68 cards in the blueprint's section Commission, accounting and settlement: 61 are in Lean, 10 are open questions and 6 need a business decision.
Each with the number of cards that depend on it, directly or through other cards, most first. Click one to see what it
depends on and what builds on it.
Only the ORA sends clearance requests, and it must be the payer or the payee of each clearance it sends. It sends the request no later than the day after payment commitment, the moment the payment became successful. The Clearance Manager rejects an EasyPay clearance whose commitment is more than 48 hours older than the request. Case to check: A payment committed at 23:55 on day 1 and requested at 23:50 on day 3 breaks the next-day rule yet passes the 48-hour check.
Open point: The next-day limit applies to all payment methods, but the only enforced limit is 48 hours and only for EasyPay. The business must decide what happens to a late settlement plan clearance and whether the limit is a calendar day or a duration.
22 cards depend on it, directly or through other cards, in 1 area.
For each clearance, the amounts settled across all clearings plus the amount still unsettled equal its agreed net clearance amount. A write-off removes exactly the amount still unsettled. Case to check: The sample clearing shows a partially settled clearance with net clearance amount 250.00 and 50.00 unsettled, beside a 200.00 clearance, with a total of 450.00. The total adds up only if 250.00 is the amount settled, so the agreed amount was 300.00 and appears nowhere.
Counterexample: under a reading where a clawed-back amount does not count as unsettled again, a clearance of 300.00 settled in full and then clawed back by 100.00 keeps 200.00 settled, with nothing unsettled. A later clearing cannot settle the 100.00.
Open point: In a clearing message the net clearance amount field carries the amount settled in that clearing, so the agreed amount travels nowhere. The business must decide where the agreed amount is kept and whether a clawed-back amount counts as unsettled again.
9 cards depend on it, directly or through other cards, in 1 area.
The airline's accounting system receives nothing about an order until at least one of its items has a successful payment. The first posting records a liability for the services' values, including taxes and fees, and a receivable for the amount paid. Case to check: An order has two items, one paid and one still waiting for payment. If the first posting books liability for both, accounting shows an obligation for a service nobody has paid for.
Open point: The source does not say whether that liability covers only the paid items or every item in the order. The business must decide, and must say whether a commitment to pay zero (C-12) counts as a successful payment here.
7 cards depend on it, directly or through other cards, in 1 area.
For each order, the total of successful payments equals the total refunded plus the paid value still held as liability plus revenue recognized plus forfeited amounts. With every term at zero or above, this yields the result that refunds never exceed payments. Case to check: A customer pays 100.00, cancels, and receives 90.00 because a 10.00 tax is non-refundable. Without a forfeited term the 10.00 is neither refunded, held nor earned, and the balance fails.
Counterexample: under the reading where accounting records a cancellation as the airline sends it, a flight paid at 100.00 and cancelled with a goodwill refund of 120.00 leaves 100.00 paid against 120.00 refunded. A refund of 100.00 with a penalty of 25.00 on the same flight leaves 100.00 paid against 125.00 refunded and recognized.
Open point: The sources send payments, refunds as negative payments, penalties and forfeited amounts to accounting but never state a balance. The business must decide whether forfeited non-refundable taxes form their own term, whether a value store counts as held liability, and whether the amounts reported at cancellation must add up to what was paid.
3 cards depend on it, directly or through other cards, in 1 area.
For each party and remittance date, the Clearance Manager adds the net clearance amounts of clearances where the party is payee and subtracts those where it is payer. A positive result makes the party a settlement payee for that amount and a negative one a remittance payer, and the results across all parties sum to zero. Case to check: A seller owes an airline 100.00 by settlement plan and 50.00 by EasyPay. If both enter the seller's net position, the seller is asked to remit 150.00 while the EasyPay provider also pays the 50.00.
Counterexample: a seller owes an airline 100.00 by settlement plan and 50.00 by EasyPay. Under the reading that leaves EasyPay out of the seller's position and keeps it in the airline's, the seller is a remittance payer for 100.00 and the airline a settlement payee for 150.00, and the positions sum to 50.00.
Open point: The netting rule does not say how EasyPay clearances enter it. The EasyPay provider pays them, so they are left out of the seller's remittance but included in the airline's settlement; the business must decide whether the provider counts as a party in the sum.
1 card depends on it, directly or through other cards, in 1 area.
Only the ORA may cancel a clearance, and only one the Clearance Manager has accepted. A cancelled clearance is never settled and the seller is notified; a refused cancellation leaves the clearance in its current status with a reason. Case to check: An order is cancelled with a full refund before the remittance date. If the ORA cancels the original clearance and also clears the refund to the seller, the seller receives a refund for money it never remitted.
Open point: When a clearance can still be cancelled is left to each Clearance Manager. The business must decide the cutoff, such as before the clearing notice or before the remittance date, and whether cancelling a paid order item cancels its clearance or raises a reverse refund clearance.
No card depends on it yet.
checks ONE-806.3!Open questionThe total of a clearing to a settlement payee is never negative, so a bank transfer to the payee can carry it.
Counterexample: a payee due 200.00 on one clearance with 300.00 clawed back on another has a clearing total of minus 100.00.
Open point: whether the payee then becomes a remittance payer or the clawback is carried forward to a later clearing.
No card depends on it yet.
The commission the airline disclosed on an offer item is the commission recorded on the order item created from it. A commission stated once for a whole shopping response applies to every offer in that response. Case to check: An aggregator merges a response carrying a 5% commission at response level with offers from a second airline. The merged offers then seem to carry the first airline's commission.
