We deliver finance transformation with our own teams and cover the capacity while it happens: the close, consolidation, controlling, reporting and the systems around them. In Belgium the trigger for much of this work is now regulatory. Structured electronic invoicing became mandatory for B2B transactions on 1 January 2026, and a PDF no longer counts as one.
Since when every VAT-registered business established in Belgium must issue and receive structured B2B invoices. A PDF is not one.
The European standard the invoice has to meet, sent by default over the Peppol network.
The fine for a first infringement where the technical means are simply absent.
Close acceleration
Fewer days, and fewer people on them.
Consolidation and group reporting
Usually where the delay actually sits.
Controlling model design
What gets measured, by whom, how often.
E-invoicing readiness
Issuing and receiving, not one of the two.
Finance shared services
Built, or migrated from where it sits now.
Regulatory reporting capability
Recurring obligations made routine.
Interim finance capacity
Covering the day job while it changes.
A shorter close
Days removed from the cycle rather than hours saved inside it. Most of the delay is not in the accounting, it is in waiting for data from people who have no reason to hurry, which is a process problem before it is a systems one.
Capacity while you change
The finance team cannot stop closing the books to redesign how the books are closed. We cover the recurring work while the change happens, which is the part a pure advisory engagement leaves with you.
Compliance that is not a project
Reporting obligations designed into the routine rather than run as an annual scramble. The e-invoicing mandate is the current example, and it will not be the last one.
Data you can use
Structured invoicing arrives as machine-readable data rather than as documents to be keyed in. That is a compliance obligation on paper and a precondition for automating anything downstream in practice.
With us | Advisory firm | Software vendor | In-house | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| What you buy | Design, delivery and cover | A design and a business case | A tool, and its configuration | Nothing, you run it yourself |
| Who does the work | Our team, alongside yours | Theirs, then yours | Their consultants, on the tool | Your team, on top of the day job |
| Capacity meanwhile | We cover the recurring work | Not their scope | None, that is your problem | The same people, twice over |
| Cost model | On the engagement and the cover | On the engagement | Licence plus implementation | Salaries, plus the overtime |
| Fits when | Your team is already at capacity | The design itself is the hard part | The process is already sound | There is genuine slack in the team |
It is the question most finance transformation plans answer last, and badly.
Assessment of the cycle
Where the days actually go in the cycle, which obligations are handled manually, and what is fragile.
Design and sequencing
What changes first, what can wait, and what has to be covered by someone while it moves.
Implementation with cover
Changes made while the recurring work keeps running, because a missed close is not an option.
Run and hand back
The new routine run with your team until it holds without us, then handed back with documentation rather than with a presentation. Finance changes tend to revert quietly at the first difficult close, so we stay through one.
Since when every VAT-registered business established in Belgium must issue and receive structured B2B invoices. A PDF is not one.
The European standard the invoice has to meet, sent by default over the Peppol network.
The fine for a first infringement where the technical means are simply absent.
Record to report cycle
The close and the consolidation, where most of the calendar pressure lives.
Purchase to pay cycle
Reshaped directly by structured invoicing, whether or not anyone planned for it.
Order to cash cycle
Where issuing side compliance meets collection, and both improve together.
Controlling and planning
Usually the function that gets squeezed when the close runs long.
Regulatory reporting
Recurring, dated, and rarely resourced as though it recurs.
Treasury operations
Where a small team carries a large exposure, so cover matters most.

Financial services
Where regulatory reporting sits alongside the statutory close, on different calendars.
Automotive and manufacturing
Multi-entity consolidation, usually across countries with different local rules.
Business services
High invoice volumes, so the structured invoicing change lands hardest here.
Usually one of four things: shortening the close, making consolidation and group reporting reliable, redesigning what controlling actually measures, or moving work into a shared service. Systems are involved in all of them and cause none of them. The recurring pattern is that the delay sits in waiting for data from people outside finance.
Since 1 January 2026, businesses established in Belgium and registered for VAT must issue and receive structured electronic invoices for B2B transactions. Structured means a machine-readable file meeting the European standard, sent by default over the Peppol network. A PDF by email is not compliant, which is still the most common misunderstanding. Public contracts have been covered since 2024.
Yes, and it is the reason to call us rather than an advisory firm. A finance team cannot stop closing the books in order to change how the books are closed, so most transformation plans fail on capacity rather than on design. We cover the recurring work while the change happens, which means the same engagement carries both.
Interim management places one leader on a mandate with decision rights. This places a team on a piece of work with a defined outcome, and covers operational capacity alongside it. An interim CFO might well ask us for this engagement rather than replace it. They are bought together more often than either is bought alone.
We work on the finance process and the reporting layer, and we work with whatever system you have. Building or configuring the platform itself is a separate service, and a separate skill set. Where a system change is genuinely needed we will say so, and equally we will say when the system is not the problem, which is more often the case.
In two parts, because it does two things. The change work is priced on scope and milestones. The capacity cover is priced on the resource and the period. Keeping them separate matters, because it lets you extend the cover without extending the project, and stop the project without losing the cover.
Tell us how long your close takes and where it waits. You get a view of which days can be removed, what it would take, and who covers the work while it happens.