美國審計體系是一個以政策評估為導向的審計機制，而我國審計體系則是一個以法律審計為主，績效評估審計為輔的制度。儘管我國審計制度的發展在時間上先於美國，我國審計制?的建構受到政治環境與發展的嚴重影響，而相關理論與經驗又不足，更重要的是我國在民之前又無西方那套民主的政治理論與經驗法則，導致審計制度的發展特別顯得艱難。相對而言，美國過去八十餘年來運作的成績，以及獲得的許多寶貴成果，都足可供我參考，也是我國審計建構得借鏡的經驗。 雖然兩國的政治體系不岣，且政治文化有異，兩國的開發程度更未立於相同的水平，但計的專業性以及其在民主政府的制衡性則未嘗稍異。相對的更可相互援引，促進民主政府邁向一個重效率與講求資源有效分配的機制。本文據美國審計制度的設計，觀察與研究我國近代審計權的發展，以及在民主政治之下審計權的評估機制與運作。
This is a comparative analysis of auditing systems between the US and the ROC in Taiwan. The study is to seek what is difference in the development of auditing systems in terms of evaluative functions. In the earlier period of development, the US system emphasizes bookkeeping function, while the ROC stresses legal control. After more than seventy-year development, the US auditing principle has been oriented toward evaluative function which is based on economy, efficiency, and effectiveness. In general the spirit of accountability, integrity, and reliability will become the goal that the US auditing system seeks. On the other hand, the ROC auditing system has placed on more legal auditing practices, evaluative function has not been given necessary attention. This article will explain why two auditing systems have such a difference.
