Connect with us

Accounting

PCAOB offers guidance on Form AP

Published

on

The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board staff released a new publication Thursday aimed at helping firms complete Form AP.

PCAOB-registered audit firms are required to submit Form AP, Auditor Reporting of Certain Audit Participants, to disclose the names of engagement partners and other accounting firms that participated in their audits of public companies. Form AP disclosures reveal exactly who has participated in the audits of public companies, and omissions on such forms account for a large number of inspection deficiencies from PCAOB inspectors..

The new staff publication, Audit Focus: Form AP, includes reminders for auditors from the PCAOB rules, standards, and staff guidance related to Form AP; the PCAOB staff’s perspectives on common deficiencies; and good practices observed by the staff, such as the use of structured templates, guidance on how to complete the templates, or policies mandating review of Form AP information to ensure accuracy and completeness.

The PCAOB staff is continuing to spot a large number of deficiencies related to auditors’ Form AP filings. Those deficiencies include inaccurately reporting whether another accounting firm contributed 5% or more of total audit hours, omitting or incorrectly reporting the percentage of total audit hours contributed by a firm, or providing the incorrect date of the audit report, as well as other problems.

For each audit report that they issue for a public company, PCAOB-registered audit firms are supposed to file a Form AP. Through this form, audit firms disclose key information specific to the audit, such as the engagement partner responsible for the audit, details about the audit report, and the participation of other accounting firms in the audit. Such disclosures enable investors, audit committees, and other stakeholders to understand exactly who has participated in the audits of public companies and how the audit work is distributed among those participants.

The report comes only days after the PCAOB sanctioned nine firms in KPMG’s network in countries around the world, including Australia, Brazil, Canada, Israel, Italy, Mexico, South Korea, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, and imposed over $3.3 million in fines against them. KPMG is reportedly mulling a reorganization of its global structure in which it will merge several of the member firms in different countries, according to the Financial Times and The Wall Street Journal, reducing the number of units from over 120 to 30 or 40 by the end of 2026.

PCAOB board member Christina Ho criticized the sanctions against the KPMG in a LinkedIn post Tuesday and indicated that she didn’t think the Form AP violations were such a big deal.

“Today, the PCAOB’s hostility toward the public auditing profession has reached new heights,” she wrote, adding a disclaimer that these only represent her views and not the rest of the board. “The chest-thumping news release below stated that PCAOB sanctions 9 foreign affiliates of a Global Network Firm for violations of PCAOB Rules and Standards, including Quality Control. Based on the headline, you would think that these firms committed egregious audit quality violations. NOT SO. These violations were mostly for filing inaccurate form APs, and in many cases, the foreign affiliates filed amended form APs after identifying the inaccuracies themselves. In my view, these violations are akin to parking ticket violations, and the sanctions are punitive and excessive. I also wonder what the opportunity costs are when we spend our resources on this type of violation. Furthermore, it appears that PCAOB is determined to spread an exaggerated narrative suggesting that public company audits and the auditing profession cannot be trusted. This binary, chest-thumping approach of bashing the profession in the name of investor protection will only lead to more polarization and distrust.”

Continue Reading

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