE STANDARD POLICY] - Exception requested: [DESCRIBE THE EXCEPTION] - Reason for the exception: [BUSINESS REASON] - Materiality of the transaction: [DOLLAR AMOUNT] </inputs> <task> Write a memo justifying the exception, addressing why it does not set a problematic precedent, and stating the materiality basis for why it is acceptable this one time. </task> <constraints> Address precedent risk directly, do not skip it. State a clear boundary for when this exception would no longer be acceptable in future periods. </constraints> <format> Return a memo with sections: Exception Requested, Business Reason, Materiality Assessment, Precedent Risk and Boundary, Approval Sign-off Line. </format>

You are a controller preparing your team for an upcoming accounting standard change. <context> A new standard takes effect soon and I need to brief my accounting team on what changes in our day-to-day work. </context> <inputs> - Standard name: [STANDARD NAME, E.G. ASU 2023-XX] - Effective date: [EFFECTIVE DATE] - Areas of our business it touches: [LIST OF AFFECTED AREAS] - Current process in those areas: [BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF CURRENT PROCESS] </inputs> <task> Summarize what the standard changes, translate it into what specifically changes in our current process, and list the steps needed to be ready by the effective date. </task> <constraints> Skip the general history of the standard. Focus entirely on what changes in this team's actual workflow. </constraints> <format> Return a briefing with sections: What Changes, Impact on Our Process, Readiness Steps and Deadlines, Open Questions for Auditors. </format>

You are a controller responsible for weekly cash visibility for the CFO and lenders. <context> We need a rolling 13-week cash forecast and I want a clean structure before I start populating actual numbers. </context> <inputs> - Main cash inflow sources: [LIST OF INFLOW SOURCES, E.G. CUSTOMER COLLECTIONS] - Main cash outflow categories: [LIST OF OUTFLOW CATEGORIES, E.G. PAYROLL, AP, DEBT SERVICE] - Current cash balance: [CASH BALANCE] - Minimum cash covenant if any: [COVENANT AMOUNT OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Design a 13-week cash forecast template with rows for each inflow and outflow category, a weekly ending balance row, and a covenant headroom row if applicable. </task> <constraints> Keep categories granular enough to be useful but no more than 12 total rows before the ending balance. Do not include categories that were not mentioned in the inputs. </constraints> <format> Return a table template with Week 1 through Week 13 as columns and the categories as rows, plus a short paragraph explaining how to use the covenant headroom row. </format>

You are a controller who needs to explain to the CEO why net income and cash on hand tell different stories this quarter. <context> The CEO is asking why we reported a profit but cash is tight, and I need a clear bridge explanation. </context> <inputs> - Net income this period: [NET INCOME AMOUNT] - Cash change this period: [CASH CHANGE AMOUNT] - Major non-cash items: [LIST, E.G. DEPRECIATION, STOCK COMPENSATION] - Major working capital changes: [LIST, E.G. AR GROWTH, INVENTORY BUILD] </inputs> <task> Build a bridge from net income to cash change that shows each adjustment and explains it in terms a non-finance CEO will immediately understand. </task> <constraints> Order the bridge from net income down to ending cash change, largest adjustment first after non-cash items. Avoid the phrase "working capital" without a one-line plain explanation next to its first use. </constraints> <format> Return a bridge table with columns Item and Amount, followed by a 3 to 4 sentence plain-language summary. </format>

You are a controller preparing the covenant compliance certificate for the lender. <context> Our loan agreement requires a quarterly covenant compliance summary and I need it drafted accurately before it goes to the CFO for signature. </context> <inputs> - Covenant type and required threshold: [E.G. MINIMUM LIQUIDITY OF DOLLAR AMOUNT] - Actual measured value this period: [ACTUAL VALUE] - Calculation method per the credit agreement: [DESCRIBE CALCULATION METHOD] - Trend versus prior quarter: [PRIOR QUARTER VALUE] </inputs> <task> Write a covenant compliance summary that shows the calculation, states pass or fail against the threshold, and notes the trend versus last quarter. </task> <constraints> Show the calculation step by step so it can be verified against the credit agreement definition. State pass or fail explicitly, do not imply it. </constraints> <format> Return a summary with sections: Covenant Definition, Calculation, Result (Pass/Fail), Trend Commentary. </format>

You are a controller managing a tight cash week and deciding which payments go out first. <context> Available cash this week is lower than total payables due and I need a defensible prioritization before I approve the payment run. </context> <inputs> - Available cash: [AVAILABLE CASH AMOUNT] - List of payables due with amounts and vendor names: [PASTE PAYABLES LIST] - Critical vendors that cannot be delayed: [LIST OF CRITICAL VENDORS] - Payroll date this week: [PAYROLL DATE, IF APPLICABLE] </inputs> <task> Rank the payables in the order they should be paid given the available cash, and state which ones must be delayed with a suggested new payment date. </task> <constraints> Payroll and critical vendors must be prioritized ahead of discretionary vendors regardless of amount. Stop ranking once the available cash is exhausted and clearly separate the paid list from the delayed list. </constraints> <format> Return two tables: "Pay This Week" and "Delay", each with Vendor, Amount, and Suggested New Date for the delayed table. </format>

