IT Compliance For CPA Firms: The Gaps Your IT Team Won’t Tell You About

What auditors, insurers, and regulators actually expect to see when they ask you to prove your safeguards are real.

Ask most partners in a small or mid-sized CPA firm whether IT is “handling compliance,” and the answer is usually yes.

There are backups, antivirus is installed, remote access works, and an MSP says everything is fine. That may be enough to keep the firm running day-to-day, but it is not what regulators, cyber insurers, or auditors are looking for when something goes wrong.

They want proof that specific safeguards are in place, monitored, and documented, not just a general sense that the technology team is competent.

For U.S. tax and accounting firms, IT compliance is not optional or informal. The FTC Safeguards Rule treats many practices as financial institutions and expects a written, risk-based security program. The IRS reinforces this with Publication 4557 and the Written Information Security Plan (WISP) template in Publication 5708.

In a review, the questions are direct: show your current WISP, your risk assessment, and evidence that controls like MFA, encryption, backups, and monitoring are actually working. If you cannot produce that on demand, “our IT provider has it covered” stops being credible.

This article is for firm owners, partners, and administrators who are responsible for risk but do not live in security jargon. We will clarify what IT compliance really means for CPA firms, highlight the gaps that internal IT and many MSPs routinely leave open, give you specific questions to ask your providers, and show what an audit-ready IT stack looks like in practice.

By the end, you should be able to tell whether your firm is genuinely prepared for an audit, a cyber claim, or a serious incident, or whether you are relying on a story that will not survive serious scrutiny.

What IT Compliance for CPA Firms Actually Requires in 2026

IT compliance for CPA firms is no longer about having antivirus software and nightly backups. Under the FTC Safeguards Rule, IRS Publication 4557, and GLBA requirements, tax and accounting firms must maintain a written, risk-based information security program.

At a minimum, IT compliance for CPA firms requires:

1. A Written Information Security Plan (WISP)
2. A documented risk assessment updated regularly
3. Multi-factor authentication (MFA) across critical systems
4. Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) on servers and workstations
5. Encrypted and tested backups, including immutable storage
6. Vendor risk management and third-party oversight
7. Ongoing monitoring and documented incident response procedures

If your firm cannot produce documentation proving these safeguards are implemented and actively monitored, you are not compliant (regardless of what your IT provider tells you).

What IT Compliance Really Means for CPA Firms (Beyond Antivirus)

Most firms equate “IT compliance” with having the basics in place: firewalls, antivirus, backups, and maybe MFA for remote access.

Those are necessary, but regulators and insurers are looking for something very different. They expect a structured security program that is written down, tied to clear responsibilities, and backed by evidence that the controls you claim to have are actually working.

For many CPA and tax practices, the starting point is the FTC Safeguards Rule. It treats covered firms as financial institutions and requires a written information security program that is appropriate to the size and complexity of the firm and the sensitivity of client data.

That program must include risk assessments, a designated Qualified Individual, policies and procedures, vendor oversight, and ongoing monitoring, not just one-time technology projects.

The IRS takes a similar approach with its own guidance. Publication 4557 explains what “reasonable” security looks like for anyone who prepares or processes tax returns for a fee and explicitly tells firms to build a data security plan rather than relying on ad-hoc tools. Publication 5708 goes further by providing a full Written Information Security Plan template for tax and accounting practices, with sections for risk assessment, access controls, encryption, incident response, and periodic review.

In other words, the IRS expects your safeguards to live in a WISP that is actively maintained, not in a collection of invoices from your IT provider.

What Is a WISP for CPA Firms?

A Written Information Security Plan (WISP) is a formal document that outlines how a CPA firm protects taxpayer data. It includes the firm’s risk assessment, access control policies, encryption standards, vendor oversight procedures, incident response plan, and ongoing monitoring requirements.

The IRS provides a WISP template in Publication 5708, but firms are responsible for tailoring it to their specific systems and risk profile.

Cyber insurance carriers have quietly become the third force shaping IT compliance. Most current underwriting checklists for small and mid-sized businesses expect concrete controls such as multi-factor authentication across critical systems, endpoint detection and response on servers and workstations, encrypted and regularly tested backups, patch management, and an incident response plan. These requirements mirror the regulatory expectations and they come with real financial consequences, since the average cost of a data breach is now estimated at around 4.88 million dollars globally as per IBM’s 2025 Cost of a Data Breach Report.

