Analyses of data associated with 1376 taxonomic innovations (703 new taxa, 673 new combinations and replacement names) published from 2018–2020 are presented. Taxonomic contributions represented 14.2% of the published literature for the period. Most registration numbers for new names were obtained from MycoBank, suggesting the community has coalesced behind this resource. The overwhelming majority of new taxa (85.1%) and combinations (94.1%) involved crustose lichens and lichenicolous fungi. But lichenicolous fungi, regarded as a major source of undetected biodiversity, represented less than a fifth of innovations. More than half of new taxa were described from Asia and South America. Fewer than half (39%) of new taxa were published with molecular data, mostly from the ITS region but often in combination with data from additional loci. The majority of new taxa were based on small numbers of specimens (34.1% from one specimen, 69.2% from five or fewer) from few locations (44.4% from one location, 80.7% from five or fewer). Although a large number of identification keys were published, many new taxa were described with limited ecological data, distribution data or range maps, or discussion of similar species or phenotypic variation. Many innovations based on previously published names did not cite the nomenclatural type (67.7%) and less than a tenth of all such names were newly typified. Based on these results a best practices framework is presented.