Connect with us

Accounting

PCAOB warns auditors about AI and PE

Published

8 months ago

on

Public Company Accounting Oversight Board officials are sounding a cautious note about the spread of artificial intelligence technology private equity funding at auditing firms.

Speaking Tuesday at the AICPA Conference on Current SEC and PCAOB Developments in Washington, D.C., PCAOB acting chair George Botic acknowledged the opportunities and challenges offered by both AI and PE, as he did in a recent interview with Mark Firiedlich for Accounting Today.

“From what I have observed at this early stage of its adoption by accounting firms, AI has the potential to transform how audits are performed and to improve the quality of audits,” he said at the conference. “For example, AI can already enhance risk assessment and evidence gathering by making it possible to efficiently analyze entire populations in certain scenarios, which can significantly reduce the risk of missing irregularities or unusual patterns. Overall, this points to a future where AI helps automate manual processes and thereby enables auditors to focus on areas that require judgment. Auditors may “find their work enriched. Tasks that are tedious have been [or will be] outsourced to machines.”

But Botic also sees a negative side to AI with the potential erosion of critical thinking, skepticism and professional judgment by auditors. “However, research has also shown that a growing dependence on AI has the potential to erode qualities that go to the core of what it means to be an effective auditor,” he said. “A recent MIT study found that using AI poses a risk to critical thinking, even going as far to suggest that the usage of large language models could actually harm learning.

“AI may also threaten auditors’ professional skepticism and judgment,” Botic added. “There are academic studies that outline the risk of becoming reliant on agentic AI, warning auditors of placing too much trust in technology outputs. These risks will also necessitate the identification of new and different paths for junior auditors to gain those important skills either from the academic community or after they are employed by accounting firms.”

Private equity issues

Botic sees pluses and minuses with private equity investments in accounting firms in the U.S. and abroad. 

“In terms of opportunity, private equity capital arguably provides many benefits,” he said. “It can be used to assist firms with recruitment, retention, and succession planning as well as to finance investments in technologies including AI. Private equity investments can also accelerate a firm’s growth by funding the expansion of existing business lines of service, the entrance into new business areas, and the acquisition of other firms through individual purchases or as roll-up transactions. By increasing firm capacity, modernizing audit tools with advanced technologies, and creating efficiencies, these opportunities have the potential to enhance a firm’s ability to consistently perform quality audits.”

However, as with AI, he sees risks with PE as well. “But these opportunities also come with risks that, I believe, warrant further discussion and input from all market participants,” said Botic. “Private equity firms are ultimately seeking returns for investors by focusing on accelerating growth and looking ahead to selling their interests to another buyer in the private or public markets. To be clear, seeking returns for investors is not inherently problematic, but that short-term focus may, over time, begin to shift firm incentives so that profitability outweighs audit quality.”

He cited a recent study by Accountancy Europe that warned about the pressure for increased profitability that could lead to cost-cutting, aggressive fee negotiations and rapid expansion strategies by PE-funded auditing firms that could put strains on the staff and cause them to spend less time to exercise professional judgment and skepticism and weaken their controls and independence.

“Moreover, consolidation driven by private equity roll-ups may reduce the number of accounting firms performing public company audits, thereby concentrating market power and potentially leaving smaller public companies with far fewer auditors competing to provide them with audits,” said Botic. “Both AI and private equity investments in accounting firms carry the potential to truly reshape the profession. Yet these opportunities come with clear challenges to ensure that overreliance on AI and the pressures of private equity do not jeopardize audit quality.”

Botic compared the PCAOB to one of his favorite Christmas movies, “It’s a Wonderful Life.”

“Similar to George Bailey’s experience of seeing a world without him in it, a world without the PCAOB would not include the following three pillars of investor protection,” he said.

PE warning

He was followed by another PCAOB official who sounded similar warnings. 

“Keep an eye on the rise of private equity firms investing in audit firms,” said Christine Gutia, director of the PCAOB’s Division of Registration and Inspections. “This is an area that we are paying careful attention to. Certainly private equity has poured billions of dollars of new capital into CPA firms over the last several years. Of the more than 90 significant PE-related transactions and firm mergers since 2020, more than half of those deals occurred so far this year, 2025. As others have shared, these investments present both opportunities and risks for audit quality. For example, private equity can fund succession planning, finance technology investments and support talent recruitment. It can help firms grow and potentially improve quality controls, and thus audit quality. Of course, investments by private equity firms can be especially appealing to smaller firms since investments in these firms can help make them more competitive.”

