Two entities report the same transaction differently. The group close eliminates it, and the difference lands in a reconciliation line that somebody explained — at some point, somewhere. At the next close the same work starts again, because the explanation does not sit on the balance.
Both sides report from their own ERP. Whether they mean the same thing only shows up in the comparison.
It gets cleared by email. The outcome sits in the email, not on the balance.
It runs. What was left of the difference, and why, is hard to reconstruct afterwards.
The data is usually there. It just takes effect in different systems at different times.
Four steps, and the same cross-functional capabilities across every one of them.
Every module is a standalone entry point. This chain shows what comes together once several of them run on the same finance data model.
In active development
Runs the comparison per partner pair and period and holds what was reported, what was eliminated and what is still open.
In active development
Reconciliation is a close task with an owner and a date, not a line in a file.
In active development
Every difference becomes a case: who clears it, by when, with what outcome — and the clearing stays on the balance.
Pilot / validation
The document behind the service and the intercompany agreement hang on the record, not in a folder beside it.
Verified in product
Closure per partner pair is confirmed, and the confirmation can be read back later — with person, timestamp and basis.
Accept, correct, defer or escalate — per partner pair, inside the authority of the entities involved. Clearing a difference is a decision with a basis, not a tick.
The posting and the balance are created there. FinanceOS compares and runs the clearing; it does not repost.
Where a consolidation system carries the determination, it stays there. FinanceOS supplies the reconciled state and the evidence behind it.
The rule — the charging basis, the terms, the corridors — is set where it is owned. This chain executes it; it does not replace it.
What is not marked, we do not claim. The full state per capability is on the module pages and under what we can evidence today.
No, deliberately. Where a consolidation system carries the determination, it stays there — including where your ERP does it natively. This chain works upstream: it carries the reconciled state per partner pair and the evidence the elimination rests on.
Not this chain. Rule authority and execution are separate: the charging basis is owned where it is set, and this chain carries its execution through to evidenced closure.
It stays visible and named. A residual difference with an owner, a reason and a decision is a different state from a residual line without an explanation — even when the amount is the same.
Bring this case as it looks in your organisation. We work through it on your example and say where a common finance layer holds and where it does not.