Connect with us

Accounting

For AI governance, execution lags far behind ambition

Published

on

While organizations understand AI governance and controls are important, actual implementation lags significantly behind, a gap attributed to problems not in technology but leadership and culture. 

Governance, risk and compliance solutions provider AuditBoard came to this conclusion as a result of a survey it conducted which found that over 80% of respondents said their organizations are either very or extremely concerned about AI risks but, at the same time, only 25% said they have fully implemented an AI governance program. Meanwhile, though 92% of respondents said they are confident in their visibility into third-party AI use, just 67% of organizations report conducting formal, AI-specific risk assessments for third-party models or vendors. That leaves roughly one in three firms relying on external AI systems without a clear understanding of the risks they may pose.

“AI systems are being deployed faster than oversight structures can keep up, leading to ad hoc governance, uneven accountability, and increased exposure to legal, ethical, and operational failures,” said the report. 

AI governance

And even when an organization does have a governance program, AuditBoard said the quality can vary greatly. For example, while organizations are prioritizing in things like AI usage monitoring (45%), risk assessments (44%), and third-party model evaluations (40%), practices that AuditBoard said are foundational—such as usage logging, model documentation maintenance and enforcement of access controls for AI systems—lags behind. 

“These are sophisticated processes that require  accurate data inputs, strong accountability frameworks, and well-defined governance policies. And yet, many of the building blocks that support such efforts—things like model inventories, usage logging, and approval workflows—are either missing or inconsistently applied,” said the report. 

Compounding problems is the fact that some organizations are automating these governance processes before routine controls are in place to support them, meaning that, rather than building upward from strong foundational practices, many organizations are trying to scale governance from the top down. 

“It’s an approach that risks embedding inconsistency, rather than eliminating it. What emerges is a kind of governance illusion: Automation gives the appearance of control, but without foundational processes and clear ownership, it may simply replicate gaps at scale,” said the report. 

This underscores another finding that fewer than 15% thought that the main problem was the technology itself; more often, respondents cited lack of clear leadership (44%), lack of internal expertise (39%) and limited resources (34%) as the main factors. 

“Most organizations are not struggling to find dashboards or compliance software; they’re struggling to determine who’s accountable, how teams should coordinate, and what workflows need to change. The issue is less about capability and more about clarity,” said the report. 

Overall, AuditBoard said organizations should move beyond principles and into execution by defining how policies apply to real-world scenarios (e.g. which teams review AI use cases, how model performance is monitored, and what happens when issues arise), with governance embedded into daily decisions, not just documents. Because AI governance isn’t owned by one function, the report said risk, compliance, product, legal, security, and engineering all need a seat at the table as well. If an organization does choose to automate its AI controls, they should do so strategically, not prematurely, with a focus on core controls like AI inventories, access approvals, and documentation standards before other steps. Considering even the best frameworks fail without user understanding, organizations are also urged to roll out training tailored by function and seniority. Finally, AuditBoard said organizations need to shift from annual reviews to continuous  updates, with teams structured to respond to new tools, risks, and regulatory changes as they emerge.

The survey included 412 respondents sourced from a leading global online panel provider. They were selected from the panel based on geographic and role-based quotas, as well as screening questions based on role in audit and compliance, decision-making role, company size, and how long they have been in their audit role. All participants were Audit, GRC, or IT decision-makers and purchase influencers working at companies with annual revenue of at least $100 million USD. Selected respondents were further screened based on self reported audit and compliance knowledge and attentiveness to survey questions.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Accounting

Continuous Auditing Transforms Corporate ERPs

Published

on

continuous auditing transforms corporate erps

As corporate accounting departments cross the threshold into late July 2026, the adoption of continuous, automated auditing systems has reached a definitive turning point. Driven by advances in artificial intelligence and deep integration with modern Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) platforms, leading finance organizations are moving away from traditional, periodic post-hoc audits in favor of real-time, 100% transactional verification. This technological transition is redefining internal control environments, reducing compliance costs, and eliminating the structural delays inherent in legacy quarterly closing processes.

Unlike traditional auditing frameworks that rely on statistical sampling—a process that inevitably leaves operational blind spots—continuous auditing software monitors operational data feeds continuously. Every purchase order, electronic invoice, payroll disbursement, and cross-border wire transfer is automatically cross-referenced against established corporate governance parameters, regulatory tax schedules, and anti-fraud algorithms in real time. Anomalies or unauthorized ledger entries are flagged instantly, allowing internal audit teams to investigate and remediate compliance gaps immediately rather than months after the close of a financial period.

The implications for executive financial management are far-reaching. By embedding continuous verification directly into daily transaction workflows, chief financial officers gain uninterrupted visibility into the organization’s true financial standing. Real-time balance sheet auditing eliminates the severe operational bottlenecks associated with month-end and quarter-end financial reconciliations, freeing accounting professionals to focus on strategic financial modeling, tax planning, and capital allocation rather than manual data entry and spreadsheet consolidation.

