Even as more and more accounting firms are partnering with private equity, many are resisting the trend: Enter the “fiercely independent” firms.
Top 75 Firm Bennett Thrasher, for instance, is one firm choosing to stay independent.
“From a financial perspective, it could be lucrative, but our view is that there are many cons, and the tradeoffs are probably not worth the potential extra liquidity that might be available to partners,” said Jeff Call, CEO of Bennett Thrasher. “We believe that having a legacy firm, remaining independent and the entrepreneurial spirit that we have is probably more powerful than the external capital would be.”
Call noted that some clients actually prefer to work with a firm not owned by private equity.
“We have seen that a little bit, where some of the clients want to deal with a company that’s independently owned by the partners versus private equity,” he said. “There’s probably a slight bit of distrust toward private equity — that they’re going to be pushing hard to increase the economics, raise fees and other things like that — because they’re on the fast track to try and exit the business again in four to six years.”
“You have an advantage,” said Paul Peterson, CEO of Wiss, a Top 100 Firm based in Florham Park, New Jersey. “You have these relationships in place, so the question I think you have to ask yourself is, ‘Do we have enough depth of services that we could compete against a PE firm?’ We’re playing aggressive defense, I would say, and really staying close to the customers that we have.”
Some employees prefer to work for an independent firm as well. And in a profession with an ongoing labor shortage — fewer students studying accounting, getting their CPA license and staying till they make partner — recruiting and retention needs to be a top priority for all firms.
“It will be interesting to see what PE does — does it further exacerbate it, or will it be reduced over time?” Peterson said. “We’ve picked up incredible talent over the past two years that we never could have touched if this didn’t happen.”
Wiss ranked No. 5 among Accounting Today‘s 2024 Best Large Firms to Work For, and Peterson says the firm’s employees are a huge reason why they haven’t taken PE money. “I think we’d lose a lot of people,” he said. “Retention has always been high, we’ve always had a lot of great qualities, and I feel like we would be backstabbing our people that have been very loyal to us.”
“I do think that there are a lot of positives with PE,” he said. “And it’s all great when it’s good, and so the challenge is when it’s not.”
But firms like Bennett Thrasher and Wiss are increasingly a rare breed. “We’re going to see less and less independent firms by far,” as PE-backed competition outmatches them, said Bob Lewis, president of The Visionary Group, a consulting firm. Talent will get poached by firms offering outsized salaries that independent firms can’t match.
“I think what’s going to happen is the really large firms are going to start going in and picking out all the superstars and overpaying them,” Lewis said, and those top performers will leave holes in the firms they leave.
Firms that are unwilling to make investments in new technology and talent “end up kind of standing still and getting run over. And I think that’s what’s happening right now in this market,” he said.
Yes, there is value to staying independent, but it comes with great risk.
“You can’t stand still doing what you’re doing,” Lewis said. “You have to understand, if your competition is getting bigger, you’ve got to make some investments in people. You’ve got to make some investments in technology. You have to establish some kind of industry or service niche. You have got to get more aggressive on pricing because the cost of labor is going to continue to go up. You can’t make the margin you need to make by keeping your prices the same and doing the same work. And if you don’t get on track, you’re going to end up in a power bid with all the other dinosaurs — we say, ‘You’re sliding into the tar pit.'”
Already, firms are digging into client niches with specialized services, and professionalizing business development. If independent firms can find ways to compete with PE-backed firms, then private equity will ultimately accelerate the diversification of the professional market.
“We see incredible opportunities on the horizon, irrespective of PE,” Peterson said. “For me, I’m looking at it more as a Renaissance. … The homogeneity of accounting is changing. There’s going to be more variety in accounting and how firms are. There’s this wave that we’ve been on for a long time where it’s been very incestuous. A lot of the learnings that you get are from other accounting firms — you belong to alliances, you share ideas, ‘Oh, what are they doing? We’ll do it’ — and I think that is going to start to break. I think that we’ll start to see firms that are packaged differently, how they service, how they go to market.”
“Historically we have not either had the need or have been unwilling to invest in the business,” said Allan Koltin, CEO of Koltin Consulting Group, who advised firms on deals of all kinds. “That has changed. So I don’t worry about the fiercely independent firm that finds a different way to capitalize their business. I worry about the firm that’s got their head in the sand — and that’s probably 50% of the profession — and thinks that they can grind and grind and they’ll be able to do it forever. That’s a big mistake. Technology is going to be the big bad game-changer, and firms that are stuck in the mud, it’ll be a rude awakening.”
“But that doesn’t mean go out and do a PE deal,” he was quick to add. “It means figure out a strategy of how you’ll differentiate yourself, how you’ll continue to be a value-added resource to your client. And the most important thing is, what’s your mousetrap to recruit, retain and grow people?”
“Eventually everything changes,” Lewis said. “Right now, this industry is in such massive change. People are having a hard time coping.”
As corporate accounting departments cross the threshold into late July 2026, the adoption of continuous, automated auditing systems has reached a definitive turning point. Driven by advances in artificial intelligence and deep integration with modern Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) platforms, leading finance organizations are moving away from traditional, periodic post-hoc audits in favor of real-time, 100% transactional verification. This technological transition is redefining internal control environments, reducing compliance costs, and eliminating the structural delays inherent in legacy quarterly closing processes.
