Key insights:

• • • Conflict of interest doesn’t start with bad intent 鈥� Often, conflict of interest starts with tenure, trust, and relationships that slowly blur the line between good judgment and personal interest.

    • The real exposure isn’t the fraud itself 鈥� The real damage from conflict of interest can be years of skewed vendor decisions, above-market pricing, and lost competitive ground.

    • Companies shouldn鈥檛 treat conflict of interest as a disclosure problem 鈥� Companies would do well to remember that often conflict of interest is really a data and systems problem.

His access logs were clean, so it took weeks to find out what actually happened. He had been borrowing colleagues’ IT logins, who had handed them over without much thought, even though they knew it broke policy. They just didn’t think it mattered. He used those logins to steer million-dollar contracts to selected vendors who were paying him kickbacks.

The company鈥檚 conflict of interest policy existed, and people had signed it. Yet, nobody checked whether anyone followed it. And this scheme wasn’t even caught internally. Fortunately, someone outside found it.

This gap between knowing something is wrong and believing it matters 鈥� that鈥檚 where conflict of interest lives.

The financial exposure goes well beyond the kickback itself

The kickback that was paid to an insider is not the real cost to the company. The real cost is what happens while nobody is looking. As a result of this fraud, this company didn鈥檛 even know they were experiencing years of sourcing decisions that were shaped by hidden interests, vendors who never got a fair shot, and pricing that stayed above market price because the person managing the relationship had a reason to keep it there.

Throughout many industries, the numbers back this up. The from the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) found corruption in almost half (48%) of all fraud cases. Median loss for corruption schemes was around $200,000, and the average scheme run for about 12 months before anyone catches on. Not surprisingly, 87% of conflict-of-interest fraud perpetrators had no prior criminal record. Indeed, they were trusted employees, not career criminals.

What makes this worse is that most organizations have no reliable way to catch it. Across industry guidance, compliance publications, and professional forums, a consistent picture emerges: The majority of organizations rely entirely on disclosure forms and self-reporting to manage conflicts of interest. Leading compliance expert, Rebecca Walker has publicly admitted that 鈥� and even though the tools exist, almost nobody is using them.

The statistics, however, only capture what gets caught. The psychology of how it starts is harder to measure 鈥� and more important to understand. Conflict of interest rarely begins with a plan to steal. Rather, it starts with tenure, trust, and relationships that make someone hard to replace. Over time, the line between good judgment and personal interest doesn’t get crossed, it just disappears.

Taking a more structured approach

Most companies rely on disclosure forms, ethics training, and a code of conduct. They want to tell people what a conflict looks like, ask them to report it, and assume they will. Too often, they won’t.

Disclosure forms ask employees to self-report behavior they often don’t recognize as problematic, and those who do recognize it worry they’ll be investigated or treated unfairly themselves. They’ve watched junior staff held to strict standards while senior leaders get a pass. Unfortunately, that teaches everyone the same lesson: Stay quiet. When 85% of companies with a code of conduct still have fraud at this scale, the problem is not what people know, rather it鈥檚 how the program is built.

These failures point to three specific gaps in how most organizations approach conflict of interest: i) how they gather information; ii) how they monitor risk; and iii) how they receive reports. A structured framework 鈥� one based on concepts of design, detect, and deploy 鈥� can address each one of these gaps directly, with each component being measurable in financial terms.

Design: Are you collecting facts or asking people to confess?

Take a look at how you approach employees around conflict-of-interest issues. Are you seeking information or just generally hoping the employee admits wrongdoing, even inadvertently. A better approach could be to ask specific questions: How long has the employee worked with this vendor? Can the employee award contracts to them? Does the employee have any ownership stake in a company on the approved vendor list?

Let the employee give the facts and then let the system make the call. When you separate sharing information from being judged for it, people actually share and you get better data. And better data means better procurement decisions. That is not a compliance win 鈥� that鈥檚 a business win.

Detect: Are you looking for conflicts or hoping someone speaks up?

Run your vendor list against your employee records and flag matching addresses, phone numbers, and bank accounts. Check public registries for shared directors between your staff and your suppliers. Look at who has been awarding contracts in the same role for years without rotating, and managers who keep hiring from former employers.

Any company with an ERP system and an HR database can run these checks quarterly. And ACFE data underscores the value in taking the proactive approach: On average, companies using automated transaction monitoring catch fraud within six months and lose about $83,000; and companies that wait for law enforcement to alert them to the fraud take 24 months and lose $675,000.

Deploy: Is your hotline a business tool or a poster on a wall?

Tips catch 43% of all fraud 鈥� more than audits, management reviews, and law enforcement combined. Companies with hotlines lose $100,000 in median fraud; but companies without them lose $200,000. A working tips hotline can cut your losses in half.

However, most hotlines are not functioning as intended. They exist on paper without the visibility, trust, or independence required to generate reliable reports. For example, a senior executive was steering contracts to his own associates. And even though a company hotline existed, the executive actually sat on the committee that received the reports. The tool was built to catch misconduct and was working properly, yet it was controlled by the person committing the fraud. The matter had to be escalated outside normal channels, and the senior executive was eventually fired for cause.

Almost half (46%) of employees who report misconduct face retaliation, according to the , from the nonprofit Ethics and Compliance Initiative. When that is the outcome, silence becomes the rational choice. If you want your hotline to work, promote it every quarter. Show people what was reported and what happened because of it. Make sure no single person can block or read a report before it reaches the right people. Being that proactive around your hotline will give employees proof that the system protects them.

Is it worth the investment?

Of course, the question is not whether your company has a conflict-of-interest policy, it most likely does. Rather, the question is whether you would know if someone were breaking it right now.

Companies that design better fact-gathering, detect through monitoring, and deploy trusted reporting can do more than catch fraud early. They can buy from better vendors, compete on fairer pricing, protect their board from liability, and build a culture in which raising a red flag is seen as protecting the business.

If the honest answer is that you would not know if someone was violating your company鈥檚 conflict of interest policy, then business case for being more proactive has already been made.

You can find more about how companies can best manage business fraud here

Key takeaways:

• • • The FIFA World Cup is a catalyst, not the root cause 鈥� Mexico City’s housing affordability crisis predates the coming tournament. Rental prices have been rising uncontrollably for years, displacing thousands of families annually. The World Cup will accelerate and amplify an already existing problem.

    • The 2024 rental reform is a step in the right direction, but it has significant limitations 鈥� Capping rent increases at the annual inflation rate was a necessary measure, but its impact has been limited by grey areas in the law.

    • The real battle is formalization 鈥� No housing regulation can be fully effective if a large portion of the market operates outside of it. Until authorities find ways to make formal rental agreements genuinely attractive and accessible for both landlords and tenants.

On the eve of the 23^rd playing of the FIFA World Cup, Mexico stands as one of three host countries for one of the most significant sporting events in the world. It will feature matches in Mexico City, Guadalajara, and Monterrey, and it will be co-hosted alongside the United States and Canada.

Organizing such an event carries notable financial benefits, including a surge in tourism, job creation, and substantial foreign investment 鈥� all of which generate a local economic spillover that strengthens the national marketplace. At the same time, Mexico’s major capitals鈥� especially its World Cup host cities 鈥� have been undergoing a level of urban transformation that has significantly altered the daily lives of its residents. Chief among these changes is the sharp rise in rental costs, which has been pushing residents toward the cities鈥� outskirts. According to government figures, are displaced each year due to the uncontrolled increase in housing prices in Mexico City alone.

