Accounting
Enforcement vs. progress: Audit reform amid heavy regulation
High-profile enforcement activity is beginning to undermine the trust that the audit profession has earned over more than a century of diligent work. However, the historically large fines are not indicators of a degradation in audit quality. Instead, key audit quality indicators point to significant improvements in audit quality.
Recent enforcement actions by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board appear to prioritize administrative burdens and punitive measures over substantive improvements in audit quality. As these multimillion-dollar fines make their way into headlines of mainstream news, the public perception of auditors and audit quality erodes.
Our profession supports the need to root out bad actors and poor quality, while ensuring the integrity of audits. However, the PCAOB’s current enforcement-first, overly prescriptive guidance leads to excessive administrative costs and enforcement measures that do little to enhance audit quality. Instead, this approach contributes to an atmosphere of hostility that forces staff and prospective auditors to think twice about their engagements and leadership roles in audit firms. This shift harms our profession — which is already struggling to attract and retain talent, even at the partner level — and also the broader capital markets.
Audit quality indicators already showed significant improvement before the PCAOB’s recent push for greater enforcement. For example, the Big Four audit firms have maintained relatively low deficiency rates, and the number of financial restatements has decreased dramatically in recent years. The percentage of material restatements, “Big R” restatements, fell from 28% to 18% from 2013 to 2022, reflecting better adaptation to new reporting standards and internal controls by public companies and their auditors, according to the
Despite these gains, the PCAOB’s aggressive enforcement agenda overshadows the profession’s achievements. In the first half of 2024 alone, the PCAOB levied nearly $35 million in penalties — more than the combined total of penalties imposed in the previous four years. Just 10 years ago, the PCAOB levied fines totaling $85,000. In the span of a decade, that makes for an astonishing increase of over 40,000%. Prior to current PCAOB Chair Erica Williams, the average yearly fines from the board were approximately $2.6 million. From 2022 to the first half of 2024, the average annual total of fines sits at roughly $22 million.
This spike in fines reflects an ‘enforcement-first’ mentality that focuses on punishment rather than collaboration and guidance to improve quality.
Growing enforcement activity and eroded trust, despite improving audit quality
If we look more closely, many of these fines are imposed for technicalities, such as lapses in documentation, communication, or not filing a Form AP 60 in a timely fashion. Accounting firms should avoid these errors, yes, but the current regime punishes them with disproportionate severity.
Rather than providing firms an opportunity to remediate without financial penalties, the PCAOB’s aggressive actions discourage professionals from continuing in the auditing field, undermining the goal of promoting high audit quality. The effectiveness of the board’s regulatory oversight should be measured by improvements in audit quality, not the dollar figure it tallies in fines.
High-profile enforcement actions often overshadow the diligent, day-to-day work that most auditors perform, and these incidents do not reflect the overall health of the profession. Yet still, enforcement activity remains elevated.
Doing more with less: Guidance, technology and people
Since COVID, audit professionals are being asked to do more with less. More work, greater scrutiny, and harsher penalties exacerbate the profession’s talent pipeline challenges. Recent PCAOB proposals suggest a drastic expansion of audit scope — including the proposal on noncompliance with laws and regulations, for example, that would require auditors to provide greater assurance across areas typically outside the scope of a financial statement audit, which would result in significant increases in time and effort, and significantly increased audit fees.
While these regulations aim to increase trust and accountability, they can often create challenges for firms trying to comply. This is particularly true for smaller firms, which may struggle to meet new demands due to limited resources. Larger firms, while more equipped to adapt, must still weigh the balance of compliance against delivery of high-quality audits, and even some of the largest auditors have backed out due to the risk of over-zealous PCAOB enforcement.
Many firms see emerging technologies like artificial intelligence and automated analytics tools as a way to streamline processes and alleviate some aspects of increasing scrutiny and workloads. These innovations have the potential to revolutionize audits by automating data-heavy tasks and allowing auditors to focus on deeper, more complex analysis.
While the technology exists, many firms face challenges in integrating it at the speed and scale needed, in part due to a regulatory environment that pushes for enforcement instead of innovation. I believe that with a proper refocusing on progressive policy and support in regards to audit technology, we can create a framework that leads to fast adoption of technology to not only support auditors, but substantially improve audit quality.
A balanced approach to reform
Voices within the profession already call for a more sensible approach to reform. Christina Ho, a PCAOB board member, advocates for practical standards that enhance audit quality without imposing undue burdens on firms. These perspectives, echoed by the Pennsylvania Institute of CPAs, stress the importance of balancing improved processes with realistic operational expectations.
Moving forward, the audit profession must navigate the fine line between regulation, enforcement and innovation. If current regulatory pressures continue unchecked, they could drive professional talent away, threatening the diversity and competitiveness of the field. By supporting policies that prioritize both innovation and practicality, the audit profession can continue to thrive in a rapidly changing environment.
The House unanimously passed four bipartisan bills Tuesday concerning taxes and the Internal Revenue Service that were all
- H.R. 1152, the Electronic Filing and Payment Fairness Act, sponsored by Rep. Darin LaHood, R-Illinois, Suzan Delbene, D-Washington, Randy Feenstra, R-Iowa, Brad Schneider, D-Illinois, Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pennsylvania and Jimmy Panetta, D-California. The bill would apply the “mailbox rule” to electronically submitted tax returns and payments to allow the IRS to record payments and documents submitted to the IRS electronically on the day the payments or documents are submitted instead of when they are received or reviewed at a later date. The AICPA believes this would offer clarity and simplification to the payment and document submission process while protecting taxpayers from undue penalties.
