---
id: ADR-ACC-TRX-012
title: Allocation Release During Billing Reduction
product_area: accounting
module: transactions
revision: 1
status: proposed
design_intent: confirmed
source_sha:
  services-accounting: f47cb263875bbc0c5640fba7dae6785ec32695f8
  react-console: baf6dae382d6f41dce976c7f848667ccc37e076f
decision: >-
  A reduction memo releases only the receipt allocations it needs in
  newest-allocation order within its transaction, retaining the money on those
  receipts and leaving refund as an explicit separate operation.
constrains:
  - DOM-ACC-TRX-001
  - DOM-ACC-TRX-003
  - WF-ACC-TRX-003
  - WF-ACC-TRX-010
  - SCR-ACC-TRX-007
origin: >-
  Andrew’s A-5 (2026-10-18):
  services-accounting:docs/architecture/accounting-2.0/02-decisions.md#2.8
  Andrew's acceptance decisions of 2026-10-18 (about 15:35 UTC)
alternatives:
  - option: >-
      Reject paid-line reduction until staff manually release receipt
      allocations.
    why_not: >-
      That would add separate steps to the staff correction and Commerce
      cancellation sequence.
  - option: Return the released money automatically with the memo.
    why_not: >-
      Money return has its own authorization, approval and external-processing
      lifecycle.
consequences:
  - The reduction editor does not offer another paid-money treatment.
  - >-
    Released value remains available on the receipt for placement, credit
    creation or return.
  - >-
    Billing cancellation can request its returns using the value released by its
    reduction memo.
supersedes: []
evidence:
  - >-
    services-accounting at f47cb263:
    docs/architecture/accounting-2.0/02-decisions.md, 05-lifecycles.md,
    06-integrity-model.md.
---
# Allocation Release During Billing Reduction

## Context

Reducing already paid billing needs to separate changing the debt from returning the money. The recorded ruling permits atomic allocation release within the memo command.

## Decision

The structured decision records the governing boundary and its observed limits. Its origin distinguishes Andrew’s rulings from reversible implementation choices and proposed publication policy.

## Alternatives Considered

The listed alternatives explain the competing responsibility or recovery approaches and why the recorded direction differs. They are explanatory comparisons, without evidence of a separate approval discussion for each alternative.

## Consequences

The consequence rows identify implementation obligations, current departures and gaps requiring further verification. Artifact status remains proposed until Andrew approves it.