Photo via Washington Examiner

California just regulated AI audits — and forgot to require the truth

Read the original at Washington Examiner ↗
Cite

Ho, C. (2026, September 26). California just regulated AI audits — and forgot to require the truth. Washington Examiner. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op-eds/4739848/california-artificial-intelligence-audit-rules-accuracy/

Dated when The Aporia collected the article, usually within hours of publication. Check the original for its exact date and byline.

Washington Examiner · collected 2026-09-26 · by Christina Ho

Quick Summary

California enacted new regulations on September 9 for auditing artificial intelligence, aiming to promote competition by allowing various entities including smaller CPA firms and tech companies to provide AI audit services. The state also mandated safeguards against conflicts of interest to ensure auditor independence. However, the regulation fails to require proof that these audits accurately verify results, which is crucial given ongoing issues with financial improprieties and corporate fraud costing billions annually.
Written by AI on 2026-09-26, from this article's own text only (the story summary below draws on all the coverage).

AI analysis

Story summary

On September 9, California established the first U.S. regulations determining who can audit artificial intelligence (AI). Christina Ho, who served four years on the board that regulates public company auditors, notes both positives and negatives in these new rules but emphasizes a critical oversight: there's no requirement to verify if an AI audit accurately got the numbers right. This flaw is significant because financial auditors are increasingly adopting AI to speed up their work, yet avoiding persistent costly mistakes remains elusive.

In 2024 alone, federal agencies reported $162 billion in improper payments despite receiving clean audits, and corporate fraud annually destroys an estimated $830 billion based on 2021 valuations. While these figures aren't entirely due to audit failures, they highlight the widening gap between passing an audit and ensuring accuracy in financial reporting. Companies often pay their accountants by the hour for work that focuses too much on process verification rather than result validation, potentially leading to significant financial losses if audits fail to accurately assess AI systems.

Written for “AI Regulation California” on 2026-11-02, grounded in this article and the 0 other(s) covering the same event.

Story

📰 AI Regulation California
Technology · 1 article(s) covering the same event.

Compared with similar articles

This article reads leans left and hedges 6% of its claims. Each row says how that neighbour differs.
Mother Jones
⚖️ Leans left Hedges 5 of 16 claims Outlet record 60/100
“The articles describe different aspects of AI regulation and behavior; one focuses on California's AI audit regulations, while the other discusses internal safety testing incidents at OpenAI and Anthropic.”
Al Jazeera
Hedges 3 of 20 claims Outlet record 60/100
“The articles discuss different topics: one focuses on California's regulation of AI audits lacking truth requirements, while the other covers Bill Gates' comments about global AI regulation.”
Washington Examiner
⚖️ Leans strongly left further left than this Hedges 2 of 43 claims Outlet record 70/100
“The articles discuss different aspects of AI regulation and safety, with Article A focusing on audit requirements in California and Article B highlighting security breaches by advanced AI systems.”
Al Jazeera
⚖️ Leans left Hedges 2 of 12 claims Outlet record 60/100
“Article A discusses California's regulation of AI audits, while Article B reports on an FTC investigation into major AI companies.”
Washington Examiner
⚖️ Leans left Hedges 2 of 20 claims Outlet record 70/100
“The articles describe different events: one about California's regulation of AI audits and the other about an FTC investigation into leading AI companies.”
Semafor
⚖️ Leans left Hedges 2 of 4 claims Outlet record 59/100
“Article A discusses California's regulation of AI audits, while Article B reports on a separate federal investigation by the FTC into potential consumer harms from AI firms.”
How this article was measured signals, leaning charts, publisher record, byline, topics and claims

Signals How these are calculated →

Claims extracted
32
sentences that state something as happening or true
Uncertain
6%
2 of 32 hedged ("reportedly", "may", "according to")
Leaning
Leans left
of the writing, not the subject · beta estimate
Publisher signals
70/100
Washington Examiner's corrections and hedging, across everything collected from it. Not a measure of accuracy.
Outlets on this story
1
Technology
Same framing elsewhere
1
articles that frame the event the way this one does
Analyzed 2026-09-26 · how these are computed

How this is being covered How these are calculated →

Article leaning vs. publisher reliability
Source leaning vs. consistency

Publisher

Washington Examiner · 3951 article(s) · 7 correction(s) detected
Running correction rate · 7 correction(s)

Who wrote this

Christina Ho
1 article(s) here · 1 carrying a prediction
🔮 On Sept. 9, California set some of the nation’s first rules for who may audit artificial intelligence.
The only article under this byline in the corpus.

