(credit: Thapana Studio - stock.adobe.com)

The firm’s monitoring systems detected the individual uploading course materials to an AI platform to generate exam answers, resulting in a financial penalty and a requirement to resit the qualification.

This case is part of a broader trend, with KPMG identifying 28 similar instances of AI-assisted misconduct since July. The firm has since bolstered its surveillance and launched a nationwide education campaign to clarify its policies, The Times reports.

Chief executive Andrew Yates acknowledged the difficulty of policing such technology given its rapid integration into daily life, yet he maintained that the firm remains committed to blocking unauthorised AI access during testing.

He said: “As soon as we introduced monitoring for AI in internal testing in 2024, we found instances of people using AI outside our policy. We followed with a significant firm-wide education campaign and have continued to introduce new technologies to block access to AI during testing.

“Given the everyday use of these tools, some people breach our policy. We take it seriously when they do. We are also looking at ways to strengthen our approach in the current self-reporting regime.”

The scandal follows a history of integrity issues within the Big Four accounting firms. KPMG Australia previously faced a significant fine in 2021 after more than 1,100 staff members shared answers on professional exams. Similarly, KPMG’s US and UK branches have incurred multi-million dollar penalties for failing to prevent widespread cheating.

In response to these persistent challenges, the accounting industry is pivoting toward stricter oversight. The Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA) recently mandated that all students sit exams in person to combat the sophisticated nature of AI-driven dishonesty. While KPMG has pledged greater transparency in its annual reporting, critics like Austalian senator Barbara Pocock argue that the current self-reporting regime remains inadequate and requires more robust regulatory intervention.