# What gives proof that every party in a deal was paid?
Proof that every party was paid is a signed share agreement plus a payment record a third party can confirm. Eight kinds of evidence compared on six points.
---
Proof that every party in a deal was paid comes from two things kept together: the agreement that sets each party's share, signed by the parties, and a payment record produced or confirmable by someone other than the payer, such as bank transfer confirmations, a neutral holder's disbursement report, a payment processor's payout report or an onchain transaction. What separates these records is one criterion: whether a recipient, an accountant or a court can check the record at its source without relying on the payer's word.
No single document does the whole job. A bank confirmation shows that money left an account, and says nothing about what was owed. A signed settlement statement shows what was owed, and does not show that the money moved. An onchain transaction shows every recipient and every amount in one public record, and identifies addresses, not people. The work of the person responsible for the payout is to assemble a file in which each of these gaps is closed by another document. Rules on evidence and on record keeping vary by country and by profession; where a rule is cited below, its source is named.
## What does proof of a multi-party payout have to establish?
Proof of a multi-party payout has to establish six points for every party: the share that was agreed, the amount actually paid, the date and time of payment, the destination, that the payment is final, and that the document cannot have been altered afterwards. A file that leaves one of the six open for one party is not proof that everyone was paid; it is proof that some were.
- **The agreed share.** What was this party owed? Without it, an amount paid cannot be called correct, only paid. The recipient asks this first; an auditor asks it second.
- **The amount actually paid.** What reached the party, after any fee deducted on the way? A transfer of $48,000 that arrives as, say, $47,975 because an intermediary bank took a charge is a difference somebody has to explain.
- **The date and time.** When was the party paid, and was it before or after the others? In a deal where one party's payment depends on another's, or where interest or a deadline runs, the order matters as much as the day.
- **The destination.** Where did the money go, and does that destination belong to the party? A payment to the right name at the wrong account is a payout that went wrong, whatever the confirmation says.
- **Finality.** Can the payment still be recalled, returned, reversed or charged back? A record that shows a payment "sent" is weaker than one that shows it settled and beyond recall.
- **Integrity of the record.** Could the document have been edited after the event, and can anyone tell? This point is about the evidence itself, not about the payment.
## Which kinds of evidence establish the agreed share, the amount and the date?
The agreed share is established only by a document the parties signed before the payment; the amount and the date are established by the record of whoever moved the money. No payment record proves what was owed, and no agreement proves what was paid.
The table scores eight kinds of evidence on the first three points. "Stated" means the document says it, in the words of whoever wrote the document; "Yes" means the document comes from the party that executed or agreed the fact.
| Evidence | Agreed share | Amount actually paid | Date and time |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Bank transfer confirmation or statement | No | Yes, amount debited | Date yes, time not always |
| Screenshot of a banking or payment screen | No | Stated only | Stated only |
| Remittance advice | Partly, cites the invoice or deal | Stated by the payer | Stated by the payer |
| Settlement or closing statement signed by the parties | Yes | Amount due, not the movement | Date of the statement |
| Neutral holder's ledger and disbursement report | Yes, when instructions are attached | Yes | Yes |
| Accounting system records | Partly, if the agreement is attached | Recorded by the payer | Entry date |
| Payment processor's payout report | Partly, if the split was set up in the tool | Yes | Yes |
| Onchain transaction from an onchain payment router | No, amounts only | Yes, every amount | Yes, block time |
## Which kinds of evidence establish the destination, finality and integrity?
The destination, finality and integrity of a payment record are most firmly established by evidence held by a third party that can reproduce it on request: a bank, a neutral holder, a payment processor or a public ledger. Evidence that exists only as a file in the payer's hands scores lowest on all three.
