The initial response to artificial intelligence from the accounting community was one of wonder and amazement and, for a while, it seemed like every firm from the smallest storefront to the largest network was eager to demonstrate its embrace of the technology.
But today, as more firms become familiar with AI — especially its generative and agentic variants — firms are focusing less on blanket adoption and more on governance, recognizing both its powerful potential and its very real limitations.
Virtually every firm included in this year’s list has a formal governance policy specifically governing AI use, and the few who do not have already found ways to work AI into already existing frameworks. Further, a rough consensus of what an AI policy should look like has begun to form. Firms in general have implemented strict prohibitions on unloading sensitive client data into public AI tools, require mandatory training on responsible AI use, and regularly monitor and assess their AI activities.
Many others have gone further, doing things like establishing cross-functional AI teams, addressing AI in their written information security plans, educating people on AI’s ethical challenges, or establishing private cloud environments specifically for AI.
Much of this has been done in recognition of AI’s risk and its limitations. It is not 2023 anymore and no one is thinking AI will solve all their problems. Yes, the technology has done many impressive things: Firm leaders report major time savings, deeper analytics, expanded automation, better brainstorming, and incredible efficiencies in software development. At the same time, nearly all the Best Firms for Technology have been frustrated by inaccurate, inconsistent or low-quality outputs, naming this as one of their biggest disappointments with the technology.
Other firms mentioned lengthy and difficult implementations, cybersecurity and data privacy problems, and difficulty working with tools like Excel.
“AI is far from a silver bullet. It’s easy to build something that works in the innovation lab, but it’s much more challenging to build something reliable and scalable across the firm. Even well-trained models can be inconsistent, and costs can rise quickly without a clear return,” said Jonathan Kraftchick, an assurance partner at Top 100 Firm Cherry Bekaert.
These firms’ approach toward AI has much in common with their technology stance as a whole, as every firm in this year’s list also said they have a written technology strategy. Each one is taking a deliberate and intentional approach to their technology infrastructure with the expectation that it will pay dividends in the future.
When asked what they hope AI would be able to do eventually, leaders mentioned not just these problems being solved, but also bots being able to better connect the dots and understand contexts better, which would enable them to become true assistants that can handle complex administrative tasks, as well as better data cleaning capacities and better interoperability with things like Excel or PowerPoint.
Yet these challenges are not preventing firms from continuing major investments in AI; they are, in fact, accelerating them, as tech spending is going up. Of the 10 firms in this list, four said their technology spending has increased significantly since last year, four said it increased slightly, one said it stayed about the same and one said that, while absolute costs have significantly grown, its per-user costs have shrunk. As for why so many firms are spending more on tech, AI was frequently cited, alongside rising service fees and the need to support additional staff.
“We are a digitally determined organization from the top down. We seek to invest in technologies that improve our capabilities, responsiveness, and our quality. Fiscal year 2024 and 2025 has us investing in AI-enabled solutions which support these attributes. Additionally, some core solutions under transition/transformation result in overlapping costs for the duration of the change,” said Peter Sebilian, chief technology officer and chief information security officer for Top 100 Firm AAFCPAs.
This focus on AI plays into other aspects of their technology. For instance, this year’s firms lean heavily on cloud computing, with the majority saying they have no physical servers on site. Even among those that do have at least one, the applications they use are almost entirely cloud-based. Similarly, cybersecurity is a big priority for each of these firms as well, as nearly all of them adhere to at least one recognized cybersecurity standard, such as SOC 2, ISO 27001 or NIST CSF.
Overall, these are firms that take AI seriously in terms of not only adoption but oversight and supporting infrastructure. Given the rapid pace of development in this sector, who knows what we’ll see next year?
With all that in mind, below are this year’s Best Firms for Technology.
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.