Unlike traditional auditing frameworks that rely on statistical sampling—a process that inevitably leaves operational blind spots—continuous auditing software monitors operational data feeds continuously. Every purchase order, electronic invoice, payroll disbursement, and cross-border wire transfer is automatically cross-referenced against established corporate governance parameters, regulatory tax schedules, and anti-fraud algorithms in real time. Anomalies or unauthorized ledger entries are flagged instantly, allowing internal audit teams to investigate and remediate compliance gaps immediately rather than months after the close of a financial period.
The implications for executive financial management are far-reaching. By embedding continuous verification directly into daily transaction workflows, chief financial officers gain uninterrupted visibility into the organization’s true financial standing. Real-time balance sheet auditing eliminates the severe operational bottlenecks associated with month-end and quarter-end financial reconciliations, freeing accounting professionals to focus on strategic financial modeling, tax planning, and capital allocation rather than manual data entry and spreadsheet consolidation.
However, implementing continuous auditing requires accounting leadership to invest heavily in data governance and technical upskilling. Internal audit teams must evolve from manual ledger reviewers into system architects capable of auditing complex algorithms and validating automated data pipelines. Accounting firms and corporate controllers that master continuous auditing will establish a resilient compliance framework capable of meeting stringent international regulatory standards with total transparency.
WASHINGTON — In a major escalation of cross-border trade friction, U.S. President Donald Trump has signed executive orders imposing new 50% tariffs on a wide selection of Canadian exports, citing discriminatory practices by Ottawa targeting American auto, dairy, and beverage industries.
The new duties, announced Monday, will take effect in 30 days. They target a broad spectrum of consumer and industrial goods—ranging from wine, liquor, and milk products to commercial cement, furniture, clothing, and hockey equipment.
Untested Legal Mechanism
To enact the sweeping measures, the administration invoked Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930—a rarely used legal provision allowing the executive branch to levy additional tariffs of up to 50% on foreign nations deemed to discriminate against U.S. commerce.
White House officials noted that Section 338 addresses trade discrimination rather than national security or economic emergencies. The move comes months after prior global emergency tariffs faced legal challenges in domestic courts, signaling Washington’s pivot toward alternate statutory authorities to maintain import duties.
Senior administration officials briefed reporters that the measure directly responds to Canadian provincial bans on U.S. alcohol, restrictions on American vehicle exports, and import quota disparities affecting U.S. dairy and cheese producers relative to third-party trading partners.
“While the administration continues to secure reciprocal trade agreements globally, Canada retaliated against efforts to protect domestic industry,” U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer stated.
USMCA Impact and Carve-Outs
Significantly, the newly ordered 50% duties will apply to designated items even if they otherwise comply with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).
However, the administration confirmed key targeted exemptions:
Energy products (including oil and natural gas)
Potash and critical minerals
Fish and seafood
Goods already governed by sector-specific duties (such as existing steel and aluminum tariffs)
Administration representatives emphasized that the tariffs do not stem from recent disputes concerning drifting Canadian wildfire smoke, noting that policy options regarding environmental spillover remain under separate review.
Canadian Response and Market Reaction
Following the White House announcement, the Canadian dollar experienced a sharp decline against the U.S. dollar, falling approximately 0.4% during evening trading.
Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney issued a statement emphasizing that Canada’s earlier counter-duties had merely matched previous U.S. trade actions. “Canada stands ready to engage intensively to address outstanding issues with the U.S. to the mutual benefit of our citizens,” Carney stated, pointing to detailed proposals Ottawa submitted to modernize the USMCA framework.
Ontario Premier Doug Ford took a firmer stance, urging a “dollar-for-dollar” reciprocal response if the measures go into effect on August 19.
With a 30-day implementation window before the duties officially lock in, industry associations and trade groups on both sides of the border are calling for urgent bilateral negotiations to avert further supply chain disruption across North America.
The traditional accounting paradigm—defined by periodic monthly closures and post-hoc annual audits—is rapidly giving way to continuous, automated financial oversight. As of July 2026, forward-thinking accounting practices and multinational corporate finance departments are leveraging continuous auditing systems powered by advanced machine learning models. These systems monitor operational transactions in real time, shifting audit methodologies from sample-based post-analysis to absolute, 100% transaction-level verification.
The operational advantages of continuous auditing are transformative. Standard auditing procedures historically relied on statistical sampling, which, despite rigorous methodology, inherently left gaps where anomalies or fraudulent transactions could go undetected for months. Modern continuous auditing platforms integrate directly with enterprise resource planning (ERP) databases, instantly cross-referencing purchase orders, invoices, bank feeds, and tax records. Any deviation from established control parameters or unusual transaction behavior triggers immediate flags for internal audit teams, dramatically reducing detection lag from quarters to seconds.
Beyond fraud prevention, continuous auditing fundamentally alters internal reporting and decision-making. Executive leadership no longer has to wait weeks after the close of a quarter to evaluate precise financial standing; real-time verified ledger data provides an uninterrupted view of operating margins, tax liabilities, and cash flow dynamics. This real-time visibility enables corporate controllers to adjust capital allocation strategies dynamically, mitigating liquidity constraints and capitalizing on emerging commercial opportunities far more efficiently than competitors bound to legacy reporting cycles.
However, implementing continuous auditing requires accounting professionals to acquire new analytical capabilities. The role of the auditor is evolving from manual data reconciliation toward system validation, algorithmic model governance, and strategic risk interpretation. Accounting firms and corporate finance departments must invest in continuous technical education, ensuring that audit staff possess the data engineering skills necessary to design, maintain, and evaluate complex automated compliance systems.