Verification means testing the research, rule paths, arithmetic relationships, templates, and release controls LeoFolio manages. It never means that LeoFolio has independently verified a user’s identity, employment, income, or source data.
A page can cite an official source, a formula can pass automated tests, and a PDF can render correctly—yet each proves something different. The evidence must match the claim.
Evidence status
The current assurance system combines public-source evidence, automated tests, controlled assets, and release gates. No single layer should be treated as independent certification of the entire product.
| System | Primary evidence | What it supports | Important boundary |
|---|---|---|---|
| U.S. wage-statement research | Official citations, classifications, jurisdiction pages, and visible review dates for all 50 states plus Washington, DC. | Traceable public summaries of statement fields, delivery, retention, and scope. | Informational research, not legal advice for a specific employer or dispute. |
| U.S. payroll calculations | Versioned rule data, calculation traces, regression cases, reconciliation checks, and server-side recalculation in supported final flows. | Consistency of supported formulas, boundaries, rounding, and document totals. | Not an external financial audit and not a substitute for current professional review. |
| Canadian payroll calculations | Published CRA formulas and parameters, supported jurisdiction rules, internal automated comparisons, and release controls. | Repeatable internal checking of supported 2026 calculation paths. | Internal test success is not the same as retained independent validation or third-party certification. |
| Fixed templates | Pinned template assets, expected fields, generation checks, and output inspection. | Use of the intended controlled document layout and expected field placement. | A recipient copy does not itself complete government filing or establish acceptance. |
| Release integrity | Focused tests, full release gate, protected-file hashes, source certification, and rollback checks. | That reviewed source—not an untested or altered tree—reached the release decision. | A passing release gate does not validate facts entered later by a customer. |
Validation layers
The verification plan follows the path a result takes, from an official source to a public claim or finished PDF.
Researchers identify the controlling or most authoritative available publication, capture the narrow conclusion it supports, retain the citation, and date the review. Conflicts or omissions remain visible rather than being smoothed over.
Known inputs are paired with expected outputs for supported tax years and jurisdictions. Cases include ordinary calculations plus boundaries such as thresholds, maximums, pay-frequency conversions, supplemental wages, and rounding.
Independent relationships catch errors a single expected total may miss. Gross pay must reconcile to earnings, net pay to gross less taxes and deductions, and YTD amounts to their stated opening basis and current period.
Document tests confirm the expected template, fields, labels, dates, and totals are used. Fixed government-style assets are controlled rather than accepted as arbitrary customer uploads.
Release tests cover canonical routes, legacy redirects, protected operational files, public-domain references, and key browser-to-server boundaries so content changes do not silently alter transactional behavior.
The tested source fingerprint is recorded with critical configuration hashes. A preview is inspected before production, and promotion or production deployment must originate from the reviewed source state.
Fail-closed behavior
When a required rule path or fact cannot be resolved safely, the correct result is a disclosed limitation or a blocked finalization—not a convenient estimate presented as definitive.
A local tax or statutory program that is outside the supported rule set should trigger review rather than disappear from the calculation.
Year-to-date validation depends on the pay periods and opening values supplied. Missing history cannot be reconstructed reliably from the current period alone.
A formula or threshold is not silently carried into another tax year. Special compensation and deduction cases must use a supported path or stop.
Canadian assurance
Canadian payroll engines use official CRA material and supported provincial or territorial parameters. Automated test and internal comparison work can show repeatability against expected cases. Formal retained external evidence, documented reviewer independence, and broader scenario coverage are separate assurance layers and should not be inferred from a green automated test result.
Important limits
A generated LeoFolio document is based on facts entered by the user. Verification of platform logic cannot turn those facts into independent evidence.
LeoFolio does not independently confirm identity, employer, worker status, hours, wages, deductions, tax elections, or year-to-date history.
A lender, landlord, agency, accountant, court, or other recipient may require employer records, bank statements, filed tax returns, contracts, or other independent evidence.
The tools do not replace payroll processing, tax filing, remittance, legal analysis, or professional judgment. The person creating and using the record remains responsible for those obligations.
The Research & Calculation Methodology page explains source selection, rule versioning, server recalculation, reconciliation, update controls, and supported boundaries.