| Evidence | Destination | Payment is final | Cannot be altered afterwards |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Bank transfer confirmation or statement | Account number, name sometimes | Partly, shows sent or debited | Partly, the bank can confirm it |
| Screenshot of a banking or payment screen | Stated only | No | No |
| Remittance advice | Stated by the payer | No | No |
| Settlement or closing statement signed by the parties | Payee name, rarely the account | No | Yes, each signer holds a copy |
| Neutral holder's ledger and disbursement report | Payee and method of payment | Yes, when issued after funds cleared | Yes, held by a third party |
| Accounting system records | As entered by the payer | No | Depends on the audit log |
| Payment processor's payout report | Payout account, often masked | Partly, payouts can be returned | Partly, the processor can reissue it |
| Onchain transaction from an onchain payment router | Address, not a named person | Yes, once the block is finalized | Yes, public and re-checkable |
Finality is the point most files get wrong, because the usual documents are issued at the moment of sending. A transfer confirmation says the bank accepted the instruction. Whether a transfer can later be recalled or returned depends on the payment system and its rules, which differ from one system and one country to the next; the bank statement for the following days, showing no return, is what completes the picture. Card payments carry a chargeback right for the cardholder, which is a protection for the payer and, for the same reason, a period during which the payment received is not yet beyond dispute.
Integrity has two levels. The first is whether the copy in the file is the original. The second, which matters more, is whether a reader can go back to the source and compare. A bank statement in the file can be edited like any other document, and the bank's own copy cannot be edited by the customer: a statement is strong evidence because the bank can be asked, not because the file looks official.
## Why is a screenshot weak evidence of payment?
A screenshot is weak evidence of payment because it is an image made by the party who benefits from it, at one moment, with no route back to the source: it cannot be traced to the system that produced it, it does not show whether the payment later settled, and it can be edited without leaving a mark. In audit terms, it is a copy of a display, produced by an interested party, with no control over its creation or its custody.
The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board's standard on audit evidence, AS 1105, gives the scale against which a screenshot can be measured. Evidence obtained from a knowledgeable source that is independent of the company is more reliable than evidence obtained only from internal sources. Evidence obtained directly by the auditor is more reliable than evidence obtained indirectly. Evidence provided by original documents is more reliable than evidence provided by photocopies or facsimiles, and the reliability of a document converted to electronic form depends on the controls over that conversion and its maintenance.
A screenshot also freezes a status that may change. "Payment sent", "processing" and "scheduled" are all screens a payer can capture in good faith before a transfer is rejected for a wrong account number, held for a compliance review or returned. The image stays true to what the screen showed and false to what happened.
A screenshot is the party's own image of a screen, forwarded indirectly, with nothing controlling what happened between the screen and the image. It remains a useful courtesy that tells a recipient to look at their account, and it can carry the reference a recipient needs to trace a transfer. It belongs in the conversation, not in the file. What replaces it in the file is the document issued by the institution, or a reference the recipient can look up for themselves.
## Who produces each kind of evidence, and can a recipient check it alone?
A recipient can check a payment record alone only when the record is held by someone other than the payer and the recipient has a way to reach it: a neutral holder that reports to all parties, or a public ledger anyone can read. For bank confirmations, processor reports and accounting records, a recipient sees their own payment in their own account and depends on the payer for everyone else's.
| Evidence | Who produces and holds it | A recipient can verify it alone | One document covers all parties |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Bank transfer confirmation or statement | The payer's bank; held by the payer | Own payment only, in own account | No, one per payment |
| Screenshot | The payer | No | No |
| Remittance advice | The payer | No | No, one per recipient |
| Signed settlement or closing statement | The preparer; each signer keeps a copy | Yes, for the shares | Yes |
| Neutral holder's ledger and disbursement report | The escrow, settlement or paying agent | Yes, on request to the holder | Yes |
| Accounting system records | The payer or its accountant | No | Yes, inside the payer's books |
| Payment processor's payout report | The processor; held by the account owner | Own payout only | Yes, for the account owner |
| Onchain transaction from an onchain payment router | The network; held publicly | Yes, with the transaction reference | Yes |
How hard each kind is to alter follows from who holds it. A document held only by the payer can be changed by the payer, and the question becomes whether the system leaves a trace: an accounting system with a locked period and an audit log records who changed an entry and when, while a spreadsheet does not. A document held by an institution can be reissued by that institution, so an altered copy is exposed the moment anyone asks for a fresh one. A document signed by all the parties exists in as many copies as there are signers, and one altered copy disagrees with the others. A record on a public ledger is kept by the network's participants as a whole and can be re-read by anyone.
How long each kind stays available is the other half. Banks, processors and neutral holders keep records for periods set by their own rules and regulators, and online access to old statements often ends well before the institution's own archive does; a statement that could be downloaded this month may need a formal request in a few years. Accounting records last as long as the business keeps its system and its backups. A signed statement lasts as long as the signers keep their copies. An onchain transaction stays readable for as long as the network operates, with no account to close and no archive request to make.
