External audit confirmations continue to play a critical role in gathering evidence for external audits. At the same time, for many CPA firms, obtaining bank confirmations has become increasingly complicated.
The problem does not lie with the standard itself; it lies with its implementation. Banks continue to update their confirmation requirements, authorization procedures, and digital workflows, creating additional complexity for audit firms managing confirmation requests across multiple institutions. In high season, even a small change can cause considerable delays across multiple engagements.
At the same time, the professional literature highlights the need for an auditor to control audit evidence. PCAOB AS 2310, AU-C 505, and ISA 505 recognize external confirmations as very reliable audit evidence when an auditor controls the confirmation process.
For firms handling a large volume of financial institution confirmations, this results in a growing operational burden. It has contributed to increased interest in PNC audit confirmations, the PNC audit confirmation process, and best practices for managing PNC bank confirmations for auditors.
Why bank confirmations continue to slow down audits
Technical issues in accounting do not, in most cases, lead to audit delays; the reason lies in workflow obstacles. For many audit managers, the problem becomes evident only after fieldwork is underway.
While something simple in the last audit cycle may now require extra approvals, new submission processes, or better coordination with clients’ employees, even the smallest adjustments can waste a lot of time, especially during peak times with many engagements.
In all businesses of different sizes, auditors often come across the following problems:
- Multi-level approval requirements
- Signature and authorization issues
- Varying bank-specific requirements
- Changes to confirmation platforms or workflows
- Delays caused by client or treasury responses
- Increased follow-up activity for outstanding confirmations
The problem becomes much more obvious when a single engagement involves multiple banking relationships, each using its own approach to completing the job.
All of these delays affect the planning of fieldwork, partners’ reviews, and reporting.
Therefore, many companies are considering changes to bank confirmation management and their current workflows.
PNC confirmation workflow challenges
Interest in information related to PNC audit confirmations, the PNC confirmation request process, and the PNC bank audit confirmation process has grown as the need to find the most effective way to obtain confirmations has increased.
PNC is one of the largest banking institutions in the United States, making it a common source of confirmation for many audit engagements. This means that for many CPA firms, the availability of these confirmations will affect many of their audit assignments.
However, there is no guarantee that the firm will be able to rely on a particular confirmation process. However, Changes in confirmation workflows across financial institutions can create challenges for audit teams seeking timely responses.
Uncertainty in the confirmation process brings numerous problems.
Need for more follow-up: In addition to the problems associated with uncertainty, auditors spend extra time determining which channel is required to submit a confirmation request. This may involve coordination with the clients, banks, and engagement teams.
Delay in receiving responses: Delays can add up quickly during peak audit seasons. In most cases, confirmation will be mandatory to perform substantive testing in areas of cash, debt, credit, and covenants.
Necessity to perform additional procedures: Under PCAOB AS 2310 and AU-C 505, auditors may need to perform alternative procedures when a confirmation response is not received or when sufficient evidence cannot be obtained through the confirmation process. While these procedures may sometimes provide sufficient audit evidence, they usually require additional audit work on subsequent cash activity, bank statements, loan agreements, debt schedules, or other documents. As a result, they require more effort and make engagement more expensive than just confirming the balances.
Resource drain for many engagements: A single delayed confirmation is easy to manage; twenty delayed confirmations are quite a problem. Especially for the firms conducting audits of middle-market and large organizations.
This is why many audit firms are evaluating ways to improve the PNC audit confirmation process and reduce administrative delays.
Why confirmation coverage matters more in 2026
The confirmation process environment has become more fragmented. Instead of sticking to a single process for all financial organizations, auditors need to follow different bank requirements, authorization processes, and submission processes.
As financial institutions adopt different authorization requirements and confirmation workflows, audit firms must navigate a more diverse confirmation landscape than in previous years.
For engagement teams, the challenge extends beyond simply submitting a confirmation request. What really matters is whether it is submitted promptly, correctly documented, and completed.
Why auditor-controlled evidence matters more in 2026
Operational efficiency is important.
Audit quality remains paramount.
This is where confirmation standards become particularly relevant.
PCAOB AS 2310 emphasizes auditor control of the confirmation process. Auditors are expected to send requests, receive responses, and maintain control over the exchange of information to reduce the risk of interception or alteration.
Similar principles exist in AU-C 505 and ISA 505, both of which recognize external confirmations as highly reliable audit evidence when properly controlled by the auditor.
As confirmation processes become more diverse across financial institutions, organizations are increasingly focusing on evidence-gathering procedures. Audit standards place significant emphasis on obtaining evidence directly from independent third parties whenever appropriate. These include:
– Direct source evidence gathering
– Security in the process of confirmation
– Audit trail in the documentation
– Validity of the reply received
– Limited manipulation of data manually
The focus is not only on getting a reply but also on correctly obtaining valid audit evidence.
How audit standards influence confirmation procedures
The emphasis on auditors collecting their own evidence is still maintained in audit standards. The PCAOB AS 2310, AU-C 505, and ISA 505 all mandate that auditors exercise control over the process of making confirmation requests and receiving replies. It includes identifying what is supposed to be confirmed, choosing the party to whom the request is to be made, sending the request, and evaluating the reply received.
What firms are looking for in modern confirmation workflows
The conversation around bank confirmations has certainly changed over the last few years. In the past, companies focused more on the rate at which responses were received. Now, however, the context of the conversation is wider.
To solve this problem, some companies are trying to adopt a system that can validate sources across different banks. Such an effort would ensure greater efficiency in the validation process.
Workflows are now being evaluated based on several elements, including standardization, minimized coordination, faster evidence collection, clear documentation, and complete audit trails.
Final thoughts
Bank confirmations are not likely to get any easier in the near future. In fact, CPAs should expect further development of authorizations, platforms, and specific bank processes. The goal for accounting firms is to balance efficiency and compliance, and those that can do so will design their confirmation processes around auditor control and effective evidence gathering.
Whatever an engagement demands PNC Bank audit confirmation, PNC confirmation request, or PNC bank confirmations for auditors, the goal always remains the same – to ensure reliable confirmation evidence collection in the most efficient way possible.
Whatever happens with changes to the requirements for confirmation, good planning and execution always remain important. Technology platforms that allow auditors to control their confirmation process may help streamline it.
AuditConfirm enables auditors to obtain bank confirmations directly from the source, including PNC, while maintaining auditor control and providing high-quality documentation throughout the confirmation process.
Disclaimer: The need for bank confirmations, permissions, and the bank’s work processes may change over time. Auditors need to check the requirements from the corresponding financial institution.
FAQs
PNC audit confirmations are external confirmations made by auditors to confirm account balances, loans, deposits, and other banking arrangements held by PNC Bank.
The PNC audit confirmation process usually entails the auditor controlling the sending, verification, and receipt of confirmation requests, which serve as evidence collection.
PNC Bank confirmation for auditors provides reliable, independent evidence that helps substantiate financial statement assertions.
Processing of PNC confirmation requests may be slowed due to authorization issues, missing documentation, changes in bank requirements, and a high volume of confirmations requested by auditors.
If PNC Bank audit confirmation is not received, auditors should use alternative procedures as described in PCAOB AS 2310, AU-C 505, and ISA 505.