A bank or auditor asks what your business did before accepting a USDT payment. Sending a PDF with no explanation leaves them to guess which payment it concerns and what you decided. Build a short packet that separates the screening evidence, customer-provided information and your own review. The aim is a traceable record, not a claim that any institution must accept your conclusion.
Start with a cover note
State the business case, payment reference, checked subject and network. Name the reviewer and record the decision date. Explain whether the check occurred during onboarding, before receipt or after funds arrived. Those timing differences matter when another reader asks what evidence was available before an action was taken.
For a training packet, use FAKE_AUDIT_WALLET_NOT_AN_ADDRESS and FAKE_AUDIT_TRANSFER_NOT_A_HASH. They are deliberately invalid synthetic identifiers. Do not circulate real customer wallets as public examples. In an actual private case file, match the report to the identifiers in your payment records and supporting documents.
Keep the cover note short enough to read first. “We reviewed the stated wallet result and held the order pending clarification” describes an action. “The screening service certified the customer” does not describe what the A2 Route sample establishes. The onboarding checklist explains how to keep those questions separate.
Follow the current sample's six sections
A2 Route's committed synthetic transaction samples have a main page and a risk-categories appendix. The first section is Subject. It shows the payment context, including network, direction, asset and amount, transaction hash, sender, recipient, screening time and check ID. Check those fields against your case before writing a summary.
The second section is Payment reference, marked client-provided. The sample includes prepared-for, invoice or contract, and purpose-of-payment fields. Attach the relevant business records separately. Their appearance in a PDF does not mean the screening service verified the invoice, the customer identity or the stated commercial purpose.
The third section, Why this verdict, explains the result with its score and reasoning. Summarise the actual finding rather than copying a sample's fixture thresholds into your policy. The synthetic REVIEW sample concerns an outgoing transfer and indirect exposure at the destination. It is not an example of a real received customer payment.
The fourth section is Sanctions and issuer restrictions. The sample shows rows for OFAC SDN, the EU consolidated list, the UK OFSI list and the Tether freeze list, with results and coverage times. Describe them as the sample layout, not a promise of identical coverage for every check. Keep a no-match row distinct from a provider-associated exposure label.
The fifth section is Where the funds come from. Read source shares and top exposure with the mode explanation. In the outgoing REVIEW sample, address-mode shares concern the destination wallet's traced incoming funds. They are not percentages of the account holder's outgoing amount. The report walkthrough covers that reading problem in detail.
The sixth section is Scope, limitations and integrity. Preserve the stated sources, mode and limitations in the packet. The sample says beneficial ownership, off-chain identity and purpose of payment are not verified, and provider labels can change. Do not omit those limits while quoting the reassuring parts of the report.
Keep the appendix and original file
The appendix defines risk categories and explains how to read shares. It says category labels describe recorded exposure rather than a conclusion about a person or transaction. Include it when sharing the report. A cropped first-page screenshot removes useful context and is a poor substitute for the original document.
Paid A2 Route checks can include a PDF. The public report page says the report API returns a file SHA-256 for lookup at /verify. Keep that fingerprint with the original file when available. A matching fingerprint concerns file integrity, not the truth of an invoice or the legitimacy of the underlying funds. The public sample PDFs are not registered checks.
Add your decision trail, not a certificate
Attach the customer explanation, any re-check and the internal approval or hold note. Keep each result's date visible. If the first result had reduced coverage, say so; the public FAQ recommends a re-check for partial results. Show which evidence the reviewer used and what remained unresolved when the decision was made.
The risk-score guide and exposure guide help phrase a proportionate summary. Ask the requesting bank or auditor what format and supporting records they need. This packet cannot guarantee acceptance or regulatory compliance.
For a separate supplier-payment workflow, see the A2vanta business payment blog. Start a supported A2 Route check or read the API documentation. Screening remains informational, not legal advice; your business decision and the recipient institution's assessment remain separate.