The increasing frequency of disputes between the quality control team and operations analysts regarding audit findings at Company X has led to delays in audit reviews and risks of regulatory non-compliance. Despite existing quality control measures, a research gap remains regarding how specific Quality Control System (QCS) elements influence audit quality. This study aimed to investigate the effects of relevant ethical terms and independency on audit quality, and the moderating role of professional skepticism in these relationships. A quantitative, correlational design was employed, utilizing a questionnaire adapted from the reference journal to gather data from 102 QC specialists. The research framework hypothesized that relevant ethical terms and independency positively influence audit quality, with professional skepticism enhancing these effects. Data analysis involved Cronbach’s Alpha for reliability and multiple linear regression for hypothesis testing. Results showed that both relevant ethical terms and independency had significant positive effects on audit quality, and that professional skepticism significantly strengthened the relationship between relevant ethical terms and audit quality. Based on these findings, a comprehensive Audit Quality Improvement Action Plan was proposed, recommending enhanced ethical training, stricter enforcement of auditor independence, and the institutionalization of professional skepticism workshops to reduce disputes, improve audit accuracy, and ensure regulatory compliance.