今天，美国上市公司会计监督委员会（PCAOB）与中国证券监督管理委员会（中国证监会）和中华人民共和国财政部签署合作检查协议，来指导检查与调查设于中国和香港的审计事务所。
本协议乃为我们首次自中国得到如此详细、具体的承诺，允许PCAOB进行符合美国标准的检查和调查。中方与我方皆同意有必要建立一个框架。我们不愿派遣PCAOB检查人员到中国和香港，除非对此一框架先达成协议。鉴于进行这些检查和调查所需的时间，检查人员必须在九月中旬抵达，才能有机会在今年年底前成功地全面完成工作。
但是，别误以为了：是否如此，届时见分晓。虽说重要，但是此框架只不过是程序中的一个步骤。本协议唯有PCAOB确实能对在中国的审计事务所进行完整的检查和调查，才会有意义。如果无法做到，约200家中国发行人将面临被禁止在美国交易其证券，如果他们继续聘用那些审计事务所的话。
为什么这些检查和调查至关重要呢？外国发行人能进入我们的市场是一项殊荣，因为我们有世界上规模最大、深度最深、最具流动性的市场。美国市场的投资者应该受到保护，应该能信任企业的财务数字，无论发行人是境外或境内的。再者，如果外国发行人想要进入我们的公开资本市场，他们必须与美国企业公平竞争。
50多个司法辖区已经遵守规定，让PCABO检查和调查其在美上市公司的审计事务所，无论审计事务所设于何地。尚有两地未做到：中国和香港。
但是，中国发行人却得以持续进入美国市场，纵使未遵守《萨班斯-奥克斯利法案》（Sarbanes-Oxley Act）的基本要求，其为20年前的7月份在不分党派的基础上所通过的：如欲在美国发行公共证券，负责审计公司账簿的注册公共会计师事务所，必须接受PCAOB的检查和调查。当外国发行人寻求进入美国资本市场时，他们和我们的境内发行人一样，必须遵守同样的审计规则。这些规则包括PCAOB得以检查所有审计底稿的要求，这是审计工作的具体业务标准底稿，涉及发行人的财务报表和审计质量。
国会近来在针对《萨班斯-奥克斯利法案》修订的2020年《外国公司问责法》（HFCAA）中，再次确认完整检查和调查的要求。HFCAA规定，如果PCAOB“无法完整检查或调查” [1]外国司法辖区的注册公共会计师事务所，连续三年聘用这些事务所的发行人，他们的证券将面临被禁止在美国交易，依照这种情况，约有200家是位于中国。
今天所宣布的协议载明贯彻国会用意的具体与问责事项。其提供标准来衡量中方发行人的审计机构是否遵守美国法律的要求，包括PCAOB的审计准则。我感谢国会对这些重要事宜的重视。具体而言，中国当局对下述四项重要事项做出承诺：
在未来，我们的市场会包括中国发行人吗？这将取决于在中国的对口人员。要看他们是否遵守美国法律的规定，如同本框架所详细列出的。
无论如何，我期待确保在我们市场做到对投资者的重要保护，如果遵守本框架，那便与中国发行人一起来；如果未遵守，那就与中国发行人分道扬镳。
竭诚感谢SEC和PCAOB的同仁，敬业勤恳地处理这些事情。
虽然很多工作尚待完成才能确保合规，但是我也要感谢 中国证监会和财政部的对口官员迄今为止与我们所进行有成效的讨论。
[1] 见美国参议院第945号法案-外国公司问责法，查阅https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/945/text.

Statement on Agreement Governing Inspections and Investigations of Audit Firms Based in China and Hong Kong
Chair Gary Gensler
Aug. 26, 2022
Today, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) signed a Statement of Protocol with the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) and the Ministry of Finance of the People’s Republic of China governing inspections and investigations of audit firms based in China and Hong Kong.
This agreement marks the first time we have received such detailed and specific commitments from China that they would allow PCAOB inspections and investigations meeting U.S. standards. The Chinese and we jointly agreed on the need for a framework. We were not willing to have PCAOB inspectors travel to China and Hong Kong unless there was an agreement on such a framework. In light of the time required to conduct these inspections and investigations, inspectors must be on the ground by mid-September if their work has any chance to be successfully completed by the end of this year.
Make no mistake, though: The proof will be in the pudding. While important, this framework is merely a step in the process. This agreement will be meaningful only if the PCAOB actually can inspect and investigate completely audit firms in China. If it cannot, roughly 200 China-based issuers will face prohibitions on trading of their securities in the U.S. if they continue to use those audit firms.
Why do these inspections and investigations matter? It’s a privilege for foreign issuers to access our markets — the largest, deepest, most liquid markets in the world. Investors in U.S. markets should be protected — and have trust in a company’s financial numbers — regardless of whether an issuer is foreign or domestic. Further, if foreign issuers want access to our public capital markets, they must be on a level playing field with U.S. firms.
More than 50 jurisdictions have complied with the requirements that the PCAOB inspect and investigate audit firms of U.S.-listed companies, regardless of where the audit firm is based. Two have not: China and Hong Kong.
China-based issuers, however, have continued to access U.S. markets while not complying with the basic bargain of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, enacted on a bipartisan basis 20 years ago this past July: If you want to issue public securities in the U.S., the registered public accounting firms that audit your books have to be subject to inspections and investigations by the PCAOB. When foreign issuers seek access to U.S. capital markets, they must abide by the same rules regarding auditing as our domestic issuers. These rules include a requirement that the PCAOB have the ability to inspect all audit work papers — standard, engagement-specific documentation of the audit work related to an issuer’s financial statements and the quality of the audit.
Congress recently reaffirmed the requirement for complete inspections and investigations under the Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act of 2020 (HFCAA), which amended Sarbanes-Oxley. Under the HFCAA, if the PCAOB is “unable to inspect or investigate completely”[1] registered public accounting firms located in foreign jurisdictions, issuers that use those firms for three consecutive years face prohibitions on their securities trading in the U.S. — in this case, roughly 200 companies based in China.
This agreement announced today brings specificity and accountability to effectuate Congress’s intent. It provides the standards against which to judge whether auditors of Chinese issuers have complied with the requirements of U.S. law, including PCAOB auditing standards. I thank Congress for their attention to these important matters. In particular, Chinese authorities have committed to four critical items:
Going forward, will our markets include China-based issuers? That still is up to our counterparts in China. It depends on whether they comply with the requirements of U.S. law, as detailed in the framework.
Either way, I look forward to ensuring key investor protections in our markets — with China-based issuers, if this framework is followed; or without China-based issuers, if it is not.
Though much work remains to ensure compliance, I would like to thank our counterparts at the CSRC and the Ministry of Finance for the productive discussions to date.
I would like to thank my colleagues at the SEC and the PCAOB for their diligent work on these matters, including:
[1] See S.945 – Holding Foreign Companies Accountable Act, available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/senate-bill/945/text.