Core Viewpoint - The recent public consultation by the Chinese Institute of Certified Public Accountants aims to establish a clear regulatory framework for sustainable information assurance, marking a new phase of standardization and professionalism in ESG assurance activities in China [1][2]. Group 1: Challenges in Sustainable Information Assurance - The current sustainable information assurance practices in China face challenges such as fragmented standards, significant differences in methods and indicators among assurance institutions, and inadequate risk assessment capabilities [2][3]. - The consultation draft aims to address these shortcomings by proposing key measures to standardize the assurance process and improve quality control [2][3]. Group 2: Standardization and Quality Control - The consultation draft is expected to resolve the long-standing issue of fragmentation in the industry by establishing a unified standard for the assurance process, which includes clear procedures and documentation requirements [2][4]. - Assurance institutions are required to meet specific competency thresholds, ensuring that project partners possess sufficient expertise in sustainable information [4][5]. Group 3: Incorporating International Experience and Local Adaptation - The draft incorporates international frameworks while considering local regulatory contexts, emphasizing the dual materiality principle in sustainable information disclosure [3][6]. - It encourages companies to establish ESG management committees and hire multidisciplinary talent to enhance internal ESG management [3][5]. Group 4: Enhancing Assurance Quality - Assurance quality is prioritized, with institutions needing to strengthen their quality management and independence systems [5][6]. - The draft suggests a transitional period where assurance institutions may provide both consulting and assurance services, with strict independence requirements to follow [6][9]. Group 5: Anti-Fraud Measures - The importance of anti-fraud measures in sustainable information assurance is highlighted, with a focus on using technology and cross-department collaboration to strengthen fraud detection [7][8]. - The draft proposes establishing a robust mechanism for verifying non-financial data and ensuring compliance with disclosure standards [8][9]. Group 6: Accountability and Penalty Mechanisms - The need for a comprehensive accountability system for ESG information fraud is emphasized, suggesting a dual accountability approach for both fraudulent companies and assurance institutions [9][10]. - A two-way data reporting platform between third-party institutions and regulatory bodies is recommended to facilitate the identification of high-risk entities [9].
告别ESG报告“盖章机器”:新规给第三方鉴证机构戴上金箍
Zhong Guo Jin Rong Xin Xi Wang·2025-09-01 00:27