Key takeaways:

• • • Deploying AI and governing it are two different things 鈥� Most tax, audit & accounting firms are further along on deployment of AI than they are with setting up how it will be governed.

    • AI literacy and understanding will be key attributes 鈥� The skill that will define the next generation of auditors isn’t knowing how to use AI; rather, it’s knowing when to distrust it.

    • Risk assessment needs to be re-thought 鈥� The risk assessment gap is a structural problem, not a technology maturity problem. And no better model is going to fix it.

There is a version of AI adoption that looks like progress, but isn’t. It involves a pilot program that runs well, gains a positive internal review and a mention in the firm’s next thought leadership piece 鈥� and then nothing changes throughout the firm. The workflow that got automated stays automated, and everything else stays the same.

This pattern is more common than many tax, audit & accounting firms want to admit. The organizational work that scaling AI actually requires 鈥� such as deciding who owns the outputs, redesigning quality review, working out what happens when a model gets something wrong 鈥� doesn’t surface in a pilot. Instead, it surfaces in production. And those firms that have been running the same pilot for more than a year aren’t being cautious, they鈥檙e simply avoiding those decisions.

A recent survey by tech market research group International Data Corp. (IDC) of 1,005 audit and accounting professionals globally captures the gap precisely. The study showed that two-thirds of firms have AI embedded in strategy or underway in pilots, but only 7% . That distance between deployment and readiness is where most of the real work is hiding.

The audit profession is underinvesting in a key skill

Ask most audit firm leaders what skills their people need for an AI-driven practice, and the answers come back quickly: data analysis, AI literacy, and technology proficiency. Those aren’t wrong answers, but they’re incomplete in a way that matters.

The skill that will actually define audit quality in an AI-enabled environment isn’t the ability to use the tools; rather, it鈥檚 the ability to pressure-test what those tools produce. To read an AI-generated summary and identify what it might have missed, or to recognize when a flagged pattern in a data set is just noise rather than a red flag, or even to override a confident-sounding output when professional judgment says something doesn’t add up.

That’s closer to editing than accounting 鈥� and it’s a fundamentally different capability than simply being familiar with AI systems. Yet most re-skilling programs are building that familiarity, while it鈥檚 the understanding and judgment that separates auditors who use AI well from auditors who use it credulously.

Indeed, excessive trust in AI outputs is the specific failure mode the profession needs to train against 鈥� and that鈥檚 not getting enough attention.

The risk assessment problem is permanent

There’s a version of the AI-in-audit story in which every limitation is temporary 鈥� the AI models will improve, the training data will get better, the accuracy will increase. For most audit applications, that’s probably true, but for risk assessment, it isn’t.

Risk assessment requires professional skepticism: the trained disposition to question, probe, and not accept appearances at face value. AI models are trained to find patterns and produce coherent, confident output. Those two orientations are in direct tension. A model that identifies a pattern and presents it with confidence is doing exactly what it was designed to do. However, the problem is that professional skepticism sometimes requires distrusting precisely that kind of coherent, confident output 鈥� and then asking what the pattern is missing, who might be motivated to produce it, and whether the data behind it can be trusted.

That gap isn’t a technology maturity problem. It’s a structural problem. Nearly 80% of audit leaders in the IDC survey say they recognize the risk of algorithmic bias in functions like risk assessment and fraud detection 鈥� and that recognition points at something real. The right response isn’t to avoid AI in risk assessment entirely, of course, but it is to be clear-eyed about where AI’s role ends and where the auditor’s begins. Summarizing, flagging, and organizing are appropriate uses of AI, but the judgment about what the output means belongs with someone else.

Governance that actually means something

Most tax, audit & accounting firms have an AI policy; however, far fewer have built the infrastructure that makes it operational.

The two requirements that matter most are traceability and explainability. Traceability means that every AI output cites its source 鈥� if it can’t show its work, the firm shouldn’t rely on it. Explainability means the auditor who is reviewing the output can follow the reasoning and form an independent view of whether it holds together. Both of these concepts should be requirements, not preferences. The audit partner signing the report needs to be able to stand behind every conclusion in it, and that requires being able to read the chain from input to output.

Naturally, the more difficult governance question is what “human in the loop” actually means when the processes are operational. As a principle, everyone agrees that the “human in the loop” is critically important. However, as a set of design decisions 鈥� determining at which specific points in a workflow human judgment required, how does the interface prompt it, and who is accountable when it doesn’t happen 鈥� most firms haven’t worked that out. That kind of imprecision is where audit risk can accumulate quietly.

Where AI is genuinely earning its place

None of this is an argument against AI in audit, of course. Document extraction, first-draft writing, data summarization are all areas in which AI is delivering real value, and the gains aren’t marginal. Contracts that once took days to review can be turned around in hours. Workpaper summaries and client communications that traditionally consumed senior staff time are now being handled in the first-draft stage by tools that do it well. Those hours are going back to partners and managers, and their work is better for it.

The honest picture of AI in audit is not the hype version 鈥� transformational overnight, replacing roles, reshaping everything at once. Instead, it’s more incremental than that, more uneven, and more dependent on organizational decisions than technology ones. The audit firms making the most of it aren’t the ones that moved fastest; rather, they’re the ones that were clearest about what they were trying to solve, built governance structures that could handle the friction, and invested in the human judgment that AI can support but cannot replace.

That clarity 鈥� about what AI is good for, what it isn’t, and what it requires of the people using it 鈥� is where the real work is.

You can find more about the challenges facing audit service professionals here

Key takeaways:

• • • The 2027 end date is not a runway 鈥� The One Big Beautiful Bill sets a statutory de minimis end date of July 1, 2027, but its own legislative history explicitly preserves the president鈥檚 authority to restrict it before that date. Sellers banking on a two-year transition period are reading the headline, not the fine print.

    • The Supreme Court win didn鈥檛 save the refunds 鈥� The Supreme Court鈥檚 IEEPA decision was real, but the administration switched legal authority to Section 1321 and kept the suspension running. Combined with congressional cover from the One Big Beautiful Bill, the path to recovering tariffs already paid is genuinely uncertain 鈥� not just delayed.

    • The refund clock just reset 鈥� The lead test case for processing refunds through CBP鈥檚 KAPE system, Atmos, just settled, forcing the process to restart with a new test case. Sellers waiting on refunds are further back in the queue than they realize.

