# Subsidiary referral attribution in a group | SourceX

Canonical: https://refer.sourcex.si/guides/how-to-handle-multiple-subsidiaries-in-referral-attribution
Last updated: 2026-10-26

Treat the group as one reward pool and as several credit questions. A parent company and its subsidiaries share a single $100,000 cap, however many entities license. Credit is decided differently: one partner per company, the first valid introduction within 90 days, and any entity's earlier application, account, lead or email with SourceX can make an introduction a duplicate. The terms do not say how those rules divide across a group, so before introducing any entity, send SourceX an entity-boundary packet and ask.

The packet is short: a chart of the entities, which ones hold records and sign, every prior contact you know of, your introduction dates, and three questions. It takes an hour to assemble. Without it, the boundary is drawn later, by someone else, from records you cannot see.

## What is settled for a group and what is not

| Question | Settled? | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Do a parent and its subsidiaries share one reward cap? | Yes: one $100,000 cap across the group | Program rule; see [subsidiaries share one cap](/guides/subsidiary-referral-reward-cap) |
| Does the cap reset for a new agreement, renewal or entity? | No | Terms, section 4: all installments, agreements, repeat licenses, renewals and transactions |
| How many partners are credited per company? | One | Terms, section 2 |
| Is a subsidiary with its own earlier SourceX contact a new company? | No: reviewed as a duplicate | Terms, section 3 |
| Does a parent's earlier contact make a subsidiary a duplicate, or the reverse? | Not stated | Ask in the packet |
| If another partner introduced one subsidiary first, what happens to yours for a sister company? | Not stated | Ask in the packet |
| Is headcount added across entities to reach 50? | No | [Sister-company headcount answer](/questions/can-affiliated-companies-combine-employees-to-qualify) |
| Who authorizes for the entity that licenses? | Its CEO, within whatever approvals the group requires | Program rule; see the [subsidiary approval path](/guides/why-a-subsidiary-introduction-needs-a-different-approval-path) |

The program terms themselves never mention parents, subsidiaries or affiliates. The cap rule comes from SourceX's own decision for groups. Everything marked "not stated" is a real gap, and the honest response to a gap is a written question, not a confident guess to the group CFO.

Older answers on the site, such as [several companies from the same group](/questions/can-i-introduce-several-companies-from-the-same-corporate-group), describe each entity's eligibility review; the one-cap rule above governs the reward.

## Draw the boundary from public records, then confirm with the CEO

Start with the legal structure, not the brand. A group that sells under one name can be five legal entities; a group with five brands can be one.

Two public sources help. Where entities have Legal Entity Identifiers, GLEIF's "who owns whom" data shows each registrant's direct and ultimate accounting consolidating parent, publishes the parent's LEI alongside the child's, and can be searched free without registering. Many mid-size companies have no LEI, and registrants can report an exception instead of a parent, so treat an LEI lookup as a starting point. For the vocabulary, U.S. securities rules define an affiliate as an entity that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with another, and control as the power to direct management and policies through shares, contract or otherwise. Those definitions are not SourceX's rules; they are a consistent way to decide which entities belong on your chart.

Then confirm the chart with the CEO you are working with, at metadata level: which entities exist, which employ staff, which hold records in their own systems, which would sign, and when each joined the group. SourceX's guide on [licensing from multiple subsidiaries](https://sourcex.si/guides/scenarios/licensing-data-from-multiple-subsidiaries) notes that each subsidiary holds the rights to its own information and authorizes separately, which is why the "who signs" column matters as much as the org chart.

## The entity-boundary clarification packet

The packet has three parts. Send it before the first application if you can, and with your introduction at the latest.

**Part 1: the entity table.** One row per legal entity.

| Column | What to write |
|---|---|
| Entity | Legal name, country, LEI if it has one |
| Place in the group | Direct parent and ultimate parent; the basis of control if known |
| Joined the group | Date of formation or acquisition |
| Records | Whether it holds records in its own systems, and which systems |
| Signs | Whether it would be the licensing party |
| CEO | Name of the CEO who would authorize for that entity |
| Prior SourceX contact | Any application, account, lead or email the group reports for that entity, with an approximate date; "none known" otherwise |
| Your introduction | Date and channel, if you have introduced that entity or the group |

**Part 2: the questions.** Ask only what the settled rules leave open.

1. For my introduction dated [date], which entity or entities does SourceX treat as the referred company?
2. Does prior contact reported for [entity] affect credit for my introduction of [other entity]?
3. If any group entity was introduced earlier by someone else, how does that affect credit for mine? (SourceX will not tell you who; the terms rule out sharing other partners' records.)

Do not ask whether the group shares one cap. It does.

**Part 3: the evidence.** Your original introduction emails with headers, the referral link or form confirmation, the dated sources behind your entity table (an LEI record, a registry extract) and your notes of what the CEO confirmed and when. Leave out the group's records, contracts, internal org charts and anything about employees beyond the CEOs' names.

Before your introduction, questions go to SourceX via sourcex.si; once an introduction exists, