Big Accounting Firms Fail To Track AI Impact on Audit Quality, Says Regulator (ft.com)
(Friday June 27, 2025 @03:00AM (msmash)
from the hard-to-quantify dept.)
- Reference: 0178199912
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/25/06/27/0426230/big-accounting-firms-fail-to-track-ai-impact-on-audit-quality-says-regulator
- Source link: https://www.ft.com/content/ee5be0d2-6d7b-432b-b778-1f7e471d8145
The six largest UK accounting firms [1]do not formally monitor how automated tools and AI impact the quality of their audits, the regulator has found, even as the technology becomes embedded across the sector. From a report:
> The Financial Reporting Council on Thursday published its first AI guide alongside a review of the way firms were using automated tools and technology, which found "no formal monitoring performed by the firms to quantify the audit quality impact of using" them.
>
> The watchdog found that audit teams in the Big Four firms -- Deloitte, EY, KPMG and PwC -- as well as BDO and Forvis Mazars were increasingly using this technology to perform risk assessments and obtain evidence. But it said that the firms primarily monitored the tools to understand how many teams were using them for audits, "typically for licensing purposes," rather than to assess their impact on audit quality.
[1] https://www.ft.com/content/ee5be0d2-6d7b-432b-b778-1f7e471d8145
> The Financial Reporting Council on Thursday published its first AI guide alongside a review of the way firms were using automated tools and technology, which found "no formal monitoring performed by the firms to quantify the audit quality impact of using" them.
>
> The watchdog found that audit teams in the Big Four firms -- Deloitte, EY, KPMG and PwC -- as well as BDO and Forvis Mazars were increasingly using this technology to perform risk assessments and obtain evidence. But it said that the firms primarily monitored the tools to understand how many teams were using them for audits, "typically for licensing purposes," rather than to assess their impact on audit quality.
[1] https://www.ft.com/content/ee5be0d2-6d7b-432b-b778-1f7e471d8145
No big deal (Score:4, Insightful)
by Waffle Iron ( 339739 )
This ought to be really easy to rectify:
> Ask me anything...
> Hey, how are you doing on all those audits?
> No problems.
> Great! Keep up the good work.
Better not to look... (Score:2)
by doragasu ( 2717547 )
Than to find an uncomfortable truth, seeing the huge piles of money they are wasting.
Re: (Score:2)
by Gideon Fubar ( 833343 )
This.
If they don't understand how it's being handled and they have reassurances then it can't possibly be their responsibility if it all goes wrong, right?
Obviously (Score:2)
by gweihir ( 88907 )
If they would, they would either stop using them or become liable. So they look away and hope for the best. Typical MBA scum.
Progress (Score:2)
by fluffernutter ( 1411889 )
What? No AI to audit the auditing AI yet? What happened to progress?
Re: (Score:2)
by gweihir ( 88907 )
Well, what happens if you put two morons in place to do a job, one supervising the other? Nagative synergies is what is happening, you get 2x the stupid!
Pass the popcorn (Score:1)
I can't wait to see how this turns out...
Re: (Score:2)
It's not hard to predict.
"Those who fail to remember that there are two types of classification error are condemned to rediscover it"
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. Easy solution: Make the C-levels personally accopuntable, including with their own wealth and going to prison.