A recent survey from advisory firm Panorama Consulting comparing leading ERP systems found that Infor users were much more likely to deploy finance and accounting functionalities than those of Oracle, SAP and Microsoft’s products.
The survey asked about what functionalities of their respective ERP systems they have deployed, and found that 78.6% of Infor users said “finance and accounting.” In contrast, 32% of SAP users, 42.5% of Oracle users and 45% of Microsoft users said the same.
Panorama believes this comes down to the target market for these respective solutions. In the case of Infor in particular, the report noted that “many mid-market organizations are using Infor to manage operations, quality and field services. … As they grow, they’re finding that implementing core financials on the same platform is more beneficial and cost effective than integrating with a dedicated financial application.”
ERP – Enterprise resource planning business and modern technology concept on virtual screen
WrightStudio – stock.adobe.com
Other systems had their own favored use cases. For Microsoft, the most common functionalities implemented by customers were warehouse and inventory management along with reporting and analytics, tied at 58.7%. For SAP it was sales and customer relationship management (64.5%), followed by reporting and analytics (54.8%). In the case of Oracle, the most common functionality was also sales and customer relationship management (62.5%), followed by enterprise asset management (60%).
The survey found other differentiating factors between the products. Beyond use cases, it found Infor users were most likely to prefer cloud solutions versus on-premise and most likely to prefer SaaS hosting models over the host/managed service hosting model.
Oracle users, meanwhile, were most likely to have implemented mobility. “Oracle’s strong focus on customer experience ensures that customers have an intuitive, familiar, repeatable interface across all devices,” said the report.
Meanwhile, SAP users were most likely to say they have already adopted and implemented AI. The report noted that SAP was an early adopter of the technology, and “their customer base of larger and more complex organizations lends itself to a need to implement AI.”
Finally, Microsoft users were most likely to have customized their experience to fit their process. The report pointed out that “Microsoft has adopted a model that encourages value-added resellers (VARs) and system integrators (SIs) to develop industry specific knowledge and IP. These implementors often help clients adopt additional functionality to meet the deep and robust requirements of specific markets.” (Infor users customized the least, according to the survey).
Finally, the survey examined the all-important metrics of time and money.
In terms of money, the survey found that — when taking into account the number of licenses or users purchases as well as the total cost of the project — Microsoft users spent the most ($5.4 million), which the report said is “a reflection of the broad, yet primarily standard, functionality of the Dynamics products” that “rely on VARs to provide additional industry-specific functionality and IP which requires configuration and integration time.”
“It’s likely that many of our respondent organizations chose to configure and enhance their applications by working with various channel partners,” said the report.
Conversely, Infor users spent the least ($1.8 million). “It’s likely that many of our respondent organizations adopted out-of-the-box processes while changing internal processes to align with the software. In these cases, the cost of implementation decreases significantly,” said the report.
Meanwhile, in terms of time, Microsoft users spent the most time on their projects (155 months), while Info users spent the least (55 months), largely for the same reasons: Infor users tend to adopt pre-configured roles and processes while Microsoft users tend to turn to VARs for industry-specific functionality.
Overall, the report said it’s not so much that any one ERP system is better than another, but that the choice of ERP is largely contingent on specific business needs.
“SAP, Oracle, Microsoft and Infor each have a variety of systems that can improve operational efficiency and adapt to dynamic environments, but you must understand your organization’s specific needs,” said the report’s conclusion.
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.