- H.R. 998, the Internal Revenue Service Math and Taxpayer Help Act, sponsored by Rep. Randy Feenstra, R-Iowa, and Brad Schneider, D-Illinois, which would require notices describing a mathematical or clerical error to be made in plain language, and require the Treasury to provide additional procedures for requesting an abatement of a math or clerical error adjustment, including by telephone or in person, among other provisions.
- H.R. 517, the Filing Relief for Natural Disasters Act, sponsored by Rep. David Kustoff, R-Tennessee, and Judy Chu, D-California. The process of receiving tax relief from the IRS following a natural disaster typically must follow a federal disaster declaration, which can often come weeks after a state disaster declaration. The bill would provide the IRS with authority to grant tax relief once the governor of a state declares either a disaster or a state of emergency and expand the mandatory federal filing extension under Section 7508(d) of the Tax Code from 60 days to 120 days, providing taxpayers with more time to file tax returns after a disaster.
- H.R. 1491, the Disaster related Extension of Deadlines Act, sponsored by Rep. Gregory Murphy, R-North Carolina, and Jimmy Panetta, D-California, would extend the amount of time disaster victims would have to file for a tax refund or credit (i.e., the lookback period) by the amount of time afforded pursuant to a disaster relief postponement period for taxpayers affected by major disasters. This legislative solution would place taxpayers on equal footing as taxpayers not impacted by major disasters and would afford greater clarity and certainty to taxpayers and tax practitioners regarding this lookback period.
“The AICPA has long supported these proposals and will continue to work to advance comprehensive legislation that enhances IRS operations and improves the taxpayer experience,” said Melanie Lauridsen, vice president of tax policy and advocacy for the AICPA, in a statement Tuesday. “We are pleased to work closely with each of these Representatives on common-sense reforms that will benefit taxpayers, tax practitioners and tax administration and we’re encouraged by their passage in the House. We look forward to continuing to work with Congress to improve the taxpayer experience.”
The bills were also included in a recent Senate
The House also passed two other tax-related bills Tuesday that weren’t endorsed in the recent AICPA letter.
- H.R. 1155, Recovery of Stolen Checks Act, sponsored by Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-New York, would require the IRS to create a process for taxpayers to request a replacement via direct deposit for a stolen paper check. If a check is determined to be stolen or lost, and not cashed, a taxpayer will receive a replacement check once the original check is cancelled, but many taxpayers are having their replacement checks stolen as well. Taxpayers who have a check stolen are then unable to request that the replacement check be sent via direct deposit. The bill would require the Treasury to establish processes and procedures under which taxpayers, who are otherwise eligible to receive an amount by paper check in replacement of a lost or stolen paper check, may elect to receive such amount by direct deposit.
- H.R. 997, National Taxpayer Advocate Enhancement Act, sponsored by Rep. Randy Feenstra, R-Iowa, would prevent IRS interference with National Taxpayer Advocate personnel by granting the NTA responsibility for its attorneys. In advocating for taxpayer rights, the National Taxpayer Advocate often requires independent legal advice. But currently, the staff members hired by the National Taxpayer Advocate are accountable to internal IRS counsel, not the Taxpayer Advocate, creating a potential conflict of interest to the detriment of taxpayers. The bill would authorize the National Taxpayer Advocate to hire attorneys who report directly to her, helping establish independence from the IRS.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith, R-Missouri, applauded the bipartisan House passage of the various bills, which had been unanimously passed by the committee.
“President Trump was elected on the promise of finally making the government work better for working people,” Smith said in a statement Tuesday. “This bipartisan legislation helps fulfill that mandate and makes improvements to tax administration that will make it easier for the American people to file their taxes. Those who are rebuilding after a natural disaster particularly need help filing taxes, which is why this set of bills lightens the load for taxpayers in communities struck by a hurricane, tornado or some other disaster. With Tax Day just a few days away, we must look for common-sense, bipartisan ways to make filing taxes less of a hassle.”
By streamlining tasks such as risk assessment, control testing, and reporting, gen AI has the potential to increase efficiency across the entire SOX lifecycle.
House passes tax administration bills
Trump tariffs’ effect on consumer prices debated by economists
In the blogs: Many hats
New 2023 K-1 instructions stir the CAMT pot for partnerships and corporations
The Essential Practice of Bank and Credit Card Statement Reconciliation
Are American progressives making themselves sad?
-
Economics5 days agoPCE inflation February 2025:
-
Personal Finance6 days agoStudent loans could be managed by the Small Business Administration
-
Economics6 days agoWhite House denials over the Signal snafu ring hollow
-
Economics5 days agoYoung Americans are losing confidence in economy, and it shows online
-
Personal Finance6 days agoMillions of student loan borrowers past-due after bills restarted: Fed
-
Economics4 days agoConsumer sentiment worsens as inflation fears grow, University of Michigan survey shows
-
Accounting4 days agoIRS sets new initiative with banks to uncover fraud
-
Personal Finance1 week agoTreasury scraps reporting rule for U.S. small business owners