Stephen asked that specs come from recognized documents, not from
anyone's memory. There is no single US bookkeeping bible; authority is
layered, and this records it:
- docs/spec/sources/: verbatim excerpts (whitespace normalized), each
with URL, retrieval date, and the SHA-256 of the fetched file, of
public-domain texts: Pacioli's 1494 treatise in Geijsbeek's 1914
translation (double entry, the trial balance, one money, write only
forward, correct by opposite entry, close into capital); IRS Pub. 583,
538, 946, 15; the 1099-MISC/NEC instructions (2025 and 2026); 26 U.S.C.
§6041, §6041A, §704; Treas. Reg. §1.263(a)-1(f) and -4(f); Notice
2015-82; Rev. Proc. 98-25; Form 1065 instructions; 17 U.S.C. §105. The
excerpts were extracted by matching each passage against the fetched
file, so none can contain text the source doesn't.
- docs/spec/rules.md: the rule catalog, B-1 to B-22. Each rule says
AUTHORITY, CONVENTION, or DECISION; cites its sources (FASB's
Codification and Concepts Statement 8 and OpenStax quoted briefly,
never copied: copyright and CC BY-NC-SA); and names the code that
enforces it and the tests and proofs that check it.
- Spec blocks in the code now carry SOURCE: lines into the catalog;
AGENTS.md makes sourcing rule 0 of the formal-methods bar.
Corrections the sources turned up: the de minimis limit is $500 in the
regulation and $2,500 by Notice 2015-82 (both now cited); 1099
thresholds after 2026 are inflation-indexed, so the engine's flat
$2,000 for 2027+ is an open question (B-19). Unverified ASC paragraphs
(360-10-35-4, 340-10, 230-10-45-10, 606-10-55-37B, 210) are listed in
docs/spec/README.md until someone with a FASB basic-view login reads
them.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01GWVo7x3UHw5kwCUaWxiejX
swaitsandClaude Opus 5.5
ad572ae89d