Mexican authorities had to get to work

Legal changes to real estate regulation in Mexico City are not isolated, and what is implemented in the capital often sets a precedent for the rest of the country. Time and again, Mexico City has served as a laboratory for new policies, and when these are proven effective, they become models for nationwide reform.

According to government figures, more than 20,000 households are displaced each year due to the uncontrolled increase in housing prices in Mexico City alone.

That said, in August 2024 鈥� after the city’s head of government noted that rentals costs in none of the boroughs of Mexico City fall below the city鈥檚 minimum wage, and that 9 out of 13 boroughs average rents that exceeded twice the minimum wage 鈥� the Official Gazette of Mexico City published a decree amending Articles 2448-D and 2448-F of the Civil Code for the Federal District, imposing limits on rent increases for residential properties. Previously, the monthly rent increase could not exceed 10% of the agreed-upon rent. That paragraph was amended to establish that rent increases shall never exceed the inflation rate reported by the Bank of Mexico for the previous year.

It is worth noting that the prior 10% cap was nearly three times the general annual inflation rate calculated by the Bank of Mexico in 2025, which stood at 3.69%.

More than a year after these reforms took effect, however, 2025 closed with an average increase in rental prices of . With the FIFA World Cup approaching, prices are expected to continue rising uncontrollably due to the influx of tourists drawn by the event. This concern is well-founded: Ahead of the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, empowered landlords to raise rents by more than 40%.

Mexico City鈥檚 rental reform also introduced additional measures. For example, a digital registry for lease agreements was established, to be immediately authorized and managed by the Government of Mexico City. Landlords now are required to register lease agreements within 30 days of their execution. Furthermore, landlords are prohibited from refusing to rent to tenants on the grounds that they have children or pets.

The registration requirement carries real consequences: Should a landlord fail to register a contract within the stipulated period, their ability to invoke legal protection mechanisms in the event of a dispute with a tenant becomes significantly more complicated.

Regardless of the efforts, it鈥檚 not all smooth sailing

That said, the reform contains certain grey areas that limit its scope. For instance, it only applies under specific conditions 鈥� most notably when a lease has been in place for three years or more. A landlord can effectively circumvent the cap by choosing not to renew an existing contract and instead requiring the tenant to sign a new one at a higher price.

A separate but equally significant obstacle to the reform’s effectiveness is the rapid growth of short-term rental platforms. In recent years, the proliferation of temporary accommodation services has steadily reduced the supply of traditional long-term rentals, as more properties are listed on platforms such as Airbnb, Vrbo, or others. Indeed, every 48 hours, three housing units in Mexico City are . And from a national perspective, the Tourism Gross Product reached approximately US $151.5 billion, equivalent to 8.7% of Mexico鈥檚 GDP.

---

Every 48 hours, three housing units in Mexico City are converted into Airbnb listings.

This problem is further compounded by the scale of informal rental arrangements. According to the National Housing Survey conducted by Mexico鈥檚 National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI), there are more than 200,000 informal rental agreements in Mexico City 鈥� none of which involve formal contracts.

Forcing the real estate market into formalization

This brings us to the central challenge facing city authorities with regard to housing: The need to incentivize the formalization of the real estate market. This is already complicated by the country’s low tax culture and the requirement for landlords to enter a specific tax regime that raises their tax burden. Additionally, rental contracts are not only essential for protecting tenants’ rights, but they also are equally important for landlords 鈥� because without a legally binding agreement, there is no guarantee that the terms of any arrangement will be honored.

Paradoxically, the recent reform may actually push the informal market further underground. By requiring landlords to formally declare their rental income, the regulation inevitably creates a sense of heightened oversight 鈥� one that informal landlords may seek to evade rather than comply with.

To the authorities of Mexico City, the message is clear 鈥� punitive measures alone will not bring the informal market into the fold. Tax benefits for landlords who register their contracts, streamlined and accessible digital registration processes, and legal protections that make formal agreements genuinely advantageous for both parties could go a long way toward building trust in the system.

The 2026 FIFA World Cup will come and go, of course, but the people of Mexico City will remain. They deserve a housing market that works for them 鈥� not one that treats their homes as a commodity to be priced beyond their reach every time the world turns its attention to their city.

You can find out more about the

Key insights:

• • • Big sporting events create perfect cover for sex trafficking 鈥� The World Cup鈥檚 massive crowds, temporary workers, and stretched local infrastructure make it easier for traffickers to blend in and exploit vulnerable people while staying largely out of sight.

    • Money trails and online ads are where traffickers slip up 鈥� Trafficking often leaves patterns, such as payments tied to commercial sex ads, round鈥慸ollar peer鈥憈o鈥憄eer transactions, and repeat phone numbers or language across online ads. Banks and investigators can spot these red flags, if they know what to look for.

    • Early, cross鈥憇ector collaboration is what actually makes a difference 鈥� The strongest prevention efforts happen before kickoff, when law enforcement, financial institutions, and nonprofits share intelligence, use formal information鈥憇haring tools, and build trusted local networks to respond quickly and protect victims.

As millions of soccer fans descend upon stadiums across North America for the 2026 FIFA World Cup in June and July, perpetrators of human rights crimes also are getting ready to operate in the shadows of host cities. Criminal networks are preparing to exploit the crowds, traffic, and chaos during the event by trafficking vulnerable individuals for commercial sex.

Human traffickers and organized crime groups often exploit major sporting events as opportunities to make quick money because the massive influx of visitors, temporary workers, and strained infrastructure creates perfect conditions for traffickers to operate while being largely undetected. At the same time, the stakeholders involved in countering this illegal activity 鈥� including law enforcement, civil society organizations, and financial institutions 鈥� stand ready to detect it, disrupt it, and protect vulnerable individuals who are exploited by criminal actors.

Indeed, close coordination and collaboration among these entities in advance of the games is key. To that end, the Association of Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists (ACAMS) and 成人VR视频 are collaborating on a virtual and live event series to support these planning counter-trafficking efforts among stakeholders in several local cities this Spring.

Why major sporting events attract human trafficking activity

Not surprisingly, large crowds draw business opportunities whether they are legitimate or illicit. Collaboration between public and private entities underscore spikes in human trafficking activity. For example, during a recent large sporting event in 2025, 成人VR视频 Special Services partnered with federal law enforcement and other partners to identify nine adult encounters & services offered, which led to the recovery of two juveniles from sex trafficking and three state arrests

Common industries that involve the exploitation of vulnerable individuals include hospitality, construction, illicit massage businesses, escort services, and adult content production. The chaos of events and large influx of people mask the reality that exploitation is happening and makes detection significantly more challenging during these high-traffic periods.

Human traffickers and organized crime groups often exploit major sporting events as opportunities to make quick money because the massive influx of visitors, temporary workers, and strained infrastructure creates perfect conditions for traffickers to operate while being largely undetected.

Critically, understanding human trafficking as a business model depends on the recruitment of vulnerable people and access to money flows. These aspects of the business are also where detection can occur. Financial institutions and money service businesses can identify suspicious transactions related to human trafficking by understanding and recognizing specific transactional patterns, including payments to commercial sex advertisement websites, round-dollar peer-to-peer transactions, and merchant services linked to illicit massage businesses.

This online footprint left by traffickers proves invaluable for detection. Investigators track advertisements across adult services websites, identifying criminal networks through repeated phone numbers, distinctive emojis, and similar wording that may appear across multiple cities. However, smaller-scale operations present significant challenges as well. When the trafficker is an intimate partner or family member with limited transaction volumes, detection becomes exponentially more difficult without external intelligence.