However, implementing continuous auditing requires accounting leadership to invest heavily in data governance and technical upskilling. Internal audit teams must evolve from manual ledger reviewers into system architects capable of auditing complex algorithms and validating automated data pipelines. Accounting firms and corporate controllers that master continuous auditing will establish a resilient compliance framework capable of meeting stringent international regulatory standards with total transparency.

Continue Reading

Accounting

U.S. Imposes New 50% Tariffs on Canadian Imports Under Rare Legal Provision

Published

on

U.S. Imposes New 50% Tariffs on Canadian Imports Under Rare Legal Provision

WASHINGTON — In a major escalation of cross-border trade friction, U.S. President Donald Trump has signed executive orders imposing new 50% tariffs on a wide selection of Canadian exports, citing discriminatory practices by Ottawa targeting American auto, dairy, and beverage industries.

The new duties, announced Monday, will take effect in 30 days. They target a broad spectrum of consumer and industrial goods—ranging from wine, liquor, and milk products to commercial cement, furniture, clothing, and hockey equipment.

Untested Legal Mechanism

To enact the sweeping measures, the administration invoked Section 338 of the Tariff Act of 1930—a rarely used legal provision allowing the executive branch to levy additional tariffs of up to 50% on foreign nations deemed to discriminate against U.S. commerce.

White House officials noted that Section 338 addresses trade discrimination rather than national security or economic emergencies. The move comes months after prior global emergency tariffs faced legal challenges in domestic courts, signaling Washington’s pivot toward alternate statutory authorities to maintain import duties.

Senior administration officials briefed reporters that the measure directly responds to Canadian provincial bans on U.S. alcohol, restrictions on American vehicle exports, and import quota disparities affecting U.S. dairy and cheese producers relative to third-party trading partners.

“While the administration continues to secure reciprocal trade agreements globally, Canada retaliated against efforts to protect domestic industry,” U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer stated.

USMCA Impact and Carve-Outs

Significantly, the newly ordered 50% duties will apply to designated items even if they otherwise comply with the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA).

However, the administration confirmed key targeted exemptions:

  • Energy products (including oil and natural gas)
  • Potash and critical minerals
  • Fish and seafood
  • Goods already governed by sector-specific duties (such as existing steel and aluminum tariffs)

Administration representatives emphasized that the tariffs do not stem from recent disputes concerning drifting Canadian wildfire smoke, noting that policy options regarding environmental spillover remain under separate review.

Canadian Response and Market Reaction

Following the White House announcement, the Canadian dollar experienced a sharp decline against the U.S. dollar, falling approximately 0.4% during evening trading.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney issued a statement emphasizing that Canada’s earlier counter-duties had merely matched previous U.S. trade actions. “Canada stands ready to engage intensively to address outstanding issues with the U.S. to the mutual benefit of our citizens,” Carney stated, pointing to detailed proposals Ottawa submitted to modernize the USMCA framework.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford took a firmer stance, urging a “dollar-for-dollar” reciprocal response if the measures go into effect on August 19.

With a 30-day implementation window before the duties officially lock in, industry associations and trade groups on both sides of the border are calling for urgent bilateral negotiations to avert further supply chain disruption across North America.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Automated Continuous Auditing: Transforming Compliance and Real-Time Financial Oversight

Published

on

Transforming Compliance and Real-Time Financial Oversight

The traditional accounting paradigm—defined by periodic monthly closures and post-hoc annual audits—is rapidly giving way to continuous, automated financial oversight. As of July 2026, forward-thinking accounting practices and multinational corporate finance departments are leveraging continuous auditing systems powered by advanced machine learning models. These systems monitor operational transactions in real time, shifting audit methodologies from sample-based post-analysis to absolute, 100% transaction-level verification.

The operational advantages of continuous auditing are transformative. Standard auditing procedures historically relied on statistical sampling, which, despite rigorous methodology, inherently left gaps where anomalies or fraudulent transactions could go undetected for months. Modern continuous auditing platforms integrate directly with enterprise resource planning (ERP) databases, instantly cross-referencing purchase orders, invoices, bank feeds, and tax records. Any deviation from established control parameters or unusual transaction behavior triggers immediate flags for internal audit teams, dramatically reducing detection lag from quarters to seconds.

Beyond fraud prevention, continuous auditing fundamentally alters internal reporting and decision-making. Executive leadership no longer has to wait weeks after the close of a quarter to evaluate precise financial standing; real-time verified ledger data provides an uninterrupted view of operating margins, tax liabilities, and cash flow dynamics. This real-time visibility enables corporate controllers to adjust capital allocation strategies dynamically, mitigating liquidity constraints and capitalizing on emerging commercial opportunities far more efficiently than competitors bound to legacy reporting cycles.

However, implementing continuous auditing requires accounting professionals to acquire new analytical capabilities. The role of the auditor is evolving from manual data reconciliation toward system validation, algorithmic model governance, and strategic risk interpretation. Accounting firms and corporate finance departments must invest in continuous technical education, ensuring that audit staff possess the data engineering skills necessary to design, maintain, and evaluate complex automated compliance systems.

Continue Reading

Trending