Around 19% of the UK’s planned audit and corporate governance reforms have been implemented, according to new analysis by the Centre for Public Interest Audit (CPIA).
The findings come after the government dropped plans for a comprehensive bill earlier this year.
Go deeper with GlobalData
Access deeper industry intelligence
Experience unmatched clarity with a single platform that combines unique data, AI, and human expertise.
The proposed reforms drew on several independent reviews released in 2018 and 2019 and received cross-party political backing. They were framed as a “once-in-a-generation re-formulation” of the UK’s audit and governance regime.
Although reform was promised in the 2024 King’s Speech, the government announced in January 2026 that it would not proceed with a wide-ranging bill.
Despite the scrapping, the CPIA said some measures have moved ahead without primary legislation.
Changes such as the ‘operational separation’ of audit arms within large businesses, tighter supervisory approaches and additional reporting by directors on internal controls have been brought in via the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) and the audit companies.
CPIA executive director Dean Beale said: “The decision in January to drop plans for audit and corporate governance legislation was disappointing.
“But in announcing this decision, the government was right to highlight important changes in the sector since the proposals were first put forward.
“Elements of the 2022 proposals that could be achieved without legislation have played a key part in that change.”
The CPIA notes that certain government commitments are still on the table – including consultation on updated corporate reporting requirements and putting the FRC on a statutory basis. This means a further 12% of the 2022 package can be implemented.
However, the analysis also indicates that most of the agenda is no longer moving.
With no legislative framework in place, around 69% of the planned reforms now appear to have reached a “dead-end”.
According to the CPIA, this outcome has left gaps in UK director accountability and has contributed to what it sees as an inconsistent and unclear regulatory landscape for audit and corporate governance in the UK.