Put simply, IT compliance for CPA firms means that:

• You have a written information security plan that follows IRS and FTC guidance, is tailored to your firm, and is kept current.
• The technical safeguards in that plan, such as MFA, encryption, EDR, backups, and logging, are actually implemented across your environment.
• Someone is accountable for regularly reviewing those safeguards, recording the results, and updating your WISP and risk assessment.
• You can produce documentation and evidence on demand for an auditor, regulator, or cyber insurance carrier.

IT teams and MSPs often focus on the second bullet only, because deploying tools is their comfort zone. Real compliance includes all four. The rest of this article looks at the gaps that usually appear when no one is responsible for the full picture.

The Compliance Gaps Your IT Team Will Not Tell You About

Most CPA firms think the big compliance risks are obvious problems like missing antivirus or outdated firewalls.

In practice, the issues that cause trouble in audits, cyber insurance reviews, and incidents are quieter. They sit in the gap between “systems are working” and “controls are documented, monitored, and provable.” That gap exists because internal IT teams and many MSPs are hired and measured on uptime, not on FTC Safeguards or IRS 4557 alignment.

Below are the specific places where CPA firms most often discover, too late, that their “we are covered” story does not hold up:

1. “We Have A WISP” That No One Uses

Many firms can produce a Written Information Security Plan on request, often a template downloaded years ago. It looks impressive on the surface, but:

• No one in leadership has read it recently.
• It does not match how the firm actually uses cloud apps, remote access, or third-party vendors.
• There is no record of reviews or updates.

IRS Publication 5708 is explicit that a WISP is meant to be a living document that reflects real risks, controls, and review cycles for tax practices, not a one-time form. If your WISP does not describe how your environment works today, regulators and insurers will treat it as if you have no plan at all.

If your Written Information Security Plan is a downloaded template that no one updates, you do not have a WISP. You have a liability with a logo on the cover.

2. Unmapped Controls and “Checkbox” Security

Most firms can list tools they use: Endpoint protection, email filtering, VPN, backups, and so on. Very few can answer a simple follow up: Which requirement does this control satisfy.

• FTC Safeguards expects you to identify and implement safeguards that control specific risks.
• IRS 4557 expects you to address threats like unauthorized access, data loss, and phishing with specific measures, not with generic statements about “strong IT.”

If your controls are not mapped to requirements, you cannot show an auditor that your program is complete. You also cannot easily see gaps. You might have great anti-malware coverage on servers, for instance, but no documented safeguard for vendor access or account termination. That is how firms end up “almost compliant” without realizing what is missing.

3. Backups That Exist But are Not Tested or Immutable

Backups are one of the few topics where every partner knows to ask questions.

Unfortunately, most firms stop at “yes, we back up every night.” That hides several common problems:

• Backups are stored on the same network as production systems, so ransomware can encrypt both.
• No regular test restores, so no one knows if the backups are valid or how long a real recovery would take.
• No immutable or versioned copies that cannot be modified by an attacker.

Cyber insurers and incident responders see this pattern often. On paper, the firm has backups. In reality, restores fail, or the only available copies are too old or too slow to keep the firm inside filing and client deadlines.

From a compliance standpoint, “we do backups” is not enough. You need a documented backup strategy that includes frequency, retention, test results, and recovery objectives that match your risk profile.

4. MFA and EDR “Almost Everywhere” Except Where it Matters Most

Multi-factor authentication and endpoint detection and response are now expected controls, not just “nice to have” add-on controls. The problem is inconsistent coverage. It is common to see:

• MFA on VPN or one cloud app, but not on email, admin accounts, or third-party portals.
• EDR on servers only, or on some workstations, with no central view of what is actually protected.

Verizon’s 2025 Data Breach Investigations Report has repeatedly shown that a majority of breaches involve a human element, such as stolen credentials or social engineering. In that context, “partial” MFA coverage or selective EDR deployment is a serious gap, because attackers only need the weakest link to gain entry.

An IT team might describe the environment as “covered” because MFA exists somewhere and the antivirus product has an EDR label. A regulator or insurer will ask where it is enforced, for which users, and how exceptions are tracked. If those answers are vague, the control is effectively not there.

5. Shadow IT and Unmanaged SaaS

Every firm now uses a mix of desktop software, hosted applications, and cloud services. The explicit stack is only part of the picture. Staff also:

• Save files to personal cloud storage when they “just need to work from home.”
• Use free e-signature tools or PDF utilities that have not been vetted.
• Sign up for niche SaaS tools that handle client information but are outside any approval process.