Neutral holders earn their place in this comparison for a reason that has nothing to do with technology. An escrow agent, a settlement agent or a paying agent has no share in the deal, keeps a ledger for the file under professional rules, and answers to all the parties. Its disbursement report is the conventional answer to the question of this article, and in many kinds of transaction it is the answer a lender, a regulator or a court expects to see.
## What does the file contain for a $240,000 payout to five parties?
For a $240,000 payout to five parties, the file contains the signed share agreement in every case, and then either five bank confirmations with the payer's statement, or one disbursement report from a neutral holder, or one onchain transaction with the record linking each address to a party. The agreement is the same under all three approaches; what changes is how many payment records there are and who holds them.
The worked example is illustrative. A $240,000 fee is shared among five parties in percentages agreed and signed before payment: the lead advisor 55% ($132,000), the co-advisor 20% ($48,000), the introducer 12% ($28,800), legal counsel 8% ($19,200) and a technical consultant 5% ($12,000). The five shares total 100% and the five amounts total $240,000.
| What the file shows | Five bank confirmations | Neutral holder's disbursement report | One onchain transaction plus the share agreement |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Money movements | 1 in to the payer, 5 out | 1 in to the holder, 5 out | 1 transaction, 5 transfers inside it |
| Who holds the money in between | The payer | The neutral holder | No one |
| When each party is paid | When the payer sends each transfer | When the holder disburses | All five in the same transaction |
| Payment records to keep | 5 confirmations and the payer's statement | 1 report listing 5 disbursements | 1 transaction reference |
Under the first approach, the payer receives the $240,000 and sends five transfers. The file holds seven documents: the agreement, five confirmations and the statement showing the five debits and no returns. It is sound evidence, provided the payer assembles it, and each recipient can confirm only the line that reached their own account. Showing the co-advisor that the introducer was paid means sending the co-advisor someone else's bank details, which is why this file usually stays with the payer.
Under the second approach, the client pays the neutral holder, which disburses according to signed instructions and issues a report listing the five payees, the five amounts and the dates. The parties' file holds two documents, the instructions and the report, and the holder keeps the underlying bank records. Every party can ask the holder for the same report.
Under the third approach, one transaction carries the five transfers. The file holds the agreement, which must list each party's receiving address next to its share, and the transaction reference. Any party can look the transaction up and read all five amounts, which also means anyone else who has the reference can.
The difference between the approaches grows with the number of parties, as the chart shows for the documents in the file. A longer file is not a weaker one: the cost is in requesting, matching and keeping each extra document.
Documents in the file as the number of parties growsShare agreement plus payment records; illustrative count
One bank confirmation per party, plus the statementOne record covering all parties
Separate confirmations: the agreement, one confirmation per party and the payer's statement. Single record: the agreement and one disbursement report or one onchain transaction. A neutral holder still keeps its own bank records behind its report.
## What does an onchain transaction prove, and what does it leave out?
An onchain transaction proves that stated amounts moved from one address to listed addresses at a recorded time, in a record that is public, final once the block is finalized, and re-checkable by anyone; it leaves out who owns each address and what each party was owed. It is the strongest of the eight kinds of evidence on integrity and on covering all parties in one record, and it needs two companion documents to become proof of a deal.
Finality has a technical definition on a public network. According to the Ethereum Foundation's documentation, time on Ethereum is divided into slots of 12 seconds and epochs of 32 slots, which makes an epoch 6.4 minutes long, and a transaction is considered finalized once it is part of a chain with a supermajority link between two checkpoints. The same documentation states that reverting a finalized block would require the forfeiture of at least one third of all staked ether. Finality therefore arrives in minutes, and after it the record does not change. Other networks define finality differently, and the file should note which network the payment used.
What the transaction leaves out is just as precise.
- **Identity.** An address is a string of characters. Nothing onchain says that the address receiving $28,800 belongs to the introducer. The link is made off the chain, by a document in which each party states its own receiving address, ideally signed by that party.
- **The agreed share.** The amounts are visible; the reason for them is not. The signed share agreement supplies it, and the reader checks that each amount equals the stated percentage of the total.