Open point: The capability asks the airline to repeat the commission in the order confirmation but does not say it must equal what was shown when shopping. The business must decide whether commission may change at pricing or order creation, and what the seller is owed if the order shows less.
No card depends on it yet.
When a ticketed flight order item is changed, the airline may offset the old item's residual value against the new item's fare and taxes, against a change penalty, or both; one of the guide's modes lets the penalty use fare residual only. The result is a single amount due to the airline, a single amount due by the airline, or nothing. Netting never crosses order items or orders, and does not apply to non-flight items with an EMD or to unticketed flight items. Case to check: The old item leaves 50.00 of fare residual and 50.00 of tax residual, and the penalty is 100.00. If the penalty may use fare residual only, 50.00 of penalty stays due to the airline while 50.00 of tax residual is due by it: two amounts where the guide promises one.
Open point: The guide says the amount due is calculated correctly but gives no formula. The business must decide the formula, including how forfeited amounts and a penalty larger than the fare residual enter it; the answer also settles part of C-18's open point on the sign of the difference.
No card depends on it yet.
checks ONE-809.3!Open questionWhen a paid service reaches a final delivery status, none of the amount paid for it is held as a liability any more.
Counterexample: under a reading that keeps the amount paid for a no-show as a liability, a flight paid at 100.00 that ends NOT CLAIMED keeps 100.00 of liability on a service that can no longer change. Under a reading that does not recognize a penalty at cancellation, a flight paid at 100.00 and cancelled with a 25.00 penalty keeps the 25.00 as a liability, since no delivery will ever recognize it.
Open point: which final statuses earn revenue, which return the amount as a refund and which keep it, and when a penalty reported at cancellation is recognized.
No card depends on it yet.
checks ONE-807.6!Open questionA short payment settles each clearance for the same amount under either source page.
Counterexample: a payer owes airline A 100.00 (older) and airline B 100.00 (newer) and pays 100.00. Under Remittance of Funds each airline receives 50.00; under Transfer of Funds A receives 100.00 and B nothing.
Open point: which allocation the Clearance Manager uses.
No card depends on it yet.
Every clearance comes from one payment commitment, identified by the order ID and the payment ID, and each commitment has at most one accepted clearance. A payment split across two methods has two commitments and so two clearances. Case to check: The Clearance Manager decides each clearance in a request separately, so one half of a split payment can clear while the other is rejected, though C-13 says the payment fails unless every method succeeds. The source's own sample request also carries two different clearances under one clearance ID and accepts both.
Counterexample: two clearances for the same order and payment, both signed by both parties, with different clearance IDs, are both accepted when signed clearances are checked only for a repeated clearance ID.
Open point: The Clearance Manager checks for a repeated order and payment pair only when the clearance data is not signed by both parties; for signed data it checks only the clearance ID. The business must decide whether two signed clearances with different IDs for one payment are allowed.
No card depends on it yet.
Accounting posts an order's notifications in the sequence in which the order changed, with no gaps; a missed notification is recovered before any later one is posted. Each posting uses the values the order held at that change, and accounting never corrects or recalculates them outside the order. Case to check: The cancellation notification arrives before the creation notification. Posting it first records a refund against an order that has no receivable.
Open point: The source requires chronological posting and a recovery process but does not say what fixes the sequence. The business must decide whether the order version (C-21), a timestamp or a per-order counter orders the postings, and whether a later notification waits for a missing one.
No card depends on it yet.
checks ONE-809.5!Open questionAccounting never refunds more for an order than was paid for it.
Counterexample: under the reading where accounting records a cancellation as the airline sends it, a goodwill refund of 120.00 on a flight paid at 100.00 is recorded as it is.
Open point: whether a refund may exceed what was paid, for example as goodwill, and how the excess is accounted for.
No card depends on it yet.
checks ONE-802.6!Open questionThe clearance for a refund through the seller never has the seller paying the ORA: its amount is never negative.
Counterexample: a payment of 75.00 carried 7.50 of commission. Under the reading that recalls the commission in full, a refund of 5.00 gives a clearance of minus 2.50: the seller pays the ORA for the customer's refund.
Open point: how much commission is recalled on a partial refund.
No card depends on it yet.
checks ONE-807.5!Open questionUnder every reading and rounding, the amounts settled from a short payment add up to what was paid.
Counterexample: a payer owes three airlines 100.00 each and pays 100.00. Under the Remittance of Funds page each share is 33.333. Rounded down the airlines receive 99.99 in all; rounded up, 100.02.
Open point: how a proportional share is rounded and who receives the remainder.
No card depends on it yet.
An open guarantee fails under some reading of the sources. For these, Lean proves a version under one reading, named
with _of_. The model leaves the choice of reading to the business.
Open point: The sources send payments, refunds as negative payments, penalties and forfeited amounts to accounting but never state a balance. The business must decide whether forfeited non-refundable taxes form their own term, whether a value store counts as held liability, and whether the amounts reported at cancellation must add up to what was paid.
Lean proves the guarantee for one reading of the sources. If the business settles the question this way, it holds for every input:
Where the airline checks the amounts of a cancellation, whatever accounting is told about an order's services, its payments equal its refunds, plus the amount held as liability, plus the revenue recognized, plus the forfeited amounts, under every reading of revenue.
Proven as order_books_balance_of_checked; open as order_books_balance.
The requirements whose rules or guarantees are on this area's cards. Each opens its chapter in the review document.
The capabilities of IATA's Airline Retailing Maturity Index that this area's candidate cards belong to. The codes and
names are IATA's.