None of this shows up in your WISP, your vendor register, or your risk assessment. From a compliance perspective, that means you are making statements like “all client data is encrypted” or “all access is logged” while whole categories of data sit in unsanctioned services that do not meet your standards.

Shadow IT is not only a security risk. It is an integrity issue for your program. If you claim comprehensive safeguards while ignoring these usage patterns, an auditor will view the entire program as unreliable.

6. Vendor Risk and MSP Blind Spots

FTC Safeguards and most cyber insurance questionnaires focus heavily on vendor management. They expect you to:

• Know which third-parties have access to client data.
• Evaluate their security posture.
• Address them in your contracts and WISP.

Most CPA firms have a list of obvious vendors like their main hosting provider. Few have a complete register that includes niche SaaS tools, outsourced bookkeeping, or specialized tax workflow platforms. Even fewer have a standard checklist or risk review process for new vendors.

On top of that, many MSPs position themselves as “handling compliance” but will not sign or own your WISP. That leaves the firm in a strange position where the provider implements technical controls but refuses to be accountable for how those controls are described or evidenced in your program.

Most IT providers are paid to keep systems running, not to sign their name under your WISP. The gap between “systems are online” and “regulators are satisfied” is where firms get hurt.

7. Logging, Monitoring, and Incident Response On Paper Only

Many firms technically generate logs. Firewalls log, servers log, cloud services log. What they do not have is:

• Central collection of logs in one place.
• Defined alerts for suspicious activity.
• A clear owner who reviews those alerts and acts.

Incident response plans have the same problem. They often exist as a document created for a policy renewal or as part of a template WISP. Few firms run tabletop exercises or even walk through the plan with the people who would have to carry it out.

From a compliance point of view, this means you cannot honestly say you are “monitoring” your environment or “prepared” for incidents. You have tools and documents, but not a functioning monitoring and response process. That is a significant gap when regulators and insurers expect not just prevention but detection and recovery capabilities.

8. Single Point of Failure IT Person or Provider

A surprising number of firms rely heavily on one internal IT person or a small external provider who “knows where everything is.” That introduces several compliance issues at once:

• Knowledge of systems and controls is in one person’s head rather than in runbooks or documentation.
• There is limited segregation of duties, so the same person both configures and approves controls.
• If that person leaves or is unavailable during an incident, the firm has no clear path to respond.

FTC Safeguards and IRS guidance both assume that security responsibilities are defined and that the program can function independently of any single individual. If your ability to show evidence, adjust controls, or respond to a threat depends on one overworked IT contact, that is a structural compliance gap, not just a staffing risk.

9. Evidence Gaps That Sink Audits and Claims

All of these issues come together in one place: Evidence. The most damaging compliance gap in CPA firms is not a missing tool. It is the inability to prove that safeguards exist and are operating as intended. Typical examples include:

• No dated reports showing that EDR is installed and active on all endpoints in scope.
• No documentation of backup test restores, only verbal assurances.
• No record of WISP reviews, risk assessments, or security awareness training.
• No tickets or logs that show how past security issues were handled.

In every cyber insurance investigation and every serious audit, if you cannot show evidence that safeguards are implemented and monitored, regulators will assume those controls do not exist. That is usually when firms discover that “IT said it was fine” does not carry any weight with people who have to decide whether to approve a claim or sign-off on your program.

These are exactly the gaps that specialized accounting-focused platforms and providers are built to close. The next section turns this list into specific questions you can use with your current IT team or MSP to see how much risk is hiding behind your own “we are covered” story.

Questions to Ask Your IT Team to Uncover Hidden Compliance Gaps

Once you have seen how these gaps play out in other firms, the next step is to find out whether they exist in yours.

The most practical way to do that is a direct conversation with your internal IT lead or MSP, using a structured checklist instead of casual questions about “are we covered.” If your goal is to verify that IT compliance is real and not assumed, this is the recommended default starting point.

Use these questions as a CPA firm IT compliance checklist in your next IT review:

• Show me our current Written Information Security Plan and the last date it was updated. “Who is responsible for keeping it current?”
• Which specific FTC Safeguards Rule and IRS Publication 4557 requirements do you monitor, and how do you prove it?
• When was the last time we tested restoring a backup, and how long did full recovery take from that test.
• Do we have immutable or offsite backups that ransomware cannot alter, and how often are they verified.
• Which systems and users do not currently have multi-factor authentication and endpoint detection and response enabled.
• Which vendors have access to client data, and where is their risk assessment or security review documented.
• How do we detect and respond to suspicious logins or data movement today, and who owns that process.
• If we had a ransomware incident tonight, what exactly happens in the first four hours, and who makes decisions.

