Financial workflow
Processor-to-bank settlement
Provider reporting is one input; the comparison remains company-owned.
What this helps you do
From the financial question to a clear next move.
- The problem
- A net payout does not explain its gross-to-bank composition.
- When it matters
- Payout settlement, daily reconciliation, or close.
- What TallyUp does
- Apply policy and tolerance; calculate expected cash; compare payout and bank; retain source digests.
- What it looks at
- Gross, refunds, fees, reserves, chargebacks, payout, bank deposit, identifiers, and digests.
- What you decide
- Return agreement or review exception and block cash-to-close outside tolerance.
- What improves
- Unmatched amount; exception rate; resolution age; replay equality; close blockers.
- A fair question
- The processor provides a report. The decision still needs independently retained bank evidence.
Fictional example—not a customer
Harbor Supply Co.
These example values show how the workflow behaves without implying a customer result.
- What happened
- Expected payout is $90,000 from a $100,000 gross population.
- What needs attention
- Bank deposit is $88,000, producing a negative $2,000 difference.
- What supports the review
- Gross, refunds, fees, reserves, chargebacks, payout, bank deposit, identifiers, and digests.
- What the person decides
- The controller records review-exception and requests the reserve movement.
- What happens next
- The same source digests reproduce the exception without an inferred entry.
More financial work
Processor-to-bank settlement
See this financial work in TallyUp.
Choose the financial question you want to see. We will shape the walkthrough around that work and the people responsible for it.