PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to examine how Supreme audit institutions (SAIs) address the issue of auditing ethical cases and, more specifically, to research whether the organizational structure of an SAI affects the variables of “corruption” and “trust in government.”Design/methodology/approachThe authors categorized SAIs into two groups depending on their organizational structure according to two divergent philosophies: the court (French) and Anglo-Saxon models. These reflect the presidential and parliamentary systems, respectively. Given the lack of a common definition for these concepts, the authors tested their results using several indexes for corruption by examining OECD (The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) Member countries between 2015 and 2019.FindingsThe authors’ research showed that SAIs organized according to the Anglo-Saxon philosophy achieved better scores than judicial SAIs for all indexes, and the difference was statistically significant. This result confirms the results of previous studies; however, one single common SAI model worldwide is not necessarily the optimal solution for fighting corruption.Originality/valueThe topic of this paper is a challenging and promising one for scholars and practitioners alike, as it combines a review of SAIs' community practices with academic research by expanding the scant literature in this field.