You can quickly gauge your position by listening to how specific and confident the answers are. The table below gives a simple benchmark:

Question	Healthy answer	Red flag answer
Show me our current WISP	“Here it is, last updated this quarter, mapped to IRS 4557 and FTC Safeguards, with a named owner.”	“I think our MSP has a copy somewhere” or “we filled out a template a few years ago.”
When did we last test backups	“We ran a full restore test last month, documented the results, and can meet our recovery time objective.”	“The backups run every night, we have never had to restore everything.”
Who does not have MFA and EDR	“Here is the report of all endpoints and accounts in scope, with any exceptions listed and tracked.”	“It should be on most users, I would have to check a few systems.”
Which vendors have access to client data	“Here is our vendor register with security reviews and contracts attached for each.”	“We have a few key vendors, but there is no single list.”

If these questions surface more red flags than clear answers, it is essential to take necessary measures to future-proof your firm against downtime and compliance gaps with the help of a managed IT and hosting provider like Verito. This is usually the point where partners decide they need a structured assessment, not another reassurance that “IT has it handled.”

What a Compliant, Audit-ready IT Stack Looks Like For CPA Firms

Up to this point, we focused on what is missing. The natural follow up is what does “good” actually look like for a 10 to 50-person CPA firm that wants to be ready for IRS and FTC questions, cyber insurance reviews, and real incidents.

A compliant, audit-ready IT environment has three layers that work together.

1. A Controlled, Central Home for Client Data

For most small and mid-sized CPA firms, the safest pattern is to give sensitive data a single, controlled home instead of scattering it across desktops, laptops, and random cloud tools. In practice, that usually means:

• A private or dedicated cloud environment hosted in audited data centers, with strong physical security, network segmentation, and documented controls.
• Core applications, such as tax software, QuickBooks, practice management, and document management, running in that environment rather than on local machines.
• Encrypted connections for every remote user, with granular access controls and centralized logging.

This centralization makes it much easier to:

• Enforce consistent safeguards, such as MFA, EDR, and backups, in one place.
• Prove to auditors and insurers where client data lives and which controls apply to it.
• Respond to incidents, because the critical systems are not scattered across unmanaged endpoints.

In a world where the FBI reports 16.6 billion dollars in cybercrime losses in a single year, up 33 percent from the year before, firms that hold client financial data on ad-hoc local systems are assuming unnecessary risk.

For many firms, a well-designed private cloud service for accounting applications becomes the anchor that the rest of the compliance program is built around.

2. Standardized, Managed Endpoints and Security Controls

A strong central environment is not enough if the endpoints that touch it are inconsistent or unmanaged. An audit-ready stack treats every workstation and laptop that accesses client data as part of the security perimeter. That typically includes:

1. Standardized builds for firm devices

• Encrypted disks by default.
• Role-based access and restricted local admin rights.
• Baseline hardening, with unnecessary services and software removed.

2. Uniform endpoint protection

• Endpoint detection and response on all servers and workstations in scope.
• Central visibility into which devices are protected, with alerts for anything that falls out of compliance.

3. Multi-factor authentication everywhere it counts

• MFA on email, remote access, practice management portals, and any admin accounts.
• A clear list of systems where MFA is enforced and a controlled process for any exceptions.

4. Backups that are designed to survive ransomware

• Regular backups of servers and critical SaaS data, including configuration states where possible.
• Immutable or write-protected copies that an attacker cannot alter.
• Documented restore tests with measured recovery times, so you can show that your stated objectives are realistic.

5. Email and web protections aligned with real threats

• Business email compromise and phishing protection tuned for financial workflows.
• Safe link and attachment scanning, plus policies for handling payment and wire instructions.

From a compliance perspective, the key is consistency and proof. It is not enough that “most” machines have EDR or that “we rolled out MFA last year.” In a mature stack, someone can immediately generate a report that shows coverage across the fleet and any exceptions that are being managed.