- **The value in the deal's currency.** The record shows units of a token. Where the agreement is in dollars and the payment is in a dollar-denominated token, the amounts match line by line; where it is in another asset, the file needs the rate used and its source.
- **Privacy.** The record is public. Every party sees what the others received, which is the purpose, and so can anyone who learns which address belongs to whom. Parties who need their share kept confidential from each other should weigh that before choosing this route.
## Where does a payment router such as Shaka fit?
An onchain payment router produces a single onchain record of who was paid what as a by-product of how it pays: one payment comes in, and every party receives its share in the same transaction. Shaka is one such router, and it suits a payout whose shares are fixed percentages agreed before the client pays.
Shaka routes a payment and never holds the funds. Each party's share is set as a percentage of the deal, and each recipient can sign their share before the client pays; signing costs the parties nothing. The destinations are fixed and signed before the payment, so the money cannot be redirected at the last minute. The client pays once, through a payment link, and every party is paid at the same moment, in one transaction. The payment is onchain and final, every party can see that the others were paid, the record of who was paid what stays available onchain, and a payment record can be kept for the file. A deal has at most 20 recipients.
It does not fit every payout. Shaka is not an escrow service, a bank, a payment processor or a payroll tool. A deal in which money must be held until a condition is met needs a neutral holder. A deal with more than 20 recipients, a payout that must arrive in a bank account in local currency, parties who cannot or will not receive an onchain payment, and a transaction where a lender or a regulator requires a licensed agent's disbursement report are all cases for one of the other approaches.
## How do you choose the evidence for your payout?
The choice of evidence for a multi-party payout depends on four things: whether the parties trust the payer to hold the money, whether each party needs to see that the others were paid, whether a rule or a counterparty requires a particular document, and how many parties there are. No kind of evidence is strongest on every criterion.
- **Two or three parties who know each other, paid by bank transfer.** Separate bank confirmations and the payer's statement are enough, provided the shares were written down and signed first. The file is short and every document is one an accountant recognises.
- **Funds that must be held until something happens, or a transaction with a lender, a regulator or a registry involved.** A neutral holder is the natural route, and its ledger and disbursement report are the documents the other participants expect. The report covers every party, and the holder remains available to confirm it.
- **A business that already collects through a payment processor.** The processor's payout report evidences amounts and dates for each payout account. Check how long reports stay downloadable, and remember that only the account owner sees the whole report.
- **Many parties, fixed percentages, and a wish that everyone sees the same record.** A single onchain transaction with the signed share agreement gives one record all parties can check alone. It requires that every party can receive an onchain payment and accepts that amounts are publicly visible.
## What should you keep, and for how long?
Keep the signed share agreement, the payment record for every party, the document linking each destination to its party, the evidence of finality and each recipient's acknowledgment, for at least as long as the longest tax, professional or contractual period that applies to any party, and keep them in the form the institution issued them, not as pictures of a screen. The periods vary by country and by profession, so the list of what to keep is firmer than the number of years.
| What to keep | Why | Who should hold a copy |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Share agreement signed by all parties, with percentages and total | Establishes what each party was owed | Every party |
| Destination record: bank details or receiving address confirmed by each party | Links each payment to a person | The payer or holder; each party for its own |
| Payment record for each party, in its original form | Establishes amount, date and destination | The payer or holder; each party for its own |
| Evidence of finality: later statement with no return, cleared-funds report, or finalized transaction | Shows the payment can no longer be undone | The payer or holder |
| Acknowledgment of receipt from each party | Closes the question from the recipient's side | The payer or holder |
| Reconciliation: amounts paid against shares, totalling the amount received | Shows nobody was left out | The payer or holder; the accountant |
On duration, two published rules show the range. The Internal Revenue Service states a general period of 3 years for keeping tax records in the United States, extended to 6 years where unreported income exceeds 25% of the gross income shown on the return and to 7 years for a claim of loss from worthless securities or a bad debt deduction. In the United Kingdom, government guidance for limited companies states that records must be kept for 6 years from the end of the last company financial year they relate to, and longer in several cases, including a late return or a compliance check. Other countries set other periods, regulated professions such as lawyers, escrow and settlement agents and brokers often have their own, and the time within which a contract claim can be brought is a separate period again.