The employment of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools can impact compliance with the CPABC Code of Professional Conduct (Code) both directly and indirectly. Members in public practice and industry, students, and candidates are encouraged to review the Code when contemplating utilizing AI tools to ensure they understand how such AI usage may impact their compliance with the Code.
Per the Code definition: “registrant” means a member, registered firm, professional accounting corporation or student. This document will use the same definition of registrant and will specify the sub-group where relevant.
Text in italics indicate that the text is directly reproduced from the Code, without modification.
The following are, among others, Code Rules to be considered in how they may apply to, or interact with, the usage of AI tools.
Rule 201: Maintenance of the good reputation of the profession
This overarching Rule largely speaks for itself when it comes to AI usage. Any AI usage that might call into question the good reputation of the profession should be avoided. The good reputation of the profession always starts with yourself. Beyond that, the AI usage by other registrants that could bring disrepute to the profession should be considered against Rule 211 Duty to report breach of the CPA Code for possible reporting to CPABC.
Rule 202: Integrity and due care and Objectivity
These concepts are introduced and discussed in the Code’s preamble on page 6. Integrity and due care require registrants to provide professional services, carefully, thoroughly and on a timely basis. The use of AI tools may create efficiencies addressing the timeliness of the service provision, however, employment of such AI tools should be done carefully and thoroughly to ensure that AI-produced results are adequately reviewed and scrutinized to ensure their accuracy.
Besides the usage of AI tools, registrants should also act with care and skepticism when receiving and reviewing documents from clients, as AI tools can easily create fictitious documents.
Objectivity does not allow professional or business judgment to be compromised by bias, conflict of interest or the undue influence of others. Similar to the prior paragraph, AI responses could be biased, calling into question the objectivity of the registrant if the results are used without further scrutiny.
Rule 203: Professional competence
Another Rule that finds its introduction in the Code preamble. Registrants are to maintain their professional skills and competence by keeping informed of, and complying with, developments in their area of professional service. Registrants should only use AI tools after having obtained adequate knowledge and competence about the usage of such tools. Further, theoretical and practical competence cannot be replaced by AI tools. I trust the following goes without saying, AI tools are not professionally competent, so they need to be supplemented with your professional competency.
Rule 205: False or misleading documents or oral representations
With respect to AI tools, this Rule is largely analogous to Rule 202: Integrity and due care and Objectivity, and the discussion of AI tool usage related to Rule 202 above. Further, the preamble discusses the characteristics of a profession and being a professional. In combination, Rule 202 and 205, when applied to AI tool usage would imply that being a professional requires careful analysis of the AI tool results prior to using those results in any letter, report, statement, representation or financial statement which the registrant knows, or should know, is false or misleading.
Rule 205 covers plagiarism and other forms of academic dishonesty in Guidance 3, something which may be of particular interest for students and candidates to be aware of and review carefully prior to using AI tools.
Rule 208: Confidentiality of information
Rule 208 is another rule that is introduced in the Code’s preamble when discussing fundamental principles. Registrants protect confidential information acquired as a result of professional, employment and business relationships and do not disclose it without proper and specific authority, nor do they exploit such information for their personal advantage or the advantage of a third party. When querying the AI tools registrants should ensure that no confidential information is included in the query, as the information typed in the query might be visible to others and could be stored in locations unbeknownst to the registrant. Registrants should obtain information about the AI tool’s operations related to the usage and storage of information included in AI queries. AI tools, both those that you pay for and those that are free to use, rely on prior queries to improve their answers over time, which means that they may reuse confidential information for other purposes outside of your control. Even after obtaining information about the AI tool’s operational characteristics and ensuring it is in compliance with CPABC and Canadian legislation related to privacy, registrants are highly encouraged to refrain from including confidential information in such queries.
Rule 214: Fee quotations and billings
The use of AI tools may create efficiencies resulting in less time expenditures to complete an engagement compared to not using AI tools. When it comes to the billing of the engagement do you pass on these time savings to your client, or do you attribute those time savings as recouperation of the cost of the AI tools? Guidance 4 to Rule 214 should be consulted in assessing the fairness and reasonableness of fees.
Rule 217: Advertising, Solicitation and Endorsement
Registrants may employ AI tools in the development of marketing materials. Care should be taken to ensure that those materials comply with CPABC legislation and not include statements the contents of which the registrant cannot substantiate; or which makes unfavourable reflections on the competence or integrity of the profession or any registrant; or which otherwise brings disrepute on the profession.
Rule 218: Retention of documentation and working papers
This Rule requires a registrant to reasonably evidence the nature and extent of the work done in respect of any professional service. When employing the aid of AI tools, registrants are expected to document the nature and extent to ensure that another registrant can re-perform the work and get to the same conclusion. This might mean that the AI tool’s make, model, and version needs to be documented as well as the input query and the tool’s output. In addition, any analysis or professional skepticism applied in interpreting the output are also expected to be documented.
Rule 406: Responsibility for a non-registrant
Any registrant engaged in the practice of public accounting is responsible for any non-registrants associated with in such practice. The responsibility for the training and supervision of non-registrants extends to the employment of AI tools.
Other Resources
Should you have any questions about the above you can contact our Member Advisory Services team at ProfessionalAdvisory@bccpa.ca
Rate this Entry
Current rating: 0 yes votes, 0 no votes