3. Governance, WISP, and Evidence on Top of the Stack

The final layer is what turns a secure environment into a compliant one. It is where IRS, FTC, and cyber insurance expectations converge. An audit-ready firm does four things well here:

1. Maintains a living WISP that matches reality

• The Written Information Security Plan follows the structure of IRS Publication 5708 and is tailored to how your firm actually works.
• It references real controls in your environment. If the WISP says “we enforce MFA for remote access,” there is a specific control and report that backs that up.
• It is reviewed at least annually, with changes recorded and approved by leadership.

2. Maps controls to requirements and owners

• Each significant safeguard is tied to one or more requirements in the FTC Safeguards Rule or IRS Publication 4557.
• Each safeguard has a named owner, which might be internal IT, a managed IT provider, or a hosting provider, and that ownership is written down.
• This mapping is what lets you answer questions like “which control addresses this risk” without improvising in front of an auditor.

3. Collects and reviews evidence on a schedule

• Monthly or quarterly reports on endpoint coverage, patch status, backups, access changes, and security incidents are produced and retained.
• Logs from critical systems are centralized and kept long enough to support investigations.
• Periodic reviews or internal audits are documented, including what was checked and what changed as a result.

4. Trains people and tests plans

• Staff receive regular, documented training on phishing, data handling, and incident reporting, with updated content that reflects current schemes.
• At least one tabletop exercise or simulation of a ransomware or data theft scenario is run each year, with outcomes captured and improvements assigned.

This is the layer that most IT teams and generic MSPs cannot deliver alone, because it relies on firm leadership choices, clear governance, and explicit coordination with providers. The technology stack underneath makes it possible, but the written program and evidence make it compliant.

4. From “Bad” to “Good” in Common CPA IT Compliance Areas

The table below summarizes how some of the earlier problem patterns look in a weak environment versus a strong one.

Area	What “bad” looks like	What “good” looks like
WISP and policies	Template from years ago, no review dates, does not match current systems or vendors.	WISP based on IRS 5708, updated at least annually, mapped to actual controls and signed off by leadership.
Backups and recovery	Nightly backups to local storage, no recent full restore test, no immutable copies.	Encrypted, offsite and immutable backups, documented restore tests with recovery times that meet business needs.
MFA, EDR, and endpoint control	Tools present but coverage unknown, some high risk users and systems without protection.	Centralized reporting that shows all in-scope users and devices protected, with exceptions tracked and remediated.
Vendor and SaaS risk	No complete list of vendors with client data, informal approvals, no security review.	Vendor register with security due diligence, contract clauses, and periodic review, integrated into the WISP.

For most small and mid-sized CPA firms, a unified private cloud plus managed IT stack is the most predictable option for staying aligned with IRS and FTC expectations without trying to build a full security team in-house. The key is working with a provider that understands accounting workflows and is willing to be accountable for its piece of your WISP and evidence trail, not just for uptime.

How Verito Closes The Compliance Gaps Most IT Teams Leave Open

Everything in this article so far describes gaps that come from one pattern: different vendors owning small pieces of your environment without anyone taking responsibility for compliance as a whole.

Verito is designed to close that gap by giving CPA firms a unified stack for cloud, IT, and WISP support, with clear ownership of the controls that matter in audits and cyber claims.

VeritSpace gives your tax and accounting applications a controlled home on dedicated private servers, in audited data centers, with encryption, access control, and logging built-in. Instead of trying to secure scattered desktops and ad-hoc file shares, you get a central environment that is much easier to map to IRS 4557, Publication 5708, and FTC Safeguards expectations.

VeritGuard layers managed IT and security on top of that environment. Patch management, endpoint detection and response, multi-factor authentication, backups, and monitoring are handled as a continuous service rather than occasional projects. VeritGuard also focuses on the part most MSPs avoid evidence by producing the reports, logs, and documentation that show your safeguards are actually in place. VeritCertified support metrics close the loop by proving that tickets and security issues are resolved quickly instead of quietly piling up.

VeritShield WISP turns this stack into a written program. Verito’s team works with your leadership to build and maintain a WISP that follows IRS Publication 5708, maps real controls to regulatory requirements, and assigns clear ownership between the firm and Verito. You are not left trying to retrofit templates to an environment your IT provider will not sign-off on.

For firms that want one accountable partner instead of three partially aligned vendors, VeritComplete, the combined cloud hosting and IT platform for accounting firms, is usually the best fit. If your goal is to stop guessing about compliance and have a single partner whose stack is built around IRS and FTC expectations from day one, VeritComplete is the most straightforward default choice.