Most e-commerce merchants couldn鈥檛 have told you what de minimis meant two years ago 鈥� mostly because they didn鈥檛 need to. It was the invisible infrastructure of cross-border trade, the threshold below which imported goods pass through customs without duties or taxes. And in the United States, that threshold sat at $800. For small online sellers sourcing internationally, it wasn鈥檛 a technicality 鈥� it was their business model. Now, that model is over.

De minimis was deliberate trade policy built on simple logic: the cost of collecting duties on a $25 phone case exceeds the revenue it generates. Let low-value goods flow freely, the thinking went, and e-commerce would grow 鈥� and it did.

The Trump administration鈥檚 first moves targeted Canada, Mexico, and China on fentanyl-related grounds. Then came Executive Order 14324, suspending duty-free de minimis for all countries effective August 29, 2025. Sellers who had never filed a customs entry suddenly had to file informal entries for goods valued up to $2,500 鈥� and pay tariffs on every single one. Last count, that has meant $175 billion in tariffs paid annually, with small shipments accounting for roughly 63% of that.

The legal basis for Trump鈥檚 tariffs 鈥� the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) 鈥� went to the Supreme Court, which constrained presidential authority to pass these tariffs. Many sellers took that as a signal that tariff refunds were coming 鈥� they shouldn鈥檛 have.

Then came the legislative layer that changed everything. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) 鈥� H.R. 1, now law 鈥� codifies the end of de minimis under Title 19 with a statutory end date of July 1, 2027. Buried in the legislative history, however, is language explicitly stating that nothing in the bill limits the president鈥檚 existing authority to restrict de minimis before that date. The current suspension has congressional cover, meaning that any court challenge faces a much tighter call than it would have had a year ago.

What most sellers are getting wrong

What鈥檚 making matters worse, however, is that many small e-commerce merchants may not fully understand all the nuances of the laws and regulations they are trying to navigate. Indeed, there are certain aspects of the situation that many are getting wrong, including:

The 2027 date is a headline, not a lifeline 鈥� When the ne Big Beautiful Bill passed with a July 1, 2027, , many sellers assumed they had a transition period 鈥� time to adjust pricing, renegotiate supplier terms, and build a compliance infrastructure. Buried in House Report 119-106, however, is language explicitly stating that nothing in the bill limits the president鈥檚 existing authority to restrict de minimis before that date. Congress didn鈥檛 create breathing room; rather, it codified the end while leaving the accelerator fully intact. The 2027 date is when de minimis ends by law. Indeed, it could end sooner 鈥� and effectively already has.

The Supreme Court decision didn鈥檛 unlock refunds 鈥� The Court鈥檚 IEEPA ruling was significant, but the administration鈥檚 response was swift: reimposed the suspension of tariffs under Section 1321 authority as of February 24. The tariff meter never stopped; and now, with the OBBBA鈥檚 legislative history providing congressional cover, the 鈥� which specifically addresses whether sellers are entitled to refunds in the de minimis context 鈥� faces a much harder statutory construction argument than it would have a year ago. This may mean that the Supreme Court win was a legal victory that may not translate into money back.

The refund process just lost its test case 鈥� For sellers hoping to recover duties paid, the most practical path was through the KAPE system run by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) 鈥� a workaround allowing refund claims to feed directly into an听听for verification. The lead case proving out that process, , just settled. Now, the trade legal community has to start over with a new test case, and nobody knows how long that is going to take. Sellers who filed protests rather than complaints at the Court of International Trade (CIT) are in a particularly difficult position 鈥� protests have time limits, and the CBP is under court order to re-liquidate open ones. Which legal bucket your entries fall into matters enormously right now.

The bottom line

The de minimis era enabled a generation of small merchants to compete globally on terms that would have been unimaginable 20 years ago. Its sunset doesn鈥檛 mean the end of cross-border e-commerce 鈥� but it does mean the end of operating on assumptions. The 2027 date, the Supreme Court decision, the refund process 鈥� each looked like relief and turned out to be more complicated than the headline suggested.

E-commerce merchants impacted by these de minimis developments need to talk to a trade attorney 鈥� not for the basics, but to understand where your claims stand, whether your protest strategy is still viable, and what the Atmus settlement means for you.

The storm isn鈥檛 over 鈥� and it may be more complicated than most sellers have been told.

For more on this, please tune into the 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 recent 鈥淐larity鈥� podcast, featuring , about the challenges facing small e-commerce merchants today

Key takeaways:

• • • Profits continue to be strong 鈥� Most tax & accounting firms saw revenues and profits increase in 2025 despite a chronic talent shortage and other systemic challenges.

    • Optimism around AI adoption 鈥� Tax professionals are generally optimistic about AI-enhanced technologies, and their firms are backing their optimism with unprecedented levels of investment.

    • Expansion of advisory services 鈥� Firms are expanding their advisory service offerings to clients in such areas as tax strategy and business consulting, fueling growth and providing opportunities for competitive differentiation.

Tax, audit & accounting firm professionals have been concerned for years that the one-two punch of do-it-yourself tax software and automation might eventually erode the value of 鈥攁nd demand for 鈥� their services. However, according to the 成人VR视频 Institute鈥檚 “2026 State of Tax Professionals Report”, which surveyed more than 600 tax professionals worldwide, firms of all sizes are adapting remarkably well to the current era of rapid technological change and political upheaval.

Indeed, tax professionals surveyed say that, in addition to traditional tax preparation, their customers want and need more advisory services, a trend that has been gaining momentum for several years. In response, many firms are continuing to expand their service offerings in the areas of tax strategy, business consulting, decision support, and financial planning 鈥� especially at larger firms with more abundant resources.

The result of this gradual shift in service offerings is that profit margins for tax & accounting firms worldwide averaged about 30% in 2025, with some firms registering profit margins of more than 40%.

Efficiency and growth were top strategic priorities

When asked about their top strategic priorities for the coming year, survey respondents cite efficiency and promoting firm growth as the top factors on the strategic agenda for 2026, even more emphatically than they did in 2025.

Further, they see that making more and better use of technology is still the most immediate path to greater efficiency, 听which is why introducing additional automation and AI 鈥� or just trying to get the most out of a firm鈥檚 existing technology stack 鈥� was also mentioned as an important focus for the upcoming year.

