Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- fxdemo:06-part:10-operating-model:10-4-accounting-basis:start [2026/06/27 09:26] – created nick_dido
+++ fxdemo:06-part:10-operating-model:10-4-accounting-basis:start [2026/07/18 12:33] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1
@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-====== 9.3 Competition and Provider Substitution ======
+====== 9.4 Accounting Basis ======
 [[fxdemo:06-part:10-operating-model:start| Return to Operating Model]]
-The [[fxdemo:99_part_annexes:annex-b-terms-and-definitions:c:cost_recovery_compensation_and_settlement_plane]] supports competition among qualified Nodes and qualified service providers. Competition applies only where providers perform equivalent governed work under equivalent obligations.
+The Cost Recovery, Compensation, and Settlement Plane uses ordinary accounting concepts. It does not require blockchain, tokenisation, cryptocurrency, speculative payment mechanisms, or a separate monetary system.
-A substitute [[fxdemo:99_part_annexes:annex-b-terms-and-definitions:n:node]] needs the same applicable interface, semantic model, policy obligation, evidence requirement, security requirement, residency constraint, sovereignty constraint, operational expectation, and service-level context as the Node it replaces.
+The plane supports accounting outcomes such as:
+  * Service charges
+  * Usage-based fees
+  * Internal chargebacks
+  * Intercompany allocations
+  * Regulated cost recovery
+  * Consortium settlement
+  * Reimbursement
+  * Infrastructure levies
+  * Provider compensation
+  * Persistence charges
+  * Evidence-retention charges
-This model supports lower-cost compliant processing without rewarding under-compliance. A lower-cost provider has architectural value only when the provider performs the required governed work and supplies the required evidence.
+The plane supplies structured operational and evidentiary records that support accounting entries. Accounting systems, contracts, regulations, and organizational policies determine the final accounting treatment.
-Competitive Substitution also supports resilience and procurement flexibility. The architecture can compare qualified implementations on cost, service level, jurisdictional eligibility, evidence quality, operational performance, and settlement context.