Professional skepticism
-
Professional ethics Judgment and competence
A Draft CCAB Statement Says Professional Accountants Cannot Abdicate Responsibility for Outputs Produced by Their Use of AI
In June 2026 the Consultative Committee of Accountancy Bodies published, for consultation, a draft statement to the accountancy profession on the ethical use of AI. It reminds accountants that they "cannot abdicate responsibility" for outputs produced by their use of AI tools and systems, and it discloses that AI tools were used in preparing the statement itself.
-
Evidence and documentation Testing the data and the tools
When a Tool Is the Primary Source of Audit Evidence: Canada's Audit Regulator on Technology in Audits, October 2025
In October 2025, Canada's audit regulator reported examples of deficiencies it identified when a technology-assisted audit tool "provided the primary source of audit evidence." In one, procedures to test completeness and accuracy were limited to the transactions the tool identified as higher risk or outliers.
-
Regulators and standard setters Audit and assurance
The Auditor Owns the Outcome: Singapore's Accounting Regulator on Using AI Responsibly, October 2026
On October 2, 2026, Singapore's Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority issued practice guidance for auditors on using AI. "AI can assist, but the auditor owns the outcome," it says, and that responsibility "cannot be delegated to AI."
-
Professional ethics Judgment and competence
Responsibility Remains Human: ACCA's Report on Ethics in Accountancy, October 2026
In a report marked October 2026, the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants found that the use of AI "ranks first in the top three ethical challenges reported by respondents." It also sets out a checklist for ethical challenges involving AI use.
-
Cannot Be Delegated to Software: The Texas Accountancy Board on AI and the CPA, August 2026
In its report of August 2026, the Texas State Board of Public Accountancy says a Texas CPA "remains responsible for all work product" and that "Professional responsibility cannot be delegated to software." The state's Public Accountancy Act and the board's Rules of Professional Conduct "do not specifically address generative AI," it says, but "existing professional obligations apply regardless of the technology used."
-
Critically Assess AI-Generated Outputs: What Canada's Audit Regulator Heard From Audit Committees in 2026
In July 2026, Canada's audit regulator published insights gathered in its outreach to audit committees. On their auditors' use of AI, the committees are interested in how firms are "building challenge and validation functions into their AI-enabled audit processes."
-
Evidence and documentation Documenting AI-prepared work
Such That Another Professional Can Understand: Australia's Auditing Standard Setter on AI Audit Tools, July 2025
In July 2025 Australia's Auditing and Assurance Standards Board set out considerations for auditors who use AI tools. Among them is documentation "Such that another professional can understand" the matters the page lists, including the design and use of the tool.