Still searching for solutions to talent challenges

Challenges still abound, however. An anemic pipeline of new talent and the ongoing retirement of senior personnel are among the top barriers to progress and profitability at many firms, the report indicates. The report also notes that the resulting competition for qualified candidates leads to overwork, skills gaps, and capacity restraints, all of which can impede a firm鈥檚 ability to compete and grow.

Many respondents say their firms are using multiple strategies to address these issues, including more targeted training, career development, outsourcing, task reallocation, and automation. Competition for top talent is intense, nevertheless; and the report shows that midsize tax firms may feel the talent squeeze harder than others, chiefly because larger firms can offer higher salaries and more career opportunities to retain top talent.

Another way firms are addressing their talent challenges is by automating more tax processes and workflows; however, the report also suggests that many firms have reached the point in their technological maturity at which it may be more difficult to identify additional processes to be automated. As a result, these firms find themselves in somewhat of a holding pattern, unable to advance technologically because of unyielding systemic and cultural impediments.

Meanwhile, many larger firms have already built the technological infrastructures they need to support more advanced forms of automation and data analysis. Now, the report reveals, these firms are shifting their focus to make better use of workflow-enhancing tools that can enable more efficient operations, expand their firm鈥檚 capabilities, and serve as a competitive differentiator.

Not surprisingly, the conversation around AI is heating up as well. While tax professionals may not be so interested in public chatbots such as Claude and ChatGPT, their attention is directed toward the many ways in which AI can enhance the tools they already use and how intelligent deployment of these tools can benefit their firms. Indeed, AI was the only category of technological investment which experienced year-on-year budget growth, the report shows.

Overall, the “2026 State of Tax Professionals Report” offers invaluable insight into where tax professionals see their firms and their industry now, shedding light on how the world鈥檚 top tax leaders are advancing the profession.

You can download a free copy of the full 成人VR视频 Institute 鈥�2026 State of Tax Professionals Report鈥� by filling out the form below:

Key takeaways:

• • • The supply hit is real, not just priced-in fear 鈥� Tanker insurance has collapsed, infrastructure is damaged, and volumes are physically offline. Some of this isn’t coming back quickly.

    • Tax policy is moving in five directions at once 鈥� Energy security incentives, BEPS 2.0 rollout, windfall tax rumblings 鈥� governments are improvising, and your effective tax rate is caught in the middle.

    • Your Evidence to Recommendations (EtR) guidance is probably already stale 鈥� If you haven’t stress-tested your EtR guidance against $100-plus per barrel oil and a multi-quarter disruption, you’re behind.

Let’s be direct: This isn’t a risky premium situation. When military strikes take out Middle Eastern infrastructure in the Persian Gulf and tanker insurers pull out of a corridor carrying 15% to 20% of global crude and liquefied natural gas (LNG), supply goes offline. That’s what’s happened.

At the time of writing, the price of oil continues to fluctuate. The recent release of the , which forecasts and analyze the global oil market, shows that more global markets are starting to say the word recession. And whether or not a recession actually materializes, the energy price environment has shifted in ways that will take multiple quarters, and maybe years, to unwind. For corporate tax departments, the question isn’t whether this changes their planning, it’s whether they’ve caught up yet.

Which scenario-modeling is most worth it?

Most ominously, nobody knows how this all ends, and that’s exactly why your tax team may need more than one base case.

The optimistic read is a short, sharp shock 鈥� prices spike, some flows resume, upstream books a windfall quarter, and consuming-country governments start muttering about excess profits taxes. Messy, but manageable.

The harder scenario is prolonged disruption: Hormuz remains constrained for months, along with repeated infrastructure hits with resulting rerouting that permanently shifts where profits land and which entities suddenly have a taxable presence for which they didn’t plan. Not surprisingly, transfer pricing and permanent听establishment听(PE) exposure get complicated fast.

Add to the mix, by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) that multinational corporate tax departments are still required to adhere to and now plan for how it may interact and intersect with the other two scenarios.

The policy environment is a mess, but in a very specific way

Here’s what makes this cycle different from 2008 or 2014: Governments are pulling in opposite directions simultaneously. The United States has pivoted hard toward energy dominance 鈥� domestic fossils, nuclear, extraction incentives. Meanwhile, BEPS 2.0 is still rolling out unevenly across jurisdictions, which means your organization鈥檚 effective tax rate in any given country depends heavily on where it sits in the implementation timeline.

Throw in 鈥� which historically shows up about six months after prices stay high and voters get angry 鈥� and you have an environment in which the gap between your statutory tax rate and your actual sustainable rate could widen fast if you’re not actively managing it.

5 actions tax team leaders can take now

Of course, none of these are new concepts; but in a fast-moving situation, the basics that get done quickly will beat the sophisticated that gets done late.

First, rebuild your EtR guidance around at least three commodity paths. Not as a theoretical exercise 鈥� as something your CFO can actually present to the board with a straight face.

Second, map out which legal entities are genuinely exposed to Hormuz-dependent flow volumes. Companies鈥� operations and trading teams often know this; but the tax team too often doesn’t until there’s a problem. Close that knowledge gap now.

Third, re-rank your project pipeline on a real after-tax basis. Updated incentive assumptions, global minimum tax, domestic versus cross-border production 鈥� run all the numbers again. Some projects that looked marginal six months ago may look very different now, and vice versa.

Fourth, build a windfall tax playbook before you need one. The data you’d need to defend your profit levels and capital allocation decisions takes time to pull together. Don’t leave that work until the week the legislation drops.

Fifth 鈥� and this is the one that gets skipped most often 鈥� make sure the company鈥檚 tax, treasury, and trading groups are talking to each other in real time. Hedging decisions, financing structures, physical flow changes 鈥� all of these have tax consequences, and they’re happening fast right now.

One final thought

Corporate tax departments that come out of this looking good won’t be the ones that predicted the conflict. They’ll be the ones who translated what鈥檚 happened into specific, actionable data and numbers for their leadership 鈥� presented quickly, clearly, and with their own company’s footprint in mind.

That’s the brief. Now go build it.

You can find more of our coverage of the impact of the ongoing War in Iran here

Key takeaways:

• • • Ways of achieving growth has changed 鈥� Sustainable growth now depends less on raw revenue and more on improving income per partner through smarter leverage, intentional service mix, and disciplined pricing.

    • Proactive firms will be better positioned 鈥� Firms that adopt data-driven pricing, bundled offerings, and subscription models will be better positioned to communicate value, raise fees confidently, and protect margins.