Collaboration is key for prevention and detection

The most critical element for combating human trafficking at major sporting events is collaboration among anti-trafficking experts and employers of these professionals. Effective prevention requires building strong partnerships before these major events occur. Specific actions that can be taken include:

Establishing multi-sector task forces 鈥� The most successful anti-trafficking efforts involve joint task forces that combine federal, state, and local law enforcement with trusted private sector partners and supportive nonprofits or non-government organizations (NGOs) that offer victim services. This toolkit for large scale public events and other anti-trafficking toolkits are excellent resources for local host cities to use to execute these partnerships. These collaborative mechanisms allow different entities to share information in a timely manner.

Leveraging information sharing mechanisms 鈥� Financial institutions can use Section 314(b) authority for peer-to-peer information sharing between banks. This allows financial institutions to piece together fragments of suspicious activity that individually might seem insignificant but collectively reveal trafficking networks. Large federal agencies are consumed by multiple priorities and benefit from information sharing through Section 314(a) and assistance from financial sector partners during special operations to act as a force multiplier. Law enforcement also can benefit from detailed Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) that contain specific dollar amounts, clear timelines, behavioral observations, and explicit keywords like human trafficking.

Preparing host cities by building networks and outreach in advance 鈥� Some World Cup host cities have already established human rights plans with robust collaborative systems within local task forces, government awareness campaigns, QR codes that link to support services, and multidisciplinary safety plans.

In addition, anti-trafficking professionals across all sectors are accessible and willing to help. Resources include national hotlines, such as the , referral directories on website, and the for cases involving minors. The most important step is simply reaching out to establish connections before crises occur.

Preparing for a safer event

The 2026 World Cup presents a pivotal moment to strengthen collaborative efforts against human trafficking across North America’s host cities. By establishing robust information-sharing networks between financial institutions, law enforcement, NGOs, and host communities before the tournament begins, stakeholders can transform heightened awareness into meaningful action that protects vulnerable individuals.

While traffickers will undoubtedly attempt to exploit the inevitable chaos surrounding a major event like the World Cup, a coordinated, multi-sector response grounded in shared intelligence, victim-centered approaches, and proactive preparation can disrupt their operations and ensure that the world’s celebration of soccer doesn’t come at the cost of human dignity and freedom.

You can find out more about听how organizations are trying to fight against human rights crimes here

Key takeaways:

• • • Violence against judges is escalating 鈥� Targeted shootings, coordinated harassment campaigns, and threats that now routinely follow judges to their homes and families.

    • The rhetoric driving the escalation is coming from the highest levels of government 鈥� The absence of any public denunciation from the Department of Justice is highlighting the source of the problem.

    • Will the violence itself become part of judicial rulings? 鈥� The endgame of judicial intimidation isn’t that judges stop ruling, it’s that the threat of violence becomes a silent presence in the deliberation itself.

NEW YORK 鈥� Those attendees who came to the recent听 to talk about AI, agentic workflows, and the business of legal technology, also were treated to a session that will likely stay with attendees and had nothing to do with AI.

In that session, four federal judges took the stage; but they were not there to talk about pricing models or AI adoption. They were there to talk about staying alive.

Setting the stage

Jason Wareham, CEO of IPSA Intelligent Systems and a former U.S. Marine Corps judge advocate, introduced the session 鈥� a panel of four sitting United States District Court judges 鈥� by speaking of how the rule of law once seemed resolute, yet how that faith in that has been shaken, year after year. He worked hard to frame his observations as nonpartisan, a matter of institutional fragility rather than political allegiance. It was a generous framing, but it was one that would not survive the weight of the ensuing discussion.

The Honorable Esther Salas of the District of New Jersey said that the reason she was there has a name. On July 19, 2020, a disgruntled, extremist attorney who had a case before her court arrived at her home during a birthday celebration. He shot and killed her twenty-year-old son, Daniel Anderl. He shot and critically wounded her husband. She has spent the years since on a mission to protect her judicial colleagues from the same fate.

The new normal

Next, the Honorable Kenly Kiya Kato of the Central District of California described what has changed. Judges鈥� rulings are still based on the Constitution, on precedent, and on the facts; but what’s different is the small voice in the back of a judge’s head. That voice, often coming after a judge issued a decision that they now have to fight against, asks: What will happen after this? It is now expected, Judge Kato explained, that a high-profile order will bring threats. When two colleagues in her district issued prominent decisions, her first thought was for their safety. That is not how it has been historically.

The Honorable Mia Roberts Perez of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania asked how we got here, pointing to language from the highest levels of government: judges called monsters, a U.S. Department of Justice declaring war on rogue judges, and recently politicians bringing justice鈥檚 families into the conversation.

Judge Salas pushed even further. She acknowledged the instinct to frame the problem as bipartisan, but said the current moment is not apples to apples. It is apples to watermelons. The spike in threats since 2015, she argued, traces directly to rhetoric from political leaders using language never before deployed against the bench.

The federal judiciary is looking to break annual records for threats [against judges], and there is an absence of any public denunciation from the Attorney General or the DOJ.

The evidence is not abstract, nor are the victims, and the panel walked through it. Judge John Roemer of Wisconsin, zip-tied to a chair and assassinated in his home. Associate Judge Andrew Wilkinson of Maryland shot dead in his driveway while his family was inside. Judge Steven Meyer of Indiana and his wife Kimberly, shot through their own front door after attackers first posed as a food delivery, then returned days later claiming to have found the couple’s dog. Judge Meyer has just undergone his fifth surgery since the attack.

All of these incidents happened at the judges’ homes.

Judge Salas then played a voicemail, one of thousands that federal judges receive. It was less than 30 seconds long, but it did not need to be longer. While names had been redacted, what remained was a torrent of threats and obscenities, graphic, sexual and violent, delivered with the confidence of someone who does not expect consequences. Some judges receive hundreds of these after a single ruling, often from people with no case before them at all.

The shadow over the courts

Throughout the session, there was a presence the panelists circled but rarely named directly. A shadow that shaped every observation about escalating threats, every reference to rhetoric from the top down, every mention of language never before used by political leaders, of action or inaction the likes of which would have been unthinkable just several years ago. The specifics were spoken. The name, largely, was not.

It didn’t have to be.

Judge Kato said that what was perhaps the most disheartening aspect of all this is that these threats are getting worse. The people who know better are not doing better. Indeed, she said her children think about these problems every day. What will happen to mom today? Will someone come to the house? These are questions children should not have to carry. They did not sign up for this, and neither did the judges.

In 2026, Judge Salas noted, the federal judiciary is looking to break annual records for threats. She also noted the absence of any public denunciation from the Attorney General or the DOJ. The silence, she said, says a lot.

Not surprisingly, the implications extend beyond the judges themselves. As Judge Salas noted, if judges have to weigh their safety alongside the law, ordinary people don’t stand a chance. If one party is stronger, better funded, or more willing to threaten, then the scales tip.

That is the endgame of judicial intimidation. It鈥檚 not that judges stop ruling, but that the violent and the powerful 鈥� indeed, the people least fit to hold the scales 鈥� can tilt them at will.

That concern echoed an earlier warning from Judge Karoline Mehalchick of the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Judge Mehalchick said that judicial intimidation feeds on misunderstanding. When the public no longer grasps why judges must be insulated from pressure or conversely, mistakes independence for partisanship, the threat environment becomes easier to justify, easier to ignore, and harder to reverse.

