How does the referral reward cap apply across a parent and its subsidiaries?
As one cap for the group. Every payment SourceX makes to the parent or to any subsidiary adds to one cumulative Actual Supplier Payout, and the reward is 25% of that total up to $100,000. A map of the group, made before the first introduction, shows which entities belong in that total.
The program terms (v2026-10-22.2) say the reward is up to USD 100,000 total per referred company across all installments, agreements, repeat licenses, renewals and transactions, and that the cap does not reset for a new agreement. They also say only one partner is credited per company, and that a company with an existing application, relationship or earlier valid introduction is reviewed as a duplicate. Each of those rules turns on what "the company" is. For the cap, that is settled: a parent and its subsidiaries are one company.
SourceX's FAQ on several companies from the same corporate group says each distinct, eligible entity with its own data and decision-maker is evaluated on its own. That covers eligibility and review; it does not multiply the cap. Each entity is reviewed separately, but payouts to all of them count toward the group's single $100,000 cap.
Why "company" needs a definition here
Group vocabulary is precise in law and loose in conversation. U.S. securities rules, for example, define an affiliate as a person that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with another; a subsidiary as an affiliate the parent controls; and control as the power to direct management and policies, whether through voting shares, contract or otherwise. Those definitions are not SourceX's rules, but they are a practical way to sort which entities sit under one parent, and so which payouts belong in one total.
Three facts still shape the introduction:
- Who holds the records. A subsidiary that runs its own ticketing, ERP and email has records of its own. One that uses the parent's systems may not.
- Who signs. If the parent licenses everything in one agreement, the counterparty is the parent; if subsidiaries sign their own, their payouts still go into the same group total.
- Who already knows SourceX. Section 3 of the terms treats any earlier application, introduction, lead, account or email correspondence with SourceX as an existing relationship. If the parent or another group entity has any of these, SourceX decides in duplicate review whether it affects credit for a subsidiary introduction; the terms do not say.
The entity map
Fill one row per entity, at metadata level. The map shows which entities belong to the group and so share one cap. Illustrative: a 900-person building services group with a holding company and three operating subsidiaries.
| Entity | Own legal entity | Peak full-time staff | Systems holding its records | Who can authorize | Prior SourceX contact |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Holding company | Yes | 25 | Group finance system only | Group CEO | None known |
| Facilities maintenance subsidiary | Yes | 410 | Own work-order system and email domain | Subsidiary CEO | None known |
| Security services subsidiary | Yes | 300 | Own scheduling and incident tools | Subsidiary CEO | None known |
| Cleaning subsidiary | Yes | 165 | Parent's shared CRM and email tenant | Group CEO | None known |
Send the map with the introduction. The cap needs no question; ask SourceX, naming the entities, only what the cap rule does not settle:
- If one entity's records sit in another entity's systems, which entity is the referred company?
- Does any prior contact with the parent make a subsidiary a duplicate?
- Does anything in my signed agreement or Schedule A change the answer?
Keep the reply with your introduction records. If you disagree with a later decision, the terms route disputes to [email protected] with the referral details and supporting evidence.
How the group's payouts add up to one cap
Illustrative only, not a forecast or a quote. Suppose SourceX pays the cleaning subsidiary $120,000, then the security subsidiary $250,000, then the facilities subsidiary $400,000, each for a completed handoff.
| Entity, in order paid | Paid to the entity | Group running total | 25% of the running total | Counted, capped at $100,000 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cleaning subsidiary | $120,000 | $120,000 | $30,000 | $30,000 |
| Security services subsidiary | $250,000 | $370,000 | $92,500 | $92,500 |
| Facilities maintenance subsidiary | $400,000 | $770,000 | $192,500 | $100,000 |
Across the group SourceX has paid $770,000. A quarter of that is $192,500, above the cap, so the reward stops at $100,000; the facilities payment counts only for the $7,500 of room left after the first two. Counting each entity separately would suggest $192,500, which the group never earns. The order of payments changes when the cap is reached, not the total. The earnings calculator handles one company at a time, so enter the group's combined payout as one company.
Either way, the reward is SourceX's money, never the group's: it is paid separately and does not reduce what any entity receives. See reward vs licensing proceeds for how to explain that to a group CFO.
Which entities qualify at all?