    • Differentiators are shifting 鈥� Leadership depth, culture, and succession planning are emerging as decisive differentiators as demographics shift, private equity reshapes the tax market, and next-generation partners step into control.

Tax, audit & accounting firms are still growing, but not all that growth is reaching the bottom line 鈥� indeed, 2026 is shaping up as a separate or be separated moment for many tax firm leaders. To sustain income per partner while the market shifts, firm leaders need to be far more intentional about how they grow, price, staff, and position their tax practices.

Here are five important ways that tax firm leaders can ensure their bottom-line growth keep pace with their top-line revenue:

1. Be deliberate about how you grow

Revenue is rising, but margins are under pressure. For example, for firms with revenue of more than $2 million, revenue grew 7.9%, yet income per equity partner (IPP) increased only 3.2%. This may imply that although firms are bringing in more money, the remaining profits available to distribute to equity partners isn鈥檛 growing at the same rate. This could mean that it鈥檚 costing firms more to generate more revenue possibly because expenses are eating into margins.

Meanwhile, 13.9% of total growth for firms whose revenue is more than $2 million now comes from mergers, and for firms with revenue of more than $20 million, more than one-fifth of growth is merger-driven.

For growth strategy, leaders should clarify their organic growth plans in light of this robust M&A drive, deciding when acquisitions are truly about capacity, specialization, or geography and when they are merely propping up lagging organic growth.

Leaders need to protect IPP metrics by focusing relentlessly on revenue per partner and revenue per person as primary levers, rather than chasing top-line growth for its own sake. Leaders also need to build optionality 鈥� with private equity, mega-firm consolidators, and independents all active, factors such as succession, capital, and ownership design have become core strategic decisions that can no longer be left to chance.

2. Treat pricing as a growth discipline

In the 成人VR视频 Institute’s pricing report for tax, audit & accounting firms, 64% of decision-makers said their firms saw revenue increases, but only 45% reported increased profits 鈥� a clear indication of margin compression. Further, just about 1-in-5 professionals said they feel 鈥渉ighly confident鈥� that their firm鈥檚 current pricing reflects the expertise of its professionals.

To be sure, key pricing work now involves moving beyond what the market will bear. While hourly billing still dominates (according to the report firms said over 40% of client engagements are billed on an hourly basis) 鈥� value-aligned methods such as fixed fees, subscriptions, and bundled packages are strongly associated with higher pricing confidence and a firm’s greater ability to raise fees.

To excel in this area, tax firm leaders need to use data rather than their gut. Although only 30% of respondents said their firm regularly benchmark their pricing against competitors, leaders overwhelmingly say better market intelligence would increase pricing confidence. Also, firms should expand subscription and bundle pricing options, since respondents form subscription-billing firms report significantly higher confidence that their pricing reflects value. Indeed, many firms using bundled packages have raised prices 10% to 24% or more over the past two years.

3. Build a capacity model that scales

The Rosenberg data is blunt: The fastest path to higher income per partner is not logging more partner hours 鈥� it is using smart leverage and stronger rates. Elite tax firms (those with IPP above $800,000) generate roughly $3.9 million in revenue per equity partner and maintain staff-to-partner ratios of around 17:1.

Several capacity dynamics matter in practice. Leverage drives profitability, for example, and those firms that have staff-to-partner ratios above 10 report IPP roughly double that of firms with ratios below 3, even though they may carry higher salary percentages.

Further, outsourcing has become mainstream. More than 4-in-10 firms (42%) with more than $2 million in revenue now outsource full-time equivalent (FTEs) employees, a figure that rises to 63% among firms with more than $ 20 million dollars. Interestingly, turnover has eased to about 11%, the lowest for the industry in years, but expectations have shifted as firms intentionally reduce average billable hours per staff member to prioritize sustainable workloads.

In fact, the key growth question is no longer Can we find the work? but rather Can we design a capacity model 鈥� onshore, offshore, AI-enabled 鈥� that supports higher rates without burning out our people?

4. Formalize strategy, marketing & service mix

Firms with written strategic plans earn about 4.5% more IPP than those without, according to the data, and firms with a formal marketing plan enjoy about 9% higher IPP. The most profitable firms are also more intentional about service mix, tilting toward advisory and financial services.

Growth-enabling practices start with written strategic and marketing plans. Firms that document these plans consistently outperform their peers, particularly when navigating private equity interest, AI adoption, and succession decisions. Many leading tax firms are deliberately shifting from compliance to advisory, reducing their reliance on commodity tax compliance and expanding into higher-value advisory work to drive stronger profitability. These firms are also packaging and communicating value more effectively by bundling compliance and advisory services into tiered packages, which in turn gives them greater ability to raise fees and justify premium positioning in the market.

5. Invest in leadership, culture & succession

Growth without leadership depth is fragile, especially in the tax profession in which the average partner age has remained high. Most recently, however, the average partner age has dipped slightly to about 52 years old as more retirements occur. And female partners now account for roughly one-quarter of partner groups overall, showing progress but also a persistent equity gap.

For many firms, succession remains a primary concern, and leadership-related growth priorities begin with treating succession as strategy, not an HR project. More firms are revisiting buy-in levels, which average around $133,000, and are experimenting with non-equity roles and alternative practice structures to create more flexible pathways to ownership. At the same time, leaders must protect and modernize their firm culture, recognizing that poorly managed PE transactions, rigid return-to-office policies, and underinvestment in technology-forward talent can quickly erode the very engines of growth they depend on.

Additionally, firms are elevating the managing partner role. In larger practices, managing partners鈥� chargeable hours are now meaningfully lower, reflecting an intentional shift toward having that role work on the business 鈥� strategy, talent, pricing, and M&A 鈥� rather than in it.

For tax firm leaders, these five considerations form a practical checklist for 2026 planning. Grounding each strategic initiative in data and taking visible action can help ensure that the next wave of growth shows up not just in revenue, but in sustainable, rising income per partner.

You can download a copy of the 成人VR视频 Institute’s pricing report for tax, audit & accounting firms, here

Key insights:

• • • Advisory is becoming the strategic core of tax practices 鈥� Tax firms are no longer treating advisory services as an add-on to compliance work but rather as a fundamental driver of business strategy, client relationships, and sustainable revenue growth.

    • Frequent client engagement drives measurably better outcomes 鈥� Professionals from firms that meet with clients quarterly or more frequently report significantly higher satisfaction across every dimension.

