التاليالدليل التالي
كيف تستخدم مصلحة الضرائب الأمريكية الذكاء الاصطناعي لاختيار التدقيق
المجتمع
دليل المجتمع
PCAOB standards neither ban AI nor give it special approval.
They apply the same rules on evidence, supervision and documentation to technology-assisted procedures as to manual ones. An audit firm that uses AI is still responsible for three things: the data the tool reads must be reliable, the procedure must fit its purpose, and the work papers must let an experienced auditor understand and re-create what was done. This matters because investors rely on audit opinions, and a fast automated procedure does not make a weak conclusion any stronger.
The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) sets auditing standards for audits of companies registered with the SEC. It regulates the work, not the tool. Several standards govern any procedure, whether a person does it or software does. AS 1105 (Audit Evidence) requires evidence to be sufficient and appropriate, and appropriateness depends on relevance and reliability. AS 2301 sets out how the auditor responds to assessed risks. AS 1201 covers supervision. AS 1215 (Audit Documentation) requires work papers that would let an experienced auditor with no prior link to the engagement understand the work performed, the evidence obtained and the conclusions reached. In 2024 the PCAOB adopted amendments to AS 1105 and AS 2301 that deal directly with technology-assisted analysis of information in electronic form. They take effect for audits of fiscal years beginning on or after December 15, 2025. The amendments make three points. When an analysis serves more than one purpose, such as risk assessment and substantive testing, the auditor must meet the objective of each purpose. The auditor must evaluate the reliability of electronic information, including information the company received from outside sources. And items that a tool flags as meeting the auditor's criteria must be investigated. They cannot be set aside. The PCAOB has also said publicly that its staff is monitoring how firms use generative AI. Its broader quality control standard, QC 1000, treats technological resources as part of a firm's quality control system. Two misconceptions are common. The first is that testing 100% of a population removes the need for judgment. A full-population test built on incomplete or altered data is still unreliable, and the flagged items still need to be evaluated. The second is that AI output counts as audit evidence in its own right. The evidence is the underlying information plus a procedure that was designed, performed and reviewed properly. A summary or score produced by a model is only as good as the checks performed on it.
تعتمد الأضرار الكارثية واليومية التي يسببها الذكاء الاصطناعي على من يفهم المخاطر ومن يستطيع التصرف.
إن المعرفة العامة والمهنية تحدد ما إذا كانت سياسة السلامة القوية ممكنة من الناحية السياسية.
إن التفسيرات الواضحة تقلل من الاستيلاء على الضجيج والعلاقات العامة المعملية والمسرح الأخلاقي الغامض.
The 2024 amendments give firms a clearer framework for data analytics, and the first audits under them will show how inspectors read the investigation requirement for flagged items. Generative AI raises questions the current standards answer only indirectly. Examples include how to document a model's role in drafting memos, and how much re-checking of extracted content is enough. The PCAOB has signalled interest through staff outreach, but a firm should not assume new guidance is coming on any particular timeline. For now, the safest approach is to treat every AI-assisted step as a procedure that must be relevant, reliable, supervised and documented under the existing standards.
A team runs an analysis over every revenue journal entry for the year and flags entries posted on weekends by users who rarely post to revenue. The flagged entries must then be followed up, because running the analysis does not by itself count as evidence.
An engagement team uses a generative AI tool to pull renewal, termination and pricing terms out of 300 customer contracts. Before relying on the extracted terms, it checks a sample of them against the signed contracts.
Before feeding the company's system-generated aged receivables report into an analytics tool, the auditor tests whether the report is complete and accurate, because it counts as information produced by the company.
A reviewer's work papers record the tool version, the parameters used, the data source, and a reconciliation of the extracted ledger to the trial balance, so another auditor could re-perform the analysis.
التعامل مع المخاطر الوجودية باعتبارها خيالًا علميًا ومركبات القدرة.
الخلط بين سلامة المنتج السطحي والمحاذاة في ظل الاستقلالية العالية.
ترك الجماهير غير الإنجليزية وغير الخبراء مع مصادر منخفضة الجودة فقط.
فصل أضرار المنتج، وسوء الاستخدام، ومخاطر فقدان السيطرة/اختلال المحاذاة.
اسأل عن الأدلة التي من شأنها أن تغير وجهة نظرك بشأن الجداول الزمنية وشدتها.
تفضيل المصادر الأولية والتقييمات الملموسة على المطالبات التسويقية.
حدد مسار عمل واحد: المهنة، أو السياسة، أو التمويل، أو المهارات - وليس الوعي فقط.
Free newsletter
Three verified AI stories every weekday morning, written in plain English. Free forever, no ads.
One email each weekday. Unsubscribe in one click. We never sell or share your address.
Test yourself
Instant feedback on every answer, and a shareable certificate with a verifiable ID once you pass a course.
Support free AI education. AI Understanding is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit — no ads, no paywall, ever. Make a donation
PCAOB standards neither ban AI nor give it special approval. They apply the same rules on evidence, supervision and documentation to technology-assisted procedures as to manual ones. An audit firm that uses AI is still responsible for three things: the data the tool reads must be reliable, the procedure must fit its purpose, and the work papers must let an experienced auditor understand and re-create what was done. This matters because investors rely on audit opinions, and a fast automated procedure does not make a weak conclusion any stronger.
غيرت تعديلات عام 2024 معيار المحاسبة الدولي 1105 (أدلة المراجعة) ومعيار المحاسبة الدولي 2301 (الاستجابات للمخاطر المقدرة). وهي تتناول كيفية تقييم المدققين للمعلومات الإلكترونية وكيفية استخدامهم للتحليل بمساعدة التكنولوجيا.
توضح التعديلات أنه يجب التحقيق في العناصر التي تم تحديدها على أنها تفي بمعايير المدقق. إن إنتاج قائمة بالأعلام ليس إجراءً مكتملاً.
التقرير الذي تنتجه الشركة هو المعلومات التي تنتجها الشركة. ويجب تقييم موثوقيتها، بما في ذلك اكتمالها ودقتها، قبل أن يعتمد المدقق عليها.
يحدد AS 1215 اختبار المدقق ذي الخبرة. يجب أن يتيح التوثيق لمثل هذا الشخص فهم العمل المنجز والأدلة التي تم الحصول عليها والاستنتاجات التي تم التوصل إليها.
تنص التعديلات على أنه عندما يخدم التحليل أغراضًا متعددة، يجب على المدقق تحقيق هدف كل منها. يتطلب الاختبار الموضوعي عادة دقة أكبر من تقييم المخاطر.
استمر في التعلم
تم اختيار المزيد من الأدلة لهذا الموضوع
التاليالدليل التالي
كيف تستخدم مصلحة الضرائب الأمريكية الذكاء الاصطناعي لاختيار التدقيق
المجتمع