What is perhaps the most disheartening aspect of all this is that these threats are getting worse, and the people who know better are not doing better.

In his 2024 year-end report, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts identified four threats to judicial independence: violence, intimidation, disinformation, and threats to defy lawfully entered judgements. The panel discussed this report as prophecy fulfilled. Public confidence in the judiciary has plummeted since 2021, and the reasons are complex. The judges insisted they are still doing their jobs the right way, but the violence is spreading anyway.

What survives

Judge Salas asked the audience to watch their thoughts. Are they negative and destructive, or positive and uplifting? Can we start loving more? She ended by sending love and light to everyone in the room.

The judges were visibly emotional on the stage.

The words were beautiful. They were also, in the context of everything that had just been described 鈥� the killings, the voicemails, the zip ties, the pizza deliveries masking a threat under a murdered son’s name 鈥� resting in a shadow that no amount of love and light could fully dispel on their own.

The room responded with a standing ovation.

Thousands of people came to Legalweek 2026 to talk about the future of legal technology. For one morning, four judges reminded them that none of it matters if the people charged with administering justice cannot do so safely.

So, while the billable hour may survive and the associate will adapt, the harder question, the one that should keep the legal industry awake at night, is whether the bench will hold.

You can find more of听our coverage of Legalweek events听here

Key highlights:

• • • Tax credit transferability survived intact鈥� The OBBBA preserved Section 6418 transferability rules despite earlier proposals to sunset or repeal them.

    • AI-driven data center boom may revive renewable energy tax credits鈥� With data centers projected to consume 12% of all US energy by 2028, large operators have strong incentives to advocate for preserving and expanding renewable tax credits to meet massive energy demands through solar, geothermal, and battery storage solutions.

    • 2026 market conditions favor buyers due to supply-demand imbalance鈥擨ncreased supply of tax credits (particularly Section 45Z clean fuel production credits) combined with reduced buyer competition from provisions like Section 174 and bonus depreciation has created advantageous pricing.

At the start of the current Trump administration, green energy tax credits were expected to be slashed or disappear altogether. In reality, significant changes emerged instead of ceasing to exist. More specifically, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), passed in July 2025, kept the transferability rules around green energy tax credits intact.

As a result, the market for these credits remains robust in 2026 and 2027, says , an energy tax authority and principal at accounting firm CliftonLarsonAllen (CLA). In addition, multiple credits still have runway, and near-term dynamics in 2026 may favor buyers.

OBBBA鈥檚 changes result in shifts in marketplace conditions

When the OBBBA bill passed, the specifics revealed a more optimistic picture than many understand. According to Hill, specific examples include:

• • Wind and solar projects 鈥� Developers that begin construction by July 4, 2026, still have a four-year window to complete their projects and still claim credits. Even projects that miss this construction deadline can qualify if they’re placed in service by December 31, 2027.
  • Clean fuel production credits 鈥� Clean fuel production credits, detailed in OBBBA鈥檚 Section 45Z, received an extended runway through 2029.
  • Tax credit transferability 鈥� The tax credit transferability aspect under Section 6418 remained whole, despite previous versions of the bill proposing either a sunset date or outright repeal of transferability. This fact provides a level of marketplace certainty that can act as critical liquidity for developers that typically lack the tax liability to use credits themselves.

In addition, the legislation altered the buyer and seller environment. Provisions including OBBBA鈥檚 Section 174 and bonus depreciation generated additional deductions for certain companies, and as a result, reduced those companies鈥� 2025 corporate tax liability. Simultaneously, Section 45Z clean fuel production tax credits came into force and created a supply-demand imbalance that favors buyers.

Overall, in the latter half of 2025, Hill describes the marketplace as favorable for buyers because of an increased supply of tax credits that were for sale previously with fewer buyers. Into 2026 and beyond, both developers and corporate buyers still have significant opportunities to participate in the tax credit marketplace, explains Hill.

AI-related data center demand may spur new proposals for renewables tax credits

The explosive proliferation of data centers because of the growing AI demand across the United States may become the unexpected champion for renewable energy tax credits. Hundreds of facilities are currently under construction, and the energy demand implications are staggering. In fact, the projects that by 2028, data centers will consume 12% of all US energy.

Renewable energy technologies are emerging as essential solutions to meet these demands. Solar power, as a tried-and-true technology, offers ideal supplementation for data center operations; and geothermal heating and cooling systems directly address the massive temperature control challenges these facilities face. Perhaps most significantly, battery storage is rapidly becoming standard operating procedure, with both grid-based and solar-array-tied battery systems providing critical backup power.

These developments carry substantial policy implications. In fact, large data center operators have incentives to become vocal advocates for preserving and expanding renewable tax credits, says , a leader in federal tax strategies at CLA. “We want our AI, we want our cloud-based services. To do that鈥� we need massive data centers and massive computing demands,鈥� DePrima explains. 鈥淎nd that in turn requires massive amounts of energy consumption, which renewables can certainly supplement.鈥� This, in turn, creates the potential for a renewable energy tax credit “comeback” within two to three years, he adds.

Guidance for buyers and sellers

Looking ahead to 2026 and beyond, both buyers and sellers of renewable energy tax credits should recognize that significant opportunities remain despite regulatory changes. More specifically:

For buyers 鈥� Buyers should act now to capitalize on favorable market conditions. With increased credit supply and reduced buyer competition due to provisions like Section 174 and bonus depreciation, pricing has become more advantageous. Buyers of renewable energy tax credits should consider structuring 2026 transactions to directly offset estimated tax payments throughout the year, thereby improving cash flow by making payments to sellers rather than the IRS. Financial institutions remain particularly well-positioned as buyers, as many have explored tax credit carryback opportunities to increase their tax savings even further.

For sellers and developers 鈥� Renewable energy tax credits sellers and energy project developers can use tax-credit monetization as a critical component of project financing because the ability to convert credits into immediate cash proceeds is essential for paying down debt and funding new projects. Despite initial concerns, substantial opportunities remain with credits outlined in Sections 45Z, 45X, 48E, and 45Y which are transferable and viable through 2029 and beyond.

In either case, tax credit transferability under Section 6418 offers key opportunities in the marketplace. Whether buyers are looking to reduce their corporate tax burden while supporting clean energy goals, or developers are seeking to monetize renewable projects 鈥� tax credits offer incentives to move forward.

The information contained herein is general in nature and is not intended, and should not be construed, as legal, accounting, or tax advice or opinion provided by CliftonLarsonAllen LLP to the reader. The reader also is cautioned that this material may not be applicable to, or suitable for, the reader鈥檚 specific circumstances or needs, and may require consideration of nontax and other tax factors if any action is to be contemplated. The reader should contact his or her CliftonLarsonAllen LLP or other tax professional prior to taking any action based upon this information. CliftonLarsonAllen LLP assumes no obligation to inform the reader of any changes in tax laws or other factors that could affect the information contained herein.

You can find out more about renewable energy tax credits here

Key highlights:

• • • Fragmented protection creates vulnerability 鈥擟urrent US privacy laws operate as a patchwork system without comprehensive national standards, leaving children and other users exposed to data exploitation across state lines and international borders.

    • Body data collection opens future manipulation potential 鈥擵irtual reality platforms collect granular biometric information through sensors that can reveal deeply sensitive information about users.

    • Use-based regulations outlast technology changes 鈥� Restricting harmful applications of data provides more durable protection than the current regulatory approach, which relies on categorizing rapidly evolving data types.