Next Steps if You Suspect Compliance Gaps

If you are reading this and realizing your firm cannot easily produce a current WISP, mapped controls, and solid evidence, you are not alone.

Most small and mid-sized CPA firms discover compliance gaps only when a carrier, auditor, or incident forces the issue. The good news is that you can turn this into a structured project instead of a vague worry.

Start by scheduling a focused review with your internal IT lead or MSP, using the questions from the earlier checklist. Capture the answers in writing, not just as verbal assurances. Pay particular attention to anything that sounds like “I think,” “we should,” or “I will have to check” when the question is about backups, MFA, EDR coverage, or vendor lists. Those phrases usually point straight at gaps.

Next, pull your current Written Information Security Plan and compare it against reality. Check the last update date, who is listed as responsible, and whether it reflects your actual applications, cloud providers, vendors, and work-from-home patterns. If the WISP feels like it describes a different firm, treat that as a priority issue, not as a paperwork problem.

From there, decide how you will close the gaps. Some firms have internal capability to tighten controls, run restore tests, and document everything properly if they have a clear plan. Others conclude that it is more realistic to move to a unified stack where hosting, IT, and WISP support are all aligned. The right answer depends on your size, risk tolerance, and appetite for building in-house security expertise.

What you cannot afford is to simply note the gaps and do nothing. That is the scenario regulators, insurers, and plaintiffs’ attorneys see too often, and it rarely ends well for the firm.

If your firm wants one accountable partner rather than juggling separate hosting, MSP, and compliance consultants, VeritComplete is designed for exactly that situation. It combines VeritSpace, VeritGuard, and VeritShield WISP into a single platform that bakes IRS and FTC expectations into how your environment runs.

Closing the IT Compliance Gaps in Your CPA Firm

Most CPA firms are not ignoring IT compliance on purpose.

They are relying on a comfortable story: the systems work, the MSP is competent, and nothing bad has happened yet. Regulators, cyber insurers, and attackers all operate on a different story, one that cares about written plans, mapped controls, and evidence that safeguards work when tested.

The gap between those two realities is where firms lose money, time, and reputation.

A compliant, audit-ready environment is not about buying the most sophisticated tools. It is about centralizing client data in a controlled platform, standardizing how endpoints are secured, and running a living WISP that matches the environment and has owners on both the firm and provider-side. For many small and mid-sized practices, the most predictable option is to work with an accounting-focused cloud and IT partner that is willing to help design, operate, and evidence the whole program, not just keep servers online.

If your goal is to stop guessing about IT compliance, the next step is simple. Use the questions in this article to test how solid your current position really is. If you do not like the answers, move from reassurance to responsibility, either by tightening your internal program or by shifting to a platform that treats compliance as a design requirement instead of an afterthought.

The firms that do this before an incident or audit are the ones that stay in control when everyone else is scrambling.

---

TL;DR

• Most CPA firms rely on “IT has it covered,” but regulators, insurers, and auditors look for a current WISP, mapped controls, and hard evidence, not verbal assurances.
  
• Real IT compliance for accounting practices is built around FTC Safeguards, IRS Publication 4557, and the IRS WISP template in Publication 5708, plus cyber insurance requirements.
  
• The biggest gaps are hidden ones such as dead template WISPs, untested or non immutable backups, partial MFA and EDR coverage, shadow IT, weak vendor management, and missing evidence.
  
• A practical way to uncover issues is to use a structured question list with your IT team or MSP and compare their answers to “healthy” and “red flag” examples.
  
• An audit ready IT stack usually combines a controlled private cloud, standardized and managed endpoints, and a living WISP with mapped controls, assigned owners, and regular evidence collection.
  
• For most small and mid sized firms, a unified cloud and managed IT platform that is built around accounting workflows and compliance is the most predictable option.
  
• If your current provider cannot explain in writing how they support your WISP and regulatory expectations, it is time to rethink how your firm approaches IT compliance.

---

FAQs

---

IT Compliance for CPA Firms: Executive Summary

In practical terms, IT compliance for CPA firms means:

• Your WISP reflects your real technology environment.
• Your risk assessment is current and documented.
• MFA and endpoint protection are enforced across all users.
• Backups are encrypted, immutable, and regularly tested.
• Vendor access is reviewed and controlled.
• Logs are monitored and incidents are documented.

Compliance is not about installing tools. It is about being audit-ready on demand.

If your firm cannot produce evidence of these controls immediately, your compliance posture is incomplete.