However, she too sees possible “cracks in the roof.” “Private equity threatens to increase pressure on profitability, which can lead to reduced staffing on audit engagements, fewer specialists and maybe other resource constraints,” said Gutia. “The risks also include threats to auditor independence and audit firm culture. So we’ll be focused on these areas, amongst others, especially when we’re performing our quality control inspection procedures at firms that have undergone or are in the process of seeking private equity and other alternative practice structure changes.”

gutia-christine-pcaob.png

Christine Gutia, director of the PCAOB’s Division of Registration and Inspections, at the AICPA Conference on Current SEC and PCAOB Developments

She sounded a warning about AI as well. “The second area also has been spoken about quite often so it’s no surprise that continuing our look into the future would not be complete without understanding how artificial intelligence figures into the equation,” said Gutia. “As with private equity, there are both opportunities and risks here as well. AI has the potential to improve audit quality, but the human element cannot be removed. So PCAOB inspectors will continue to be focused on AI as well in our 2026 work. Our inspectors frequently meet with firms,  generally the larger firms, to learn and understand where they and sometimes their issuers are using new technology, especially AI. Many firms have invited us to view demonstrations of their new tools, and do so generally while they’re piloting them, before they actually roll them out to the larger population of issuer audit clients.”

The PCAOB is keeping a close eye on AI use at firms. “We try as much as possible to incorporate developing an understanding of audit firms’ innovative and technology approaches into our inspection processes, and at a firm level that includes performance of our quality control inspection procedures, in addition of course to what we see if anything used in the audit files we select for review,” Gutia added. “Audit firms seem to agree that the human element is paramount in the execution of high-quality audits, so while new technologies and artificial intelligence are tools that help enable an audit’s execution, professional skepticism, professional judgment, and supervision and review remain as fundamental as ever to an auditor’s responsibility and therefore will remain as a key focus of ours.”

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Accounting

Global ESG Reporting Standards and Double Materiality Compliance

Published

5 days ago

on

August 9, 2026

By

Corporate accounting departments face expanding reporting expectations as international sustainability disclosure standards achieve regulatory enforcement across major global jurisdictions. Chief Accounting Officers (CAOs) and corporate controllers are establishing rigorous internal accounting controls to treat Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) metrics with the same data precision, auditability, and governance as traditional financial statements.

Regulatory Harmonization Under Global Sustainability Frameworks
The implementation of standardized sustainability reporting frameworks—notably rules established by international sustainability accounting boards—has created unified expectations for public and large private enterprises. Corporations must report standardized metrics covering greenhouse gas emissions (Scope 1, 2, and material Scope 3), energy utilization, workforce demographics, and supply chain governance.

In Europe and other participating international jurisdictions, double materiality principles are mandatory. Under double materiality, organizations must report both how external sustainability risks impact corporate financial performance, and how internal corporate operations affect surrounding environmental and social structures.

Integrating Sustainability Metrics into Core ERP Systems
To provide auditable non-financial data, enterprise organizations are integrating specialized carbon accounting and ESG management platforms directly into core ERP systems. Automated data collectors capture energy utility invoices, logistics fuel consumption metrics, and vendor compliance records in real time.

Establishing automated, traceable data pipelines ensures that non-financial reporting is supported by clear audit trails. This structured approach allows external financial auditors to provide reasonable assurance on sustainability disclosures during annual corporate reporting cycles.

Financial Impacts and Capital Market Disclosure
Accurate ESG reporting directly influences corporate cost of capital and institutional credit ratings. Commercial lenders and institutional asset managers systematically incorporate sustainability metrics into risk pricing models. Companies that demonstrate transparent, verifiable progress in operational energy efficiency and climate risk mitigation benefit from expanded access to green bond markets and lower debt pricing.

Action Steps for Accounting Leadership
1. Implement Double Materiality Frameworks: Conduct comprehensive assessments to identify material financial and operational sustainability metrics.
2. Build Auditable Non-Financial Data Pipelines: Automate ESG data collection within core accounting software to ensure data integrity.
3. Align Sustainability with Annual Financial Filings: Prepare non-financial disclosures concurrently with financial statements to satisfy regulatory audit expectations.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Modernizing Internal Controls: Machine Learning and Continuous Monitoring in Auditing

Published

1 week ago

on

August 5, 2026

By

Internal audit departments and corporate risk managers are modernizing internal control frameworks by shifting from periodic sampling techniques to continuous monitoring and machine learning analytics. As operational data volumes increase across enterprise organizations, automated control testing ensures financial integrity, prevents corporate fraud, and streamlines annual audit engagements.