    • Technology and capacity are the keys to breaking through barriers 鈥� Firms are rapidly adopting automation to free up their professionals for advisory work, while addressing staff skills gaps through training and strategic hires.

For decades, tax firms built their practices around the predictable calendar of the annual compliance cycle, punctuated by occasional client requests for advice. Over the past five or more years, however, there’s been a seismic shift. Tax advisory services are emerging as the defining strategic function within successful firms, and it鈥檚 being driven mostly by an unprecedented convergence of regulatory complexity, technology capabilities, and evolving client expectations.

Jump to 鈫�

2026 Tax Firm Advisory Services Report

As a result, many firm leaders are fundamentally rethinking their business models, reimagining what a tax practice can be as they move from being transactional service providers to becoming more strategic advisors that can guide clients through complex financial decisions year-round.

To delve into this deeper, the 成人VR视频 Institute has published the 2026 Tax Firm Advisory Services Report, that clearly shows that as regulatory complexity and client expectations mount, firms that systematically invest in building advisory capabilities are outperforming their peers by significant margins 鈥� and the performance gap is widening.

From compliance shop to strategic advisor

For tax firm leaders, this transformation represents both validation and opportunity. The numbers tell a compelling story, especially for firms that are proactively leading the strategic elevation of their advisory capabilities. Among surveyed respondents from firms experiencing revenue growth, 88% report that advisory revenue is growing faster than compliance revenue and that advisory services now represent an average of 31% of total firm revenue.

Not surprisingly, many forward-thinking firms are backing this shift with concrete plans. Nearly 9-in-10 respondents say their firms are planning to expand their advisory services within the next year.

The engagement advantage

What’s driving this transformation? According to the report, the quality and frequency of client relationships have fundamentally recast what’s possible in tax advisory services. Firms that meet with clients quarterly or more frequently see dramatically different outcomes than those meeting clients just once or twice a year.

Tax professionals from firms with quarterly touchpoints rated their own satisfaction significantly higher across every dimension measured, such as knowledge of the client’s business, understanding the client’s industry sector, the overall strength of the client relationship, and the range of services the client uses. Even more compelling, almost 90% of respondents from firms with more frequent client engagement report that advisory revenue growth is outpacing compliance growth compared to just 65% of respondents from firms with less frequent client contact.

As the report underscores: This message is unmistakable 鈥� relationship depth directly drives revenue growth. Firms that use quarterly or more touchpoints with clients are more successfully converting compliance-only relationships into comprehensive advisory partnerships at substantially higher rates than their less-engaged competitors.

The challenging landscape

Despite the opportunities that abound in advisory services, many firms face real obstacles in expansion, the report shows. More than half (52%) of respondents cite staff skills gaps among their colleagues as their biggest challenge, followed closely by client resistance to paying for advice (47%).

These challenges create a reinforcement loop that can trap firms in their current state: Staff lack advisory skills, so they focus on compliance work, leaving no time to develop advisory capabilities or engage clients proactively. Then, clients don’t see the value of advisory services because they haven’t experienced them, and the cycle continues.

Breaking this loop requires intentional strategy and systematic execution 鈥� which is exactly what leading firms are doing differently, the report shows.

How strategic priorities are reshaping the profession

The ripple effects from this advisory transformation have dramatically reshaped strategic priorities for tax firms beyond routine concerns about service expansion. These new priorities represent fundamental shifts in how firm leadership view the purpose of their firm, its client relationships, and competitive positioning.

Interestingly, while revenue objectives dominate the top priorities, 13% of firm leaders cite developing more intellectually stimulating work for their teams as a key objective, the report shows. This speaks to a deeper strategic consideration 鈥� that advisory work itself offers the kind of challenging, engaging work that attracts and retains top talent in an increasingly competitive labor market.

Today, the opportunity is here for tax firms to capitalize on this momentum and operationalize their advisory services offerings through formalized processes, systematic client engagement, technology leverage, and value-based pricing that creates enduring competitive advantages.

As the report shows, tax advisory today is moving beyond simply offering occasional consulting services alongside compliance work. And with the strategic elevation of tax advisory services already underway, it鈥檚 those firms that move quickly enough to capture the opportunity that will flourish.

You can download

a full copy of the 成人VR视频 Institute’s “2026 Tax Firm Advisory Services Report” by filling out the form below:

Key takeaways:

• • • Legal professionals face tighter procedural constraints 鈥� The shift to legitimate interest and stricter suspension rules limit the scope of litigation, requiring claims of more precise harm and reducing early judicial intervention.

    • Stricter judicial suspension powers 鈥� Judges now face tighter rules when granting suspensions and need to prioritize public interest and order over individual or corporate requests.

    • Compliance and financial counsel must prepare for UIF scrutiny 鈥� Expanded authority for Mexico鈥檚 Financial Intelligence Unit (UIF) means frozen assets may remain inaccessible despite amparo filings, necessitating stronger defense strategies and deeper expertise in financial legality.

In Mexico, the Amparo Law is one of the most important legal tools for protecting individual rights. For legal professionals, amparo has long been a key tool to challenge government actions that impact clients鈥� operations or compliance. This legal action acts as a mechanism to enforce constitutional protections, preventing public authorities from being unfair or abusing their power.

In September, Mexico sought reform in many areas of this action, including seeking changes to . The update in Article 5 of the Amparo Law refines the definition of 鈥渓egitimate interest鈥� (inter茅s leg铆timo) while maintaining the concept of 鈥渓egal interest鈥� (inter茅s jur铆dico). Under the previous standard, which was introduced in the 2011 reform and formalized in 2013, practitioners could initiate amparo proceedings on behalf of clients who were affected in a general way 鈥� for example, by pollution, lack of access to public information, or harm to indigenous communities. Now, the law only allows a filing of an amparo when individuals are .

Judicial limits and augmented authority for UIF

Another important change in the 2025 reform relates to suspensions. In Mexico鈥檚 Amparo Law, a suspension is a temporary court order that stops administrative measures while the judge reviews the case. Before the current reform, judges had , even in cases that affected the public or large groups using their evolving jurisprudence.

Now, judges must follow stricter rules; for example, they cannot allow suspensions if these affect. This shift has direct implications for law firms because legal teams will need to reassess the likelihood of obtaining suspensions in cases involving administrative actions, especially those tied to public infrastructure or financial enforcement.