Topics

Arthur Andersen California Enron Macy’s United States

Subjects

California GPE · 4× Macy’s ORG · 2× the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board ORG · 2× Arthur Andersen ORG · 1× Christina Ho PERSON · 1× Enron ORG · 1× Oath ORG · 1× Oath Verified ORG · 1× Sacramento GPE · 1× United States GPE · 1×

Narrative

Regulatory clarity unlocks a market where 1) auditors are chosen on demonstrated performance and capability, 2) smaller firms win on the evidence they can comply, and 3) companies learn about a problem in March instead of the following January.
framing: assertive · carried by 1 article(s) · first seen 2026-09-26
🔮 On Sept. 9, California set some of the nation’s first rules for who may audit artificial intelligence.
2026-09-26 · Washington Examiner
California just regulated AI audits — and forgot to require the truth · assertive framing

Claims (32 extracted, 2 hedged)

On Sept. 9, California set some of the nation’s first rules for who may audit artificial intelligence. uncertain
who → set → intelligence
I spent four years on the board that regulates public company auditors, often as its lone dissenter, and the state got more right than wrong. asserted
state → spend → right
The problem with the policies is that nothing requires proof that an AI audit got the numbers right, which defies the whole point. asserted
which → require → point
Financial auditors, like everyone else, are increasingly adopting AI in their work, but faster audits are useful only if they avoid the persistent, costly mistakes we keep making. asserted
we → adopt → mistakes
In 2024, federal agencies reported an estimated $162 billion in improper payments, despite most receiving clean opinions on their financial statements. asserted
most → report → statements
In the private sector, researchers estimated that corporate fraud destroys $830 billion annually at 2021 valuations. asserted
fraud → estimate → valuations
These losses are not all audit failures, but they do show how wide the gap has grown between passing an audit and getting the numbers right. asserted
numbers → show → audit
That gap can pose steep costs to businesses, which pay their accountants by the hour for work that spends too much time box-checking processes and not enough on verifying the results themselves. asserted
that → pose → results
No matter how good a process is, if it produces a wrong conclusion, it should be marked as failed, even if the inspection finds the process was followed. asserted
process → produce → conclusion
A single employee hid over $100 million in expenses over nearly three years, falsifying documentation along the way. asserted
employee → hide → way
In December 2024, Macy’s said neither its own financial controls nor its auditor’s assessments of them could be trusted. uncertain
controls → say → them
The controls were signed off on, but the numbers were wrong anyway. asserted
numbers → sign → ?
California did get two big things right, and the first is competition. asserted
first → get → ?
The Big Four accounting firms audit nearly every large public company in the United States, leaving customers little choice in their provider. asserted
firms → audit → provider
California opens AI auditing to smaller CPA firms, technology companies, nonprofit groups, and academic consortia that demonstrate expertise. asserted
that → open → expertise
Qualified entrants can bring better tools, lower costs, and more choice about whom to trust. asserted
entrants → bring → whom
Even OpenAI calls for the government to help build a competitive market of AI auditors and develop standards that assess safety and security risks without imposing unnecessary burdens on small companies. asserted
that → call → companies
Second, California required safeguards against conflicts of interest. asserted
California → require → interest
When Arthur Andersen served as both auditor and consultant to Enron, the arrangement famously exposed the danger of competing interests. asserted
arrangement → serve → interests
Customers need to trust that an auditor’s conclusions are free from influence, which is why certain financial and operational relationships have to be firewalled. asserted
relationships → need → influence
These are fine steps, but the next one is the hard one, and no government body has taken it. asserted
body → take → it
Markets work best when regulators say plainly what they expect. asserted
they → work → what
Right now, no one knows what will count as adequate proof. asserted
what → know → proof
Buyers cannot tell good tools from bad ones, and a firm that adopts what it thinks is the former still cannot be sure a regulator will accept its results. asserted
regulator → tell → results
The technology is ready to be put to use. asserted
technology → put → use
What is missing is business confidence. asserted
missing → miss → ?
Regulatory clarity unlocks a market where 1) auditors are chosen on demonstrated performance and capability, 2) smaller firms win on the evidence they can comply, and 3) companies learn about a problem in March instead of the following January. asserted
companies → unlock → March
I left the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board to help build Oath Verified because machine checking machine, with a human answering for the result, is how the profession earns back trust. asserted
profession → leave → trust
Sacramento’s formula is “trust, but verify.” asserted
formula → trust → ?
At Oath, we believe in the reverse order. asserted
we → believe → order
When the outputs are right, the trust naturally follows. asserted
trust → follow → ?
She served on the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, 2021-26 asserted
She → serve → Board
💬Give feedback
🕘History 🎫Support