Each entity that would license must stand on its own: 50+ full-time employees at peak (contractors excluded), a documented operating history, rights to license its records, and an authorized contact. Companies in the U.S., Canada and the EU qualify, as do companies in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, India, Singapore, South Africa, Latin America, the UAE and Saudi Arabia when at least 90% of the data is in English. In the worksheet, the holding company would not qualify on headcount, and SourceX does not add employees across entities; see whether affiliated companies can combine headcount. For a subsidiary with its own workflows, referring a subsidiary with its own operating processes covers the qualification side.
What stays unknown until SourceX reviews the group?
Whether any entity's records match SourceX's current data needs, the rights review for each entity, each offer, and so the reward. If another partner has already introduced one entity, handling an overlapping introduction explains what happens next. Do not tell a subsidiary president, or yourself, that a group is worth several caps: it is worth one.
Next step
Refer a company. Earn up to $100,000. Default reward: 25% of Actual Supplier Payout, capped at $100,000 cumulatively per referred company. Eligibility and payment conditions apply, and a signed Schedule A or addendum can differ. A lead, meeting or signature alone does not trigger payment.
With your entity map filled in, register as a partner, check each entity against who qualifies, and send the map with your introduction; the program terms and the rewards page explains how the cumulative cap is applied.
Why is the $100,000 cap per company, not per introduction?
Because an introduction is the event that earns you credit for a company, and the cap is a number attached to that company. One partner is credited per company and rewards stop at $100,000 per referred company, so introducing the same company a second time creates neither a second credit nor a second cap.
Three sections of the program terms, Version 2026-10-22.2, lock together here:
- Section 2, attribution. A new company's credit is earned by its first valid introduction inside the 90-day attribution window and granted once that company submits a verified application. No company is credited to more than one partner.
- Section 3, duplicates. A company that already has an application, relationship or earlier valid introduction with SourceX is reviewed as a duplicate and is not credited to a later partner. Since Version 2026-10-21, an earlier lead, an account or any email correspondence between the company and SourceX has counted as a relationship.
- Section 4, the cap. Rewards run to USD 100,000 in total per referred company across all installments, agreements, repeat licenses, renewals and transactions, and the cap does not reset for a new agreement.
Read in order, they leave no room for a per-introduction cap. Once your first introduction is credited, the company has a relationship with SourceX, so any later introduction of it, by you or by anyone else, meets that relationship and adds nothing. What keeps adding is the company's later business. The unsigned sample of the Channel Partner Agreement that the terms link to gives the partner 25% of Actual Supplier Payout for each qualifying paid transaction attributable to it, and keeps company attribution alive for repeat licenses and renewals agreed during the agreement's term or its Protection Period, always inside the cumulative cap.
Five events a partner might count as a new introduction. Illustrative: one fictional 310-person HVAC and plumbing contractor.
| Event | New credit? | New cap? | What it can add to the partner's total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Month 0: you introduce the CEO, and the company submits a verified application in week 6 | Yes, this is the credited introduction | No, it starts the company's only cap | Rewards on qualifying paid transactions, $100,000 at most |
| Month 8: you introduce the operations vice president about a second dataset | No, the company already has a relationship with SourceX | No | Nothing by itself; the second dataset counts under the month 0 credit if it is agreed in time |
| Month 11: another partner submits the same company | No, it is a duplicate | No | Nothing for the second partner |
| Month 14: the company renews its first license | No introduction is involved | No, the cap does not reset | Whatever room is left |
| Month 16: you introduce a sister company owned by the same parent | Not settled by the terms | No, a parent and its subsidiaries share one cap | Unknown until SourceX rules on credit |
The month 11 row is the one a second partner disputes most often; handling an overlapping introduction covers what to send.
What the terms leave open for groups. The cap side of a corporate group is settled: a parent company and its subsidiaries count as one company, so one cap covers them all, as the who qualifies page also states. The credit side is not. The terms never mention parents, subsidiaries or affiliates, so they do not tell you whether a parent's earlier dealings with SourceX turn your introduction of one of its subsidiaries into a duplicate, or what follows when a different partner has already brought in a sister company. SourceX works that out case by case when it checks a new introduction against its own records. Until it gives you an answer, treat credit for a second entity as uncertain, name every entity you know of when you submit, and remember that even a credited second entity can only fill whatever room the group's single cap has left. The corporate group question explains how each entity is evaluated.
How do you explain the cumulative cap across several dataset deals?
Show one ledger for the company instead of a list of deals. Every deal's money, once SourceX actually pays it to the company, runs through a single running total, and each deal's reward is whatever room it finds at that moment. A later deal can be worth a great deal to the company and nothing to you.