The Limitation of Periodic Audit Sampling
Historically, internal and external auditors evaluated internal controls by reviewing random samples of financial transactions—often analyzing less than five percent of total ledger entries. In complex enterprise environments, periodic sampling methods carry inherent risks of overlooking localized financial misstatements, unauthorized disbursements, or operational control breakdowns.

In 2026, progressive internal audit functions are utilizing automated continuous monitoring platforms that evaluate one hundred percent of financial transactions in real time. Continuous control auditing systems continuously monitor general ledger entries, procurement approvals, and expense reimbursements across all operating subsidiaries.

AI-Powered Fraud Detection and Anomaly Identification
Machine learning models trained on historical corporate financial data excel at identifying subtle transactional anomalies that indicate potential fraud or operational error. Automated systems instantly flag duplicate invoice payments, unapproved vendor creation, unusual journal entry timing, and unauthorized override of authority thresholds.

When an anomaly is detected, the automated auditing platform generates an instant risk alert, allowing internal audit teams to investigate root causes immediately. Early detection prevents minor operational errors from escalating into material weaknesses in financial reporting.

Streamlining External Audit Preparation
Continuous internal control monitoring delivers significant benefits during annual external financial audits. External audit firms can review continuous audit logs and automated control testing documentation, reducing the time required for manual field testing.

This integrated approach lowers overall audit compliance fees, reduces administrative burdens on corporate accounting staff, and provides senior management and audit committees with real-time visibility into the organization’s overall risk profile.

Core Implementation Guidelines
1. Transition to 100% Data Testing: Replace legacy sampling methods with automated continuous audit monitoring systems.
2. Deploy Anomaly Detection Algorithms: Implement machine learning models to identify unauthorized transactions and operational control overrides.
3. Align Internal and External Audit Workflows: Coordinate continuous control testing protocols with external auditors to optimize annual compliance cycles.

Continue Reading

Accounting

Automated Tax Compliance and Global Regulatory Harmonization in 2026

Published

1 week ago

on

August 5, 2026

By

Corporate tax accounting departments are navigating an era of unprecedented regulatory complexity as global tax harmonization frameworks take full effect alongside real-time digital tax reporting mandates. Tax directors and accounting teams are adopting cloud-based tax compliance automation tools to manage multi-jurisdictional tax liabilities and satisfy stringent reporting rules across international jurisdictions.

Implementation of Global Minimum Tax Provisions
The implementation of international tax reform agreements—notably the Pillar Two global minimum tax framework—has reshaped multinational corporate tax planning. Multinational enterprises with consolidated revenues exceeding established thresholds must ensure an effective tax rate of at least 15% across every jurisdiction in which they operate.

Accounting teams are implementing specialized tax calculation modules integrated directly into enterprise resource planning (ERP) platforms. These automated tools calculate effective tax rates per country, identify top-up tax liabilities, and generate standardized compliance documentation required by national tax authorities.

Real-Time Digital Invoicing and E-Reporting Mandates
Tax authorities across Europe, Latin America, and Asia-Pacific have enacted mandatory electronic invoicing (e-invoicing) and continuous transaction controls (CTC). Under these systems, corporate transaction data must be submitted electronically to government portals in real time at the point of sale or invoice issuance.

This shift toward continuous digital tax reporting eliminates traditional annual tax audits in favor of ongoing automated compliance monitoring. Accounting departments are upgrading invoicing software to ensure seamless XML data formatting, digital signature authentication, and real-time validation against tax authority databases.

Automation and Data Analytics in Corporate Tax Strategy
To keep pace with dynamic tax legislation, tax departments are transitioning from reactive compliance teams to proactive strategic advisors. Machine learning algorithms analyze corporate transactional data to identify tax credits, research and development (R&D) incentives, and cross-border transfer pricing adjustments.

By automating routine tax return filings and calculations, corporate tax directors can focus on long-term capital structuring, evaluating the tax implications of corporate mergers, and optimizing international supply chain networks.

Strategic Priorities for Tax Executives
1. ERP System Upgrades: Ensure enterprise software is capable of generating real-time, granular tax data required for global minimum tax compliance.
2. E-Invoicing Integration: Implement scalable e-invoicing platforms to satisfy regional continuous transaction control regulations.
3. Strategic Tax Analytics: Utilize predictive tax modeling tools to evaluate structural changes in corporate operations and cross-border trade.

Continue Reading

Trending