Virtual reality (VR), social media, and gaming companies have long avoided robust content moderation, largely out of concern over implementation costs and the risk of alienating users. This reluctance stems from platforms wanting to have the widest pool of users as possible. Yet, the shortsightedness of this decision has consequences, including insufficient protection of children and long-term cost to companies鈥� bottom-lines.

The child exploitation crisis in digital spaces requires better laws and a reimagining of how VR, gaming, and social medial companies balance privacy, safety, and accountability across diverse platform architectures, according to , an expert in child exploitation methods in digital spaces and Policy Advisor at the NYU Stern Center for Business and Human Rights.

Limitations of existing regulatory frameworks

The current regulatory landscape is insufficient to protect children online. The lack of a comprehensive national privacy law in the United States, the use of consent mechanisms, and the haphazard rollout of age verification all expose protection gaps and come with economic and psychological costs, according to Olaizola Rosenblat. For example, some of the dangers include:

Gaps in patchwork of regulations leave children vulnerable 鈥� Regulatory demands for child safety often collide with privacy protections, creating contradictory obligations that platforms cannot realistically satisfy. In the absence of unified standards, however, companies operate in a jurisdictional maze that leaves most users, including children, exposed to data exploitation across borders.

America鈥檚 regulatory landscape remains especially fragmented, with no comprehensive national privacy law to provide consistent protection. comes close to establishing meaningful safeguards, according to Olaizola Rosenblat, yet it still permits companies to collect data even after users opt out of the sale or sharing of their data.

Federal reform attempts, including the , collapsed amid conflicts between states demanding stronger protections and tech lobbyists aligned with conservative representatives seeking weaker standards. In addition, child-specific laws, such as the , provide protection only for those under 13, which leaves older minors and adults vulnerable.

鈥淥nce users turn 13, they fall off a regulatory cliff,鈥� says Olaizola Rosenblat. 鈥淭here is no federal child-specific data protection regime, and existing state-level safeguards are patchy and largely ineffective for teens.鈥�

Internationally, the European Union鈥檚 (GDPR), although considered the gold standard for regulation, suffers from a persistent gap between its ambitious text and its uneven enforcement.

Age verification tensions 鈥� These regulatory shortcomings also are evident in debates over age verification. Protecting children requires collecting data to determine user age, yet privacy advocates frequently oppose such measures. Without pragmatic guidance acknowledging these inherent trade-offs, platforms often face contradictory obligations they cannot simultaneously fulfill.

Current consent frameworks offer little protection 鈥� Current consent mechanisms offer users an illusory choice that fails to protect children from data exploitation. Even relatively robust frameworks like the GDPR rely on consent models in which refusal means exclusion from digital spaces essential to modern life. This approach proves particularly inadequate for younger users. Indeed, that about one-third of Gen Z respondents expressed indifference to online tracking.

VR data collections may allow future exploitation

VR platforms differ fundamentally from traditional gaming spaces and social media platforms. Users with VR headsets embody avatars that move through thousands of interconnected experiences. While no actual touching occurs, the experiences feel visceral. Indeed, the psychological and physiological responses can mirror aspects of real-world experiences, which include sexual exploitation, even though no physical contact occurs.

Olaizola Rosenblat explains that the data collected from the sensors can open up the potential for future exploitation. “The inferences that can be drawn from your body-based data collected by these sensors is granular and often intimate,鈥� she explains. 鈥淭he power that gives to companies is pretty remarkable in terms of knowing things about you that you might not even know yourself.鈥�

Recommended actions to address challenges

Addressing the child exploitation crisis in digital spaces requires coordinated action, according to Olaizola Rosenblat, and that needs to include:

Universal protection standards 鈥� Corporate action in partnership with legislators is necessary for effective reform that protect all users rather than fragmenting safeguards by age or vulnerability status. Current approaches that shield only younger children create dangerous gaps and leave adolescents and adults exposed once they age out of protected categories.

Enforce existing regulations 鈥� Even well-crafted legislation proves meaningless without robust enforcement mechanisms. Commitment by government agencies along with the appropriate levels of funding is the most meaningful approach to achieve desired outcomes.

Technology-agnostic use regulation 鈥� Rather than attempting to categorize rapidly evolving data types, companies in the VR, gaming, and social media sectors must work with legislators to restrict harmful uses of data such as manipulation, exploitation, and unauthorized surveillance, regardless of technical collection methods. Regulating data use 鈥� rather than the current method of regulation based on categories of data, which include personally identifiable information 鈥� is the right approach.

Public mobilization is essential 鈥� Citizens must understand that the stakes of data exploitation beyond corporate collection also include hacking vulnerabilities and manipulative deployment. Without consumer demand for better protection and the willingness for legislators to pass the laws, regulation will not happen.

The path forward

The digital exploitation of children demands immediate action that transcends partisan divides and corporate interests. Only through coordinated regulatory reform, meaningful enforcement, and sustained public pressure can we create digital spaces in which innovation thrives without sacrificing our privacy and safety. The cost of continued inaction grows steeper each day we delay.

You can find out more on how organizations and agencies are fighting child exploitation here

Key points:

• • • USMCA at risk 鈥� Rising tariffs, political friction, and the potential 2026 review are creating uncertainty around rules of origin, market access, labor obligations, and dispute鈥憆esolution mechanisms 鈥� areas that are central to legal and tax planning.

    • Economic impact 鈥� Mexico depends on USMCA for exports, investment, and employment; and any disruption would be problematic.

    • Water as a strategic resource 鈥� The conflict over the 1944 Treaty and the new law reflect the critical importance of water usage and water rights in the bilateral agenda.

For almost 25 years before the United State-Mexico-Canada Agreement听(USMCA), it was the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) that defined the region鈥檚 economic relationship. Enacted in 1994, NAFTA removed most tariffs, encouraged foreign investment, and integrated supply chains across North America, especially in manufacturing, automotive production, and agriculture. This integration helped transform Mexico into a major export platform and contributed to North America鈥檚 emergence as a competitive economic bloc.

Over time, however, NAFTA drew criticism, particularly in the US, where concerns grew about trade imbalances, worsening labor conditions, and the agreement鈥檚 ability to address modern challenges such as . These political pressures set the stage for renegotiation and ultimately produced the USMCA, a more modern but also more politically sensitive framework.

The current chaotic environment around tariffs and trade suggests that these rules in North America may again be subject to revision. Understanding how tariffs, political dynamics, and resource鈥憆elated tensions interact is essential for organizations and corporations as they try to plan for the legal and tax implications that may arise as the 2026 review approaches.

A year of trade tensions

From the beginnings of Donald Trump鈥檚 second administration in January 2025, , marking the start of a more protectionist trade policy.

In March, some of those tariffs were exempted for products that comply with USMCA provisions. However, in December, President Trump declared that the US would allow the treaty to expire or seek to renegotiate it in 2026, alleging that Canada and Mexico have gained advantages to the detriment of US interests.

Not surprisingly, throughout 2025 and saw President Trump accuse Mexico of failing to comply with the 1944 Water Treaty, a historic agreement that regulates the distribution of water resources from the Bravo, Colorado, and Tijuana rivers. According to the US government, Mexico had not delivered the agreed-upon volumes, generating friction amid a political context already marked by trade disputes.

Mexico argued that prolonged droughts between 2020 and 2025 made compliance with the treaty difficult, affecting water availability in its own agricultural and urban regions. However, President Trump warned that if water flow to the US did not increase, he would impose a 5% tariff on Mexican exports, adding pressure to the bilateral relationship. Finally, after negotiations, an agreement was reached: Mexico must supply the remaining amount before 2030, which represents a significant challenge for the country鈥檚 water management.