In Mexico, the Amparo Law is one of the most important legal tools for protecting individual rights. For legal professionals, amparo has long been a key tool to challenge government actions that impact clients鈥� operations or compliance.

The reform also limits suspensions, including investigations by the Federal Executive Branch, tax credit cases (unless the person pays a financial guarantee), preventive detention, and cases in which the country鈥檚 Financial Intelligence Unit (UIF) is involved. The UIF works on cases in which individuals or entities are suspected of .

Lawyers and legal counsel, particularly those representing clients in financial and criminal matters, face new hurdles because of this reform. Even if an amparo is filed, bank accounts may remain frozen if there is suspicion of links to criminal organizations. This forces legal teams to develop more robust strategies for contesting UIF actions. Similarly, tax professionals must also adjust to the new reality. The reform limits the use of amparo to delay tax payments or challenge tax credit denials. Clients who previously relied on legal maneuvers to postpone payments or other obligations will now need to provide financial guarantees or face immediate enforcement. This increases pressure on tax advisors to ensure compliance and to anticipate UIF scrutiny.

Another consideration is whether UIF鈥檚 legal counsel itself can verify the legality of resources, a process that requires specialized knowledge. In some cases, public interest and public order may be referenced in general terms rather than supported by specific evidence, thus placing additional burdens on legal professionals to challenge such claims effectively.

In contrast to the concerns about qualified personnel and individual rights, the government explains that the reform helps stop powerful groups 鈥� those that can afford to pay a lawyer and other legal expenses, as opposed to common citizens 鈥� from to avoid paying taxes or slowing down legal actions.

Modernizing the amparo process through digital reforms

The September reform is expected to expand and reinforce the digital modernization initiatives introduced in the and other earlier reforms, much of which focused on using technology to improve the amparo process. For example, lawyers must now adapt to mandatory digital procedures; and Article 3 now allows people to send documents either online or on paper. (According to the reform, however, if someone has an account in the Federal Judiciary鈥檚 Online Services Portal, they must use it to send and receive documents.)

While this shift standardizes communication, it may challenge those firms with limited digital infrastructure or clients in rural areas.

The reform also supports using electronic signatures for all legal steps. Previously, digital signatures were not accepted in the same way by all courts. This change simplifies filings and enhances procedural clarity, but it also requires law firms and tax advisors to update their systems and train staff on secure digital authentication.

Lawyers and legal counsel, particularly those representing clients in financial and criminal matters, face new hurdles because of this reform. Even if an amparo is filed, bank accounts may remain frozen if there is suspicion of links to criminal organizations.

In addition to reforms designed to enhance system functionality, further modifications have been introduced to decrease the number of cases and enable judges to reach decisions more efficiently. In the past, judges had flexible timelines, which often resulted in delays. The reform now sets clearer limits; for example, in indirect amparo cases, judges must give a ruling within 90 calendar days. This accelerates case resolution but also increases pressure on judicial teams to manage caseloads efficiently and consistently.

Adapting to Mexico鈥檚 amparo reform

The September reform could reshape the legal landscape for judges, attorneys, and tax professionals by reversing the progress made since the 2011 changes, which aimed to protect Constitutional rights more strongly. If this happens, the reform may weaken the procedural tools that legal professionals use to defend their clients 鈥� people and companies alike 鈥� against government actions. As a result, we may see a noticeable shift in litigation demand, with fewer opportunities for constitutional defense and more pressure on legal teams to adapt to narrower procedural options. Contributing to this, the new requirements and streamlined procedures could discourage frivolous claims, reducing the volume of cases that firms must manage.

For judges, the reform introduces a more rigid framework. Previously, collective actions based on the prior definition of legitimate interest delayed major infrastructure projects. By requiring direct harm under the new standard, judicial discretion is curtailed, and courts are expected to prioritize administrative efficiency over broad social concerns. In addition, the UIF is now better positioned to freeze illicit funds, which helps lower the chances of situations such as the release of the 27 billion pesos frozen between 2018 and 2025. Legal teams must now prepare for more aggressive enforcement and fewer procedural safeguards.

Finally, the reform has introduced significant elements to enhance transparency and accountability in the amparo process. By introducing requirements for digital submissions and establishing clear deadlines, the changes aim to reduce corruption and confusion, but courts and professionals may struggle with the new digital tools because of their own limited access to technology. Successful adoption of this reform will depend on training judges, UIF staff, and legal teams to ensure procedural compliance and maintain the public trust.

You can find more on the legal and regulatory issues facing Mexico here

Key findings:

• • • • Strategic blind spots remain 鈥� Despite widespread awareness, many tax firms have yet to fully assess the operational or financial impact of the reform, highlighting the need for more proactive planning as changes approach.

      • Technology investment leads the way 鈥� Firms are prioritizing technology and now are beginning to complement these efforts with increased attention to staff training and client support, aiming for a more balanced and complete transition.

      • Client guidance is gaining momentum 鈥� While clients will be among the most affected, professionals are recognizing the urgency of providing clearer communication and tailored support to help clients navigate the reform more confidently.

Brazil鈥檚 tax, audit & accounting sector is on the verge of a historic transformation. The country鈥檚 new tax reform, approved by the National Congress, will gradually unify several existing taxes into a dual value-added tax (VAT) system. The reform aims to simplify compliance, promote transparency, and help citizens better understand how public resources are allocated.

Jump to 鈫�

Brazil Tax Reform for Tax Firm Professionals 2025

So how prepared are Brazil鈥檚 tax & accounting professionals for this upcoming shift? A new report from the 成人VR视频 Institute reveals a gap between awareness and action. While most professionals understand the reform and its implications, only a minority have moved into active preparation. Only a small group of firms have established internal teams or concrete plans; however, many others are now beginning to shift from passive monitoring to more decisive steps.

Definitions: Incipient: I am aware of the Tax Reform, but I am not keeping up with the changes. Beginner: I am following updates through the press and reports to evaluate information that fits the firm鈥檚 and customers鈥� profile. Preparatory: I have an internal working group and/or a developing plan. Advanced: I have allocated resources and a transition project in progress. Leader: I have the structure prepared for the transition and I am working with my team and external providers to anticipate our adaptation.

The reform is expected to impact core areas of tax, audit & accounting work 鈥� including tax calculation, pricing strategies, and advisory services. Professionals widely acknowledge these areas will be disrupted and are starting to take steps to assess and prepare for the changes. Technology investment is accelerating, with many firms upgrading systems and digital infrastructure to meet new requirements. At the same time, there is growing recognition that staff training and client education must advance in parallel to ensure a successful transition.

Many professionals have expressed a need for more resources and structured plans to help them guide clients through the reform, especially as they face changes in tax burdens, pricing structures, and compliance requirements. Encouragingly, firms are beginning to respond 鈥� developing communication strategies and training programs to better support both their teams and their clients.

You can download a full copy of the 成人VR视频 Institute’s “Brazil Tax Reform for Tax Firm Professionals 2025” in Portuguese here

One major area still evolving is the financial planning around the reform. Despite the potential for significant operational changes, most organizations have yet to estimate the cost of adaptation. As new requirements take effect, understanding and preparing for these costs will be essential to avoiding unexpected disruptions.

Opinions on the reform鈥檚 complexity remain divided. Some professionals expect simplification, while others anticipate greater difficulty in tax and accounting practices. This uncertainty only reinforces the importance of ongoing monitoring and the development of flexible strategies.

While technology remains a central focus, the sector is now beginning to align its efforts 鈥� recognizing that human capabilities and client engagement are equally essential. The transition is no longer just about systems and infrastructure, but also about empowering their professionals and building trust. Firms are taking steps to ensure that their teams are prepared and their clients are supported, thereby laying the groundwork for a more complete and resilient transformation.

You can download

a full copy of the English-language version of the 成人VR视频 Institute’s “Brazil Tax Reform for Tax Firm Professionals 2025” by filling out the form below:

Key points:

• • • Technological transformation 鈥� SAT is modernizing its auditing with machine learning and graph analytics to detect fiscal risks and tax evasion networks.

    • Greater operational demands 鈥� Taxpayers and accounting firms must adapt to faster, more precise reviews that will be driven by AI.

    • Efficient and preventive auditing 鈥� AI enables SAT to anticipate irregularities, promote self-correction, and maintain effective tax collection at low cost.

In 2024, Mexico鈥檚 tax authority, the Tax Administration Service (SAT), introduced its Master Plan, marking a new chapter in tax auditing. This plan includes the integration of technologies such as machine learning to identify high-risk taxpayers who potentially could be involved in illicit activities. The aim of the plan is to detect complex structures of tax evasion and avoidance through the analysis of transactional patterns and relationships among entities.

Additionally, the plan seeks to uncover inconsistencies in Digital Tax Receipts (CFDI) that may indicate simulated operations, smuggling, or the use of shell companies, thereby strengthening fiscal oversight and the prevention of financial crimes.

This approach relies on large-scale data analysis, with AI playing a central role. Through algorithms that learn from historical patterns, SAT aims to anticipate irregular behavior and act proactively. Indeed, this represents a profound shift in how tax auditing is understood and executed.

Although AI is a major innovation in the field, it鈥檚 not the starting point. Since 2020, SAT has been consolidating its four-pronged strategy, aimed at i) increasing collection efficiency; ii) reducing tax evasion; iii) combating corruption; and iv) improving taxpayer service. This strategy has supported the development of programs such as Compliance Monitoring, Deep Surveillance, and Coercive Collection, which have enabled the authority to act with greater precision and speed.

To better understand the scope of this transformation, certified public accountant Roberto Iv谩n Col铆n Mosqueda, a member of the Mexican Institute of Public Accountants, shares his expert insights on how these tools are redefining tax auditing and what they mean for taxpayers and professionals in the field.

The role of advanced analytics

SAT鈥檚 2024 Master Plan places special emphasis on machine learning to strengthen auditing. This approach is divided into two main models:

1. 1. 1. Analytical techniques, which allow the review of large volumes of data from CFDIs, tax returns, and audit reports. The goal of this is to detect irregularities in real time, especially in sensitive sectors like fuel distribution, where illegal trade and irregular commercialization are targeted.
      2. Statistical learning models, which enable AI to identify previously detected tax evasion patterns and apply them to uncover new networks or similar schemes. This model is particularly useful for identifying operations linked to fake invoicing companies or importers engaged in irregular practices.

The combination of these models allows SAT not only to react to non-compliance but to anticipate it, resulting in smarter, less invasive, and more resource-efficient auditing.

鈥淭he authority has been closing gaps and tightening controls, and the reality is that electronic invoicing now provides highly reliable information,鈥� explains Col铆n. 鈥淏ased on this, along with tax returns and other data it receives, SAT can implement artificial intelligence to develop analytical and statistical learning models that will undoubtedly continue to deliver strong results.鈥�

Direct impact on taxpayers & accounting firms

SAT鈥檚 technological transformation doesn鈥檛 only affect large taxpayers or strategic sectors. It also has direct implications for ordinary taxpayers and the accounting firms that support them.

Indeed, Col铆n warns that this new auditing will be more dynamic and demanding. 鈥淚n the daily life of a regular taxpayer, this will mean increased auditing,鈥� he says. 鈥淭he authority will detect non-compliance and omissions more quickly, which will generate more work for both taxpayers and accountants, who will need to constantly review and correct.鈥�

Additionally, accounting firms must adapt to a more sophisticated auditing process that goes beyond numbers to better analyze relationships between data, behavioral patterns, and connections among taxpayers. This implies greater responsibility in validating transactions, ensuring consistency in reported information, and maintaining traceability of digital tax receipts.

鈥淭hese analytical techniques will allow the authority to detect irregularities more quickly. Today we already see reminders before a tax declaration is due, and invitation letters requesting explanations. With artificial intelligence, this pace will intensify,鈥� Col铆n adds.

Efficient collection and preventive auditing

One of SAT鈥檚 most notable achievements is its operational efficiency. Currently, for every 100 pesos collected, the authority spends only 28 cents, compared with the United States鈥� Internal Revenue Service (IRS) which . This figure reflects a modern fiscal management model based on the strategic use of technology to maximize results with limited resources.

Preventive auditing, supported by AI, allows SAT to expand its coverage without significantly increasing its operational structure. By detecting irregularities before they become serious omissions, it encourages taxpayer self-correction, reducing the need for formal audits and improving voluntary compliance.

This proactive approach not only optimizes government resources but also fosters a more transparent and collaborative relationship between the authority and taxpayers.

Preparing for the future of tax compliance

SAT鈥檚 technological evolution presents new challenges for all actors in the tax system. For taxpayers, it means maintaining more rigorous accounting, staying alert to messages in the tax mailbox, and responding quickly to any requests. For accounting firms, it鈥檚 an opportunity to strengthen their services, adopt analytical tools, and provide more strategic advice to their clients.

Smart auditing works to move revenue services beyond enforcement, enhancing the ability of auditors to prevent, educate, and collaborate. In this new environment, transparency, traceability, and cooperation will be key to building a fairer, more modern, and efficient tax system in Mexico.

You can find out more about the regulatory and legal issues impacting Mexico here

Key findings:

• • State-level changes 鈥� States are responding to the impact of OBBBA on state-level taxation.

  • Budget shortfalls may result 鈥� Several states are already projecting reduced revenue collections because of the OBBBA.

  • Multi-state business impacts 鈥� Businesses with multi-state operations should re-evaluate where their operations are located for tax purposes.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) ushered in sweeping federal tax changes including provisions aimed at stimulating domestic business investment, particularly in manufacturing and research & development. While many businesses welcome the enhanced federal deductions, the changes are also significantly shifting the landscape for taxation at the state and local levels.

The impacts of the OBBBA are playing out differently across states, depending on each state鈥檚 own tax rules. In addition, the Act is likely to have fiscal ripple effects for states, including new budget challenges. How states respond to these combined impacts promises to dramatically reshape the tax environment, particularly for businesses operating across multiple jurisdictions.

These are among the considerations that seem to be keeping clients up at night 鈥� despite the federal tax benefits of the Act, many business owners and tax professionals are nervous about what it鈥檚 going to be mean at the state and local levels.

Impact on state-level tax policies

For businesses that operate across multiple states, the state and local tax landscape is suddenly more dynamic and much less predictable. States generally start their income tax calculations based upon federal taxable income, but they then modify those numbers based on their own rules and legislative priorities. That means federal changes, such as bonus depreciation or research expensing, are often partially or fully clawed back at the state level. So key provisions of the OBBBA, particularly those involving deductions and R&D expenses, will impact specific businesses differently depending on a state鈥檚 existing tax rules and policies.

For example, the OBBBA allows immediate 100% expensing for federal purposes for fixed assets placed in service after January 19, 2025. However, many states already decouple their assessments from federal bonus depreciation. Other states adjust the percentage or disallow the bonus entirely, forcing an addback and requiring businesses to instead use standard federal depreciation schedules. In fact, OBBBA threatens to widen these differences for deductions.

The impacts of the OBBBA are playing out differently across states, depending on each state鈥檚 own tax rules.

Similarly, the OBBBA enhances the ability of businesses to expense qualifying domestic R&D costs. Historically, only a few states followed the federal shift from expensing to capitalization under prior law. Some states, such as Indiana, may now conceivably permit a double deduction for these expenses under concurrent federal and state codes. Meanwhile, other states will likely reassess or restrict the treatment of these deductions because of concerns over the potential negative impact on state revenues.

Michigan and Rhode Island, for example, recently enacted legislation decoupling from the OBBBA provision that allows for the immediate deduction of domestic research and development expenses, resulting in the continued requirement to capitalize such amounts for state purposes.

State budget concerns

Meanwhile, concerns about the effect of the Act on state revenues could result in far more significant impacts.

One of the most immediate consequences of the OBBBA has been already observed in several states: Illinois, Maryland, Nebraska, and Oregon are among the states that have publicly acknowledged that major federal funding cuts in programs like Medicare, Medicaid, SNAP food assistance, and broader social services are likely to trigger budget shortfalls. And Colorado recently announced a projected $1 billion shortfall, prompting tax increases and a November 2026 referendum to raise income tax rates on certain high-income levels.

While clearly, nobody has a crystal ball, the OBBBA is already putting a lot of strain on state budgets and more states will likely follow in Colorado鈥檚 footsteps.听 Indeed, at a Massachusetts Department of Revenue roundtable held September 30, Commissioner Geoffrey E. Snyder declared that the OBBBA is projected to reduce the state鈥檚 revenue collections by almost $700 million in their 2026 fiscal year.

Impact on businesses

For businesses, navigating through all these changes complicates everything from daily operations to long-term strategy planning 鈥� and the stakes are considerable.

New tax increases or other changes in state tax rules could change asset deployment strategies, shift business expansion plans, and even encourage relocation to more favorable jurisdictions. Robust proactive tax planning is now a competitive necessity rather than a defensive maneuver.

To get on top of this, tax professionals should look into adopting more customized, multi-state mindsets for their clients. It鈥檚 essential that tax professionals fully grasp the substance and trajectory of each material state, or those states in which their clients鈥� businesses have significant business activity. Given that most states currently apportion taxable income primarily based on revenue, rather than physical presence, the rules governing each material state should be monitored closely in addition to the state in which the client is headquartered.

To get on top of this, tax professionals should look into adopting more customized, multi-state mindsets for their clients.

Further complicating matters is that the ripple effects from state responses will vary considerably in terms of timing. Some state legislatures only meet biennially, while some states may call special sessions to address urgent revenue needs or adjust their rules to conform with federal law. States also may enact rapid changes in response to headline-making budget projections 鈥� often with little warning.

Tax professionals need to stay proactive and vigilant, and most importantly, keep their finger on the pulse of state tax policies to best keep their clients informed. Some key steps for tax professionals include:

• • • Conduct a 鈥渕aterial state鈥� audit 鈥� Proactively identify and monitor those states in which clients have meaningful revenue, as those locations will now drive new tax risks and opportunities.
    • Stay informed on legislative developments 鈥� Closely track statements from state governments, economic development departments, and relevant tax and economic authorities on budget forecasts and discussion of anticipated responses.
    • Educate and advise clients with flexibility and understanding 鈥� Provide clients with regular updates on state-level changes and counsel them to build flexibility into their business forecasts and strategies, especially around capital expenditures and R&D investments.

While the OBBBA is ultimately a federal catalyst 鈥� the state and local reverberations of the Act are just beginning to be felt. For tax professionals, this is a moment to lead by educating clients, anticipating legislative shifts, and building resilient tax strategies across jurisdictions. State and local responses to the OBBBA will be diverse and are only beginning to unfold. Steady guidance from tax professionals can make the difference between whether their clients thrive or flounder amid all these changes.

You can find more of our coverage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act here