The company-level cumulative reward ledger. Illustrative: the same fictional contractor, four dataset deals, seen at two dates. Every amount is invented for the example; none is a forecast or a quote.
At month 12, one deal has been paid and three are open:
| Deal | Status at month 12 | Paid to the company | Counted toward the cap | Room left after this line | Estimate on file, not counted |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Service-call records | Paid in month 5 | $160,000 | $40,000 | $60,000 | None |
| 2. Installation job files | Signed; Acquisition Partner acceptance still pending | $0 | $0 | $60,000 | $30,000 on $120,000 proposed |
| 3. Dispatcher notes | Not selected | $0 | $0 | $60,000 | $0 |
| 4. Renewal of deal 1 with two more years of records | In review | $0 | $0 | $60,000 | $75,000 on $300,000 proposed |
The two open estimates add up to $105,000, yet only $60,000 of room exists. Whatever happens to deals 2 and 4, the partner's total for this company cannot pass $100,000, so the open deals can add $60,000 between them at most. Section 4 of the terms is explicit that any figure shown before the company is paid is an estimate.
By month 22 the open deals have resolved. The partner signed the Channel Partner Agreement in month 0, so its one-year term ended in month 12 and its Protection Period in month 18. Two timelines:
| Line | Timeline A: renewal agreed in month 13, paid in month 15 | Timeline B: renewal first agreed in month 20, paid in month 22 |
|---|---|---|
| Deal 1, $160,000 paid | $40,000 | $40,000 |
| Deal 2, $120,000 paid in month 18 | $0 of a possible $30,000 | $30,000 |
| Deal 3, never selected | $0 | $0 |
| Deal 4, $300,000 paid | $60,000 of a possible $75,000 | $0, unless SourceX and the partner agree otherwise in writing |
| Partner total for the company | $100,000 | $70,000 |
What each line shows, and the term that governs it:
- Capped. In timeline A the renewal is paid first and takes the last $60,000; deal 2, paid three months later, finds no room left, so its $30,000 estimate becomes nothing for the partner while the company is paid in full. Section 4: the cap covers every agreement, repeat license and renewal and never resets.
- Delayed. Deal 2's acceptance slipped by about six months. Each qualifying transaction runs its own payment clock: 60 calendar days from whichever comes second, completed handoff of that deal's complete, validated dataset or the Acquisition Partner's final written acceptance of it, together with the other conditions in section 5. A late deal moves its own date and nobody else's.
- Zero. Deal 3 was never selected, and unclosed data is not Actual Supplier Payout under section 4. In timeline B the renewal was first agreed after the Protection Period ended and the partner had not signed again, so under Schedule A 6 of the sample agreement it creates no reward without a written agreement. The cap is never reached and $30,000 of room stays unused.
- Reduced. In timeline A the company was paid $580,000 in total. If $200,000 of that were later reversed, 25% of the remaining $380,000 is $95,000, so the partner's total falls to $95,000 and the $5,000 already paid above it is adjusted. A smaller reversal that kept a quarter of the reduced total at or above $100,000 would change nothing.
Three figures to report from the ledger, and one to leave out. Report the amount counted to date ($40,000 at month 12), the room left ($60,000, or whatever cap a signed Schedule A sets), and the open estimates listed deal by deal but never totaling more than the room. Leave out the sum of each deal's reward worked out as if it had a cap of its own: $40,000 plus $75,000 plus $30,000, or $145,000 in timeline A. That figure is the per-introduction reading turned into a number, and it is the one that leaves a partner's finance team expecting money that cannot arrive. When your ledger and SourceX's status disagree, SourceX's records are the reference point: the sample agreement says SourceX keeps supplier payout calculations, cap usage and payment status, and will explain a partner's own reward on request. Parallel licenses signed in the same quarter are worked through in the renewal cap scenarios, repeat deals in referral fees on repeat business, and the wording for a company owner in explaining the $100,000 cap in an intro email. More worked cases sit in the guides library.
Refer a company. Earn up to $100,000. Default reward: 25% of Actual Supplier Payout, capped at $100,000 cumulatively per referred company. Eligibility and payment conditions apply, and a signed Schedule A or addendum can differ. A lead, meeting or signature alone does not trigger payment.
Before you introduce a company that may license several datasets over the years, register as a partner, check it against who qualifies and read sections 2 to 4 of the program terms, so the cap you plan around is the one the company actually has.