In this context, the Mexican government promoted a structural reform to ensure compliance with the treaty and guarantee efficient resource management. On December 11, 2025, the and came into force the following day. This regulation establishes a new legal framework with three fundamental pillars:

• • • comprehensive state responsibility for water management;
    • exclusive powers for Conagua in the allocation, supervision, modification, and revocation of concessions; and
    • prohibition of concession transfers between private parties, preventing speculation and resource hoarding.

The law directly impacts strategic sectors such as agriculture, livestock, industry, and rural communities, as well as domestic services. Beyond its internal scope, this reform is interpreted as a mechanism to guarantee compliance with the Water Treaty, reduce the risk of trade sanctions, and strengthen Mexico鈥檚 position in future international negotiations.

Economic impacts and projections

For Mexico, the USMCA is not merely a trade agreement; it represents a strategic pillar for the country鈥檚 economic stability and sustained growth. Since its entry into the USMCA, Mexico has become a reliable partner in the North American region, guaranteeing its preferential access to two of the largest markets in the world. This advantage has driven foreign direct investment into the country, especially in sectors such as automotive, advanced manufacturing, agribusiness, and emerging technologies.

The importance of USMCA lies in the fact that . Without this legal framework, Mexico would face an adverse scenario because the imposition of significant tariffs would reduce the competitiveness of national products, increase supply chain costs, and directly affect job creation. The automotive sector, for example 鈥� and about 30% of manufacturing GDP in Q3 of 2025 alone and employs more than 1 million people 鈥� would be one of the hardest hit by the loss of these preferential conditions.

In addition, USMCA offers legal certainty for investors. Clear rules on intellectual property, digital trade, and dispute resolution reduce risks and encourage the arrival of foreign capital. Without this treaty, Mexico could experience an outflow of investments to other countries with more stable agreements, which would negatively impact job creation and projected economic growth.

The coming USMCA review

The possible renegotiation of USMCA, scheduled for later this year, generates uncertainty. This review process presents several possible paths for Mexico, each with distinct economic, political, and diplomatic implications. If the USMCA is successfully extended without substantial modifications, Mexico would preserve its preferential access to the US and Canadian markets, maintaining the commercial stability that supports most of its exports. This continuity would reinforce investor confidence, support job creation and stabilize diplomatic relations.

However, if no agreement is reached to extend the treaty, this absence of clarity would create uncertainty for businesses operating throughout North America. Investment decisions could be delayed, expansion plans postponed, and operating costs could rise due to increased scrutiny and customs enforcement. Further, diplomatic tensions could begin again, particularly if unilateral measures such as large tariffs are threatened again. In this environment, Mexico would need to adopt a cautious strategy focused on strengthening legal frameworks and offering targeted economic incentives to maintain its own competitiveness.

Another scenario in which the parties fail to reach consensus would activate the formal pathway toward the treaty鈥檚 expiration in 2030. While trade flows would continue in the short term, markets would begin adjusting to the anticipated end of the USMCA. This expectation could trigger a gradual relocation of investments and restructuring of supply chains, particularly in industries heavily integrated with US production networks, such as automotive manufacturing and advanced industrial sectors. Pressure on the peso, slower GDP growth, rising import costs, and early job losses would likely follow; and even if diplomatic efforts emerge to prevent severe disruption, the economic effects for Mexico would become progressively more adverse.

However, the most severe scenario involves one country withdrawing from the USMCA, which would cause the agreement to collapse for all three members. For example, if the US were to withdraw, Mexico would immediately face World Trade Organization tariffs, dramatically increasing export costs for manufactured goods and agricultural products and severely disrupting supply chains.

Clearly, any of these scenarios highlight how critical this year will be for Mexico. While a successful extension of the USMCA would support stability, attract investment, and sustain long鈥憈erm growth, a failure to reach agreements 鈥� or the withdrawal of a partner country 鈥� could reshape Mexico鈥檚 economic landscape for years to come.

You can find more of our here

Key takeaways:

• • • Shifting from engineering to architecture 鈥� Focusing solely on building better AI models and engineering solutions leads to isolated, non-reusable outputs. Instead, organizations should build AI into the broader enterprise, emphasizing reusable, machine-readable intelligence that integrates with business operations and data structures.

    • Regulation as opportunity for reusability and efficiency 鈥� Regulatory frameworks are not just compliance burdens; they also are catalysts for sustainable AI. By mandating standardized, machine-readable data, these regulations force organizations to design systems for reuse, enabling operational efficiency and scalable innovation.

    • Reusable enterprise is the path to sustainable reinvention 鈥� The future of AI leadership lies in building adaptable, reusable data and AI infrastructures. When standardized data, AI models, and regulatory compliance reinforce each other, organizations can continuously reinvent themselves, support multiple business outcomes from the same information assets, and achieve compound returns on their investments.

Across industries, executives are confronting an uncomfortable truth: AI projects are delivering outputs, not outcomes.

For years, organizations have poured time and capital into the mechanics of AI 鈥� the algorithms, the computation power, the data pipelines, and the engineering teams to support them. Yet results remain uneven. Models keep getting larger, but lasting, reusable business value hasn鈥檛 followed.

The problem isn鈥檛 the math, it鈥檚 the mindset.

Too many enterprises have tried to engineer AI into existence instead of architecting it into the enterprise. The focus has been on perfecting models, not integrating them into the broader data and operational fabric of the business. The assumption has been that a technically superior model naturally creates a competitive edge. It doesn鈥檛.

Without consistent governance, shared definitions, and reusable data structures, every AI initiative becomes its own isolated experiment. One line of business builds a credit-risk model. Another develops an environmental, social, and governance (ESG) classifier. A third deploys a generative assistant for customer support. Each team moves fast, but none build on each other鈥檚 work. The result is a proliferation of proofs of concept 鈥� impressive on paper but disconnected in practice.

For years, organizations have poured time and capital into the mechanics of AI 鈥� the algorithms, the computation power, the data pipelines, and the engineering teams to support them. Yet results remain uneven.

And this fragmentation carries a financial cost. Every new model adds complexity 鈥� new pipelines, new monitoring requirements, and additional governance checkpoints. These systems rarely scale together, and as integration demands grow, executives find themselves in a paradox: Make massive investments in AI infrastructure yet see declining agility and uncertain ROI.

The AI engineering mindset has optimized the structural parts, not the whole when it comes to a production solution set. In general, it has produced models that predict, but not organizations that learn.

In short, the AI engineering mindset has reached its limit 鈥� a sign that AI is entering sustainable growth cycles. Many leaders are beginning to realize that they don鈥檛 need more AI engineers, rather they need system designers who can embed intelligence into reusable business frameworks 鈥� all while navigating a regulatory environment increasingly defined by machine-readable data standards such as the Financial Data Transparency Act (FDTA) and Standard Business Reporting (SBR).

Regulation as catalyst, not constraint

At first glance, FDTA and SBR may appear to be just another layer of regulatory complexity. They are not. In fact, they represent one of the most powerful architectural opportunities available to organizations today.

By mandating machine-readable data standards, these frameworks force companies to design for reuse. They turn what once felt like a compliance exercise into an infrastructure strategy 鈥� one that connects regulatory requirements directly to operational efficiency. Build once. Reuse often.

For decades, compliance has been treated as a cost of doing business. Under FDTA and SBR, it can become the scaffolding of reinvention. Machine-readable, standardized data provides the foundation for models that are verifiable, shareable, and reusable across domains. Reporting ceases to be an afterthought and becomes a living data layer that fuels forecasting, stress testing, and product innovation.

When viewed through this lens, regulation isn鈥檛 an obstacle; it鈥檚 the blueprint for sustainable AI. It forces clarity, consistency, and interoperability 鈥� qualities every enterprise says it wants, but few achieve voluntarily. Regulation may finally deliver what AI engineering alone could not: The discipline of reusability.

From proofs of concept to proofs of architecture

For most organizations, AI success has been measured by the number of proofs of concept completed, or how fast a model moves into production. However, the real test of maturity isn鈥檛 how many experiments you run, it鈥檚 how easily those experiments can be scaled, reused, or extended.

That鈥檚 where the next evolution lies. We are now shifting from proofs of concept to proofs of architecture. And that means the question leaders should be asking isn鈥檛, 鈥�Did it work once?鈥� but 鈥�Can it work again, and with half the effort?鈥� Only when a single domain鈥檚 data can serve multiple regulatory, compliance, and analytical purposes, can the enterprise start to gain compound returns on its information assets.

When viewed through this lens, regulation isn鈥檛 an obstacle; it鈥檚 the blueprint for sustainable AI. It forces clarity, consistency, and interoperability 鈥� qualities every enterprise says it wants, but few achieve voluntarily.

This approach turns data from a static resource into a dynamic capability. AI is no longer something you deploy; rather, it鈥檚 something you design for reuse.

Engineering adaptability

Organizations that embrace this shift are learning to engineer adaptability rather than one-off innovation. Their data and AI systems act like interchangeable components, each capable of supporting new regulations, mergers, or market disruptions without starting from scratch.

Some industry examples of this development include:

• • • Financial services 鈥� Stress-testing data used for regulatory compliance can also inform pricing analytics and liquidity simulations, reducing cycle time between audit and strategy.
    • Healthcare 鈥� Patient outcome models built for quality reporting can be reused to predict staffing needs or optimize clinical supply chains, extending beyond compliance and into operations.
    • Legal and compliance sectors 鈥� AI used for document classification under discovery protocols can be repurposed for internal policy audits or ESG disclosure mapping, turning regulatory data into a strategic asset.
    • Manufacturing and supply chain 鈥� Sensor and maintenance data initially used for safety reporting can drive predictive production planning and carbon-emission forecasting under emerging sustainability standards.
    • Public sector and critical infrastructure 鈥� Data collected for transparency and open-data mandates can be reused to model risk exposure across utilities, cybersecurity, and climate resilience programs.

In each of these cases, the same information infrastructure supports different outcomes. That鈥檚 the hallmark of a reusable enterprise.

The above chart鈥檚 interconnected components illustrate how standardized data, reusable AI, and regulatory compliance can reinforce one another to create a continuous cycle of enterprise reinvention 鈥� standardized data supports reusable AI, which in turn enhances reporting and regulatory alignment. The result is a virtuous loop that replaces isolated projects with scalable, data-driven reinvention.

A call to reusable leadership

The next phase of digital leadership won鈥檛 be defined by how sophisticated a company鈥檚 models are, but instead by how seamlessly those models integrate into decision-making.

The leaders who succeed will be those who align AI investments with evolving regulatory and data standards. Their organizations will speak a common data language in which AI, compliance, and analytics operate within a shared architectural framework.

As FDTA and SBR converge globally, the line between compliance and competitiveness will blur. What once felt like regulatory overhead will become the foundation of reusable intelligence. Reinvention, in this sense, isn鈥檛 a campaign or initiative 鈥� it鈥檚 a discipline. This is not AI as a project; it鈥檚 AI as infrastructure and the architecture of continuous reinvention.

For executives navigating 2026鈥檚 convergence of regulation, consolidation, and automation, the difference between thriving and merely surviving will depend on whether they can build organizations that learn, adapt, and continuously reinvent themselves through data.

You can find more blog posts听by this author here

Key takeaways:

• • • Legal promise, operational gaps 鈥� The biometric CURP could streamline identity verification in legal and notary contexts but lacks training programs and designated data capture sites.

    • Balancing security and civil liberties 鈥� While intended to help locate missing persons, the CURP raises concerns over government surveillance due to broad access by security agencies.

    • Digital readiness under scrutiny 鈥� Mexico currently lacks the systems and regulatory framework to securely manage biometric data, risking identity fraud and misuse if not properly addressed.

Last July, key reforms to Mexico鈥檚 General Population Law and the General Law on Forced Disappearance were approved, marking the beginning of a transformation in the way people are officially identified in the country.

With these reforms, the biometric Unique Population Registry Code (CURP) becomes an official identification document, which is now mandatory and available in both physical and digital formats that will integrate biometric information such as fingerprints, iris scans, and photographs.

The biometric CURP will be used mainly for identity validation on digital platforms, immigration procedures, access to health services, legal processes, and to support the search for missing persons. With little time left before its implementation, doubts linger regarding how this new system will be implemented and the impact it may have, especially in the judicial and notarial areas.

To provide a professional perspective on the possible impacts, Jos茅 Ra煤l Gonz谩lez Ram铆rez, Master in Notarial Law and aspirant assigned to Notary 1 in Cuernavaca, Morelos, shared his personal perspective on what this mandate will mean for Mexico and its citizens.

Challenges and benefits in the legal and notary fields

In Mexico, there is currently no single official identification document. In the legal and notary field, the passport and voter ID card are mainly used, as they are documents issued by federal institutions that generally use greater security measures. The biometric CURP could represent a solution to this lack of a single document, offering a more reliable tool to validate people’s identity.

However, key parts of the system are still lacking that could have significant consequences. For example, there is no implementation program to train notaries on this document; and while the College of Mexican Notaries is hoping to disseminate training mechanisms in the coming months, so many areas of the system remain undefined that training at this stage could prove difficult.

Further, no designated sites have been reported for the population to go for the official capture of the biometric data that is at the heart of the system鈥檚 methodology. Finally, no official date has been defined for the mandatory use of this new CURP.

Hope or surveillance?

The biometric CURP was approved with the main objective of strengthening the search, location, and identification of missing persons in Mexico. Not surprisingly, this has raised significant government surveillance issues. And while the access to CURP is stipulated to be exclusively for search purposes, access on a consultation basis will be allowed to prosecutors, investigative bodies, and the National Intelligence Center.

This measure has generated divided opinions among Mexicans. On one hand, there is fear that it could become a tool for government surveillance as the National Guard (GN) and the Secretariat of Security and Citizen Protection (SSPC) can access individuals鈥� delicate information that will include bank and telecommunications data. On the other, it represents hope for thousands of families who have been searching for their loved ones in a country in which 42 people disappear daily on average according to the National Registry of Missing and Unlocated Persons (RNPDNO).

Master Jos茅 Ra煤l says he considers the implementation is positive, since its initial purpose is the search for missing persons. The rest of the population鈥檚 concerns, in that sense, would be 鈥渃ollateral damage,鈥� he adds.

“It is going to be an identification that, if done correctly and if the registration is adequate, will strengthen the notary鈥檚 ability to identify the person in front of them and avoid, as much as possible, a false declaration or impersonation at the moment of identification,” Jos茅 Ra煤l explains.

Is Mexico ready?

One of the greatest challenges will be Mexico鈥檚 ability to securely store and manage the vast amount of confidential data required for the biometric CURP. According to Jos茅 Ra煤l, the country currently lacks the necessary systems, infrastructure, and regulatory framework to handle this information effectively.