You are a controller preparing the cash slide commentary for the quarterly board deck. <context> I need short, board-ready commentary on our cash position that a director with limited finance background can read in under a minute. </context> <inputs> - Ending cash balance this quarter: [CASH BALANCE] - Ending cash balance last quarter: [PRIOR CASH BALANCE] - Key drivers of the change: [LIST OF DRIVERS, E.G. CUSTOMER COLLECTIONS, CAPEX] - Runway in months at current burn: [RUNWAY IN MONTHS, IF APPLICABLE] </inputs> <task> Write board slide commentary that states the cash change, the top two or three drivers, and runway if applicable, in language a non-finance director will understand immediately. </task> <constraints> Keep it to 4 bullet points maximum. No hedge words like "potentially" or "generally", state the drivers directly. </constraints> <format> Return 4 bullet points ready to paste onto a slide, each under 20 words. </format>

You are a controller responding to the external auditor's prepared-by-client request list. <context> The audit team sent a PBC list item that needs a written response along with the supporting schedule. </context> <inputs> - PBC item requested: [DESCRIBE THE REQUEST] - Account or process it relates to: [ACCOUNT OR PROCESS NAME] - Data available to respond: [WHAT DATA YOU HAVE] - Prior year treatment if relevant: [PRIOR YEAR NOTES OR NONE] </inputs> <task> Write a response memo that answers the PBC request directly, references the supporting schedule, and notes any change from prior year treatment. </task> <constraints> Answer the exact question asked first, before adding context. Do not restate the auditor's request word for word, respond to it. </constraints> <format> Return a memo with sections: Request Summary, Response, Supporting Schedule Reference, Prior Year Comparison. </format>

You are a controller documenting internal controls for SOX or audit purposes. <context> I need to document the control narrative for a key process before our controls testing begins. </context> <inputs> - Process name: [PROCESS NAME, E.G. REVENUE CUTOFF] - Steps in the process today: [LIST THE ACTUAL STEPS] - Control owner: [CONTROL OWNER NAME OR ROLE] - Frequency of the control: [DAILY / WEEKLY / MONTHLY / PER TRANSACTION] </inputs> <task> Write a control narrative describing the process, the specific control activity that prevents or detects error, who performs it, and how it is evidenced. </task> <constraints> Describe the control activity specifically enough that a tester could walk through it and confirm it happened. Avoid describing the whole process when only the control step matters. </constraints> <format> Return a narrative with sections: Process Overview, Control Objective, Control Activity, Control Owner and Frequency, Evidence of Performance. </format>

You are a controller responding to an audit finding that needs a remediation plan. <context> The auditors raised a finding this cycle and I need a clear remediation plan to present to the audit committee. </context> <inputs> - Finding description: [DESCRIBE THE FINDING] - Root cause identified: [ROOT CAUSE] - Proposed remediation steps: [LIST OF STEPS] - Target completion date: [DATE] </inputs> <task> Write a remediation plan that states the finding, the root cause, the specific steps to fix it, and how success will be verified. </task> <constraints> Separate root cause from symptom, do not restate the finding as the cause. Each remediation step needs an owner and a date. </constraints> <format> Return a plan with sections: Finding, Root Cause, Remediation Steps (table with Step, Owner, Date), Verification Method. </format>

You are a controller doing a final tie-out review of a financial statement disclosure before it goes to print. <context> I have a draft disclosure paragraph and the underlying numbers and need to confirm they agree before filing. </context> <inputs> - Draft disclosure text: [PASTE DRAFT DISCLOSURE TEXT] - Underlying figures it should tie to: [PASTE THE ACTUAL FIGURES] - Filing type: [10-Q / 10-K / INTERNAL REPORT / OTHER] </inputs> <task> Compare every number and claim in the disclosure text against the figures provided and flag any mismatch, rounding issue, or unsupported statement. </task> <constraints> List only actual discrepancies found, do not restate numbers that already agree. If everything ties, say so explicitly rather than leaving it ambiguous. </constraints> <format> Return a list titled "Discrepancies Found" with the disclosure text quoted, the figure it should match, and the mismatch explained. If none, return "No discrepancies found" with a one-line confirmation. </format>

You are a controller compiling related-party transactions for disclosure and audit review. <context> I need to summarize this period's related-party transactions clearly before the audit team reviews them. </context> <inputs> - Related party name and relationship: [NAME AND RELATIONSHIP, E.G. OWNER'S OTHER COMPANY] - Transaction type and amount: [TRANSACTION TYPE AND AMOUNT] - Terms compared to arm's length: [DESCRIBE TERMS OR NOTE IF UNKNOWN] - Approval obtained: [WHO APPROVED IT, OR NONE YET] </inputs> <task> Summarize the related-party transaction, state whether the terms appear consistent with arm's length dealing, and note whether proper approval was documented. </task> <constraints> If approval was not documented, say so plainly rather than softening it. Do not assume arm's length terms if the inputs do not support that conclusion. </constraints> <format> Return a summary table with columns: Related Party, Relationship, Transaction, Amount, Terms Assessment, Approval Status. </format>

You are a controller documenting a repeatable close task so any team member can execute it without asking questions. <context> A specific close task keeps getting done inconsistently because we never wrote down the steps. </context> <inputs> - Task name: [TASK NAME, E.G. BANK RECONCILIATION] - Systems used: [LIST OF SYSTEMS] - Current steps as best you know them: [LIST WHAT YOU CURRENTLY DO] - Common mistakes made: [LIST OF COMMON MISTAKES] </inputs> <task> Write a step-by-step standard operating procedure for this task that a new hire could follow without help, including a note at each step that historically causes the common mistakes listed. </task> <constraints> Number every step. Include screenshots placeholders only where a system navigation step is not obvious from text alone. </constraints> <format> Return a numbered SOP with a "Watch Out For" callout under any step tied to a listed common mistake. </format>

You are a controller reducing key-person risk on your accounting team. <context> Too many of our close tasks depend on one person and I need a cross-training plan to spread the knowledge. </context> <inputs> - Team members and current specialties: [LIST NAMES AND SPECIALTIES] - Tasks with single points of failure: [LIST OF TASKS AND WHO OWNS THEM] - Timeframe to complete cross-training: [TIMEFRAME] </inputs> <task> Build a cross-training plan that pairs a backup person with each single-point-of-failure task and sequences the training over the timeframe given. </task> <constraints> Do not assign a backup who already owns too many other single-point tasks. Sequence training so the highest-risk tasks get covered first. </constraints> <format> Return a table with columns: Task, Primary Owner, Backup Assigned, Training Start, Training Complete By. </format>

You are a controller preparing quarterly performance feedback for a staff accountant on your team. <context> I need to give specific, useful feedback rather than generic praise or criticism. </context> <inputs> - Employee name and role: [NAME AND ROLE] - Specific wins this quarter: [LIST SPECIFIC EXAMPLES] - Specific areas to improve: [LIST SPECIFIC EXAMPLES] - One growth goal for next quarter: [GROWTH GOAL] </inputs> <task> Write performance feedback that cites the specific examples given for both strengths and improvement areas, and ends with one concrete goal for next quarter. </task> <constraints> Do not generalize a specific example into vague praise like "great attitude". Tie every point back to a specific example from the inputs. </constraints> <format> Return feedback with sections: Strengths (with examples), Areas to Develop (with examples), Goal for Next Quarter. </format>

You are a controller pitching a process improvement to the CFO that requires budget approval. <context> I want to automate or improve a manual accounting process and need to justify the investment. </context> <inputs> - Current process and time spent: [DESCRIBE PROCESS AND HOURS PER MONTH] - Proposed solution: [DESCRIBE THE SOLUTION, E.G. SOFTWARE TOOL, NEW WORKFLOW] - Cost of the solution: [COST AMOUNT] - Fully loaded hourly cost of staff time: [HOURLY COST] </inputs> <task> Build a business case that calculates the current cost of the manual process, the cost of the proposed solution, and the payback period. </task> <constraints> Show the math for the payback calculation, do not just state a conclusion. Include a risk section on what happens if the improvement is not funded. </constraints> <format> Return a business case with sections: Current State Cost, Proposed Solution Cost, Payback Calculation, Risk of Inaction, Recommendation. </format>

You are a controller preparing an onboarding guide for a newly hired accounting team member. <context> A new person is joining my team and I want them productive quickly without me repeating the same explanations. </context> <inputs> - New hire's role: [ROLE, E.G. SENIOR ACCOUNTANT] - Systems they need access to: [LIST OF SYSTEMS] - Key processes they will own: [LIST OF PROCESSES] - People they should meet in the first two weeks: [LIST OF NAMES AND ROLES] </inputs> <task> Build a two-week onboarding plan covering system access setup, process walkthroughs, and introductory meetings, sequenced so the earliest days focus on access and context. </task> <constraints> Sequence system access requests to day one so delays do not block later steps. Do not schedule more than 3 process walkthroughs in a single day. </constraints> <format> Return a day-by-day plan for 10 business days with columns: Day, Focus Area, Specific Task, Person Involved. </format>