鈥淚f implemented correctly, this system could provide stronger safeguards against identity fraud,鈥� he explains. 鈥淗owever, without a reliable database and proper data management, it could become a serious problem.鈥�

In addition, there is uncertainty about how the data will be captured, with which population the process will begin (those over 18 years of age, or also minors), and how often the database should be cleaned. The population aged 0 to 18 poses a particularly complex challenge due to its size, which current resources and infrastructure are not equipped to handle effectively.

In the coming months, it will be crucial for the Mexican government to define the implementation mechanisms, the initial target population, and the data cleansing processes, as this will be one of the most important aspects for the success or failure of the biometric CURP.

The road ahead

Although a pilot program is currently underway in Mexico City, it is essential to establish a robust action plan for collecting population data. Likewise, a clear framework must be defined for the management, maintenance, and protection of this data, especially considering the sensitive nature of the information and the critical need to prevent misuse. Further, it is crucial to assess whether the government has the technological infrastructure required to securely store this data, or if investment in such storage capabilities will be necessary.

You can learn more about the challenges of identity verification here

Key takeaways:

• • • Strategic focus is crucial 鈥� Firms with a clear, written strategy and marketing plan are out-earning peers, and vague ambition is no longer sufficient in today’s competitive tax industry landscape.

    • Advisory services drive growth 鈥� Advisory service lines, particularly investment advisory and proactive tax planning, are expanding faster than traditional compliance work, and firms must blend recurring compliance jobs with scalable advisory to smooth revenue cyclicality and deepen client relationships.

    • Technology and leadership are keys to success 鈥� Firms must harness the power of AI, automation, and private equity to drive growth, and prioritize leadership systems, professionalization of leadership, and culture by design to endure the next decade.

If the last few years felt like standing at a crossroads for tax, audit & accounting firms, 2025 is the turn itself. Consolidation, private equity, AI, and evolving workforce expectations have tipped the profession from gradual change into a full paradigm shift. The illuminates the state of the profession. The annual report on the tax industry shows that those firms that win from here won鈥檛 simply be competent 鈥� they鈥檒l be intentional, strategically focused, and relentless about converting capacity into higher-value client impact. For tax firm leaders, the mandate is clear: Make bold, data-informed choices now or wait and watch competitors outpaced you.

What the numbers are really saying

While revenue growth has cooled from the post-pandemic highs, settling near high single digits across the market, a striking share of that growth now is being powered by mergers and acquisitions, while organic expansion is proving harder to sustain. Meanwhile, income per equity partner has still edged upward, although profit growth lags revenue as costs, partner counts, and investment outlays rise.

The standout tax firms 鈥� especially those with higher billing rates and strong staff-to-partner ratios 鈥� are combing scale, leverage, and premium pricing to widen the gap between them and competitors. The message is clear: Profitable growth now depends less on squeezing more hours and more on getting the business model right.

Indeed, the report noted several areas in which tax firms leaders need to pay special attention.

Talent: Retention is better 鈥� but capacity isn鈥檛 the same as productivity

The report reveals turnover among tax professionals has fallen to its lowest level in years, which is a positive development. Yet billable hours per professional have declined, and many teams are logging less than 1,400 hours annually.

In response, some firms are hiring to build capacity, but revenue per full-time equivalent (FTE) employees slipped for the first time in five years 鈥� a signal that headcount without redesign is a blunt instrument. Offshoring and outsourcing remain in the toolkit, especially for larger firms, but as retention improves, the hiring mix is shifting from emergency capacity to structured, strategic resourcing. The imperative is smarter workload orchestration, not more bodies.

Strategy is no longer optional

Firms with a clear, written strategy and marketing plan are out-earning their peers, the report showed. That鈥檚 not correlation by accident 鈥� it鈥檚 the compounding effect of decisive prioritization. When leaders articulate where the firm will play and how it will win, then firm investments align with strategy, pricing reflects value, and teams understand how to move the needle. Having vague ambitions is expensive, precision pays much better.

Advisory is the growth flywheel

Advisory service lines 鈥� particularly investment advisory and proactive tax planning 鈥� are expanding faster than traditional compliance. The most resilient firms are shaping portfolios that blend recurring compliance jobs with scalable advisory roles, thus smoothing revenue cyclicality and deepening client relationships. Technology is central here because it doesn鈥檛 just compress the cost of compliance work, it liberates capacity that can be redeployed into offering advice for which clients will happily pay a premium.

Private equity & technology: Forces to harness, not fear

Private equity (PE) is no longer an outlier, it鈥檚 reshaping governance, accelerating M&A, and boosting tech investment across the top end of the market. Whether you choose to partner with PE firms or compete against PE-backed platforms, you must operate with PE-grade rigor 鈥� and that means sharper KPIs, faster decision cycles, and a clearer capital allocation model.

On the tech front, AI and automation clearly are transforming tax preparation, workpaper assembly, and research 鈥� often eliminating 50% to 80% of the manual steps in defined use cases. And the top performing firms don鈥檛 just use AI just to cut costs, they turn their teams鈥� freed-up hours into advisory projects, client education, and proactive planning conversations that can fortify loyalty and margins.

Leadership & succession: Redesigned for durability

Today, partner demographics are shifting quickly. There are more younger partners, more women advancing, and more diverse paths into leadership. Non鈥慹quity roles and flexible buy鈥慽n models are becoming standard, while mandatory retirement policies are moderating to support smoother succession.

Compensation and buyout systems are maturing as committees and transparent formulas replacing opaque, personality鈥慸riven decisions. The firms that will thrive over the next decade already are professionalizing leadership the same way they professionalize client service.

The bottom line

Finally, there are several actions that smart tax firm leaders are already abandoning and others that they are strongly focusing on.

What to stop doing

• • • Managing to utilization alone 鈥� Leaders need to shift their thinking to revenue per FTE, realization, and cycle time to reflect true performance.
    • Treating offshore resources as a plug鈥慳nd鈥憄lay fix 鈥� Integrate these resources into your firm鈥檚 standard processes with clear ownership and quality assurance.
    • Waiting for 鈥減ost鈥憈ax鈥憇eason鈥� to improve systems 鈥擨mprovement is a year鈥憆ound muscle that needs to be exercised. Schedule and track system improvement it like any client deliverable.

What to double down on

• • • Focusing on client segmentation and ideal鈥慶lient fit 鈥� Politely winnow misaligned work or burdensome clients and reinvest those hours into high鈥憄otential relationships.
    • Promoting manager leverage 鈥� Equip managers with the ability to own scoping, pricing, and coaching so partners can drive market鈥慺acing growth.
    • Encouraging culture by design 鈥� Flexible work is table stakes in today鈥檚 environment. Promote what differentiates your firm, especially its clarity of mission, feedback cadence, and recognition systems.

The tax, audit & accounting profession鈥檚 fundamentals remain strong, but the rulebook has been rewritten, as the Rosenberg Report illustrates. Firm growth will increasingly come from strategy, not inertia; from advisory impact, not additional hours; and from leadership systems, not individual heroics.

Smart tax firm leaders need to treat 2026 as a pivot year for their firms. Publish the plan, price to value, operationalize AI, and convert freed-up capacity into advice offerings your clients can鈥檛 imagine running their businesses without.

Those tax firms that move first, while measuring what matters, will define the next decade of tax leadership.

For more on the current state of tax, audit & accounting firms, check out the recent 2025 State of Tax Professionals Report from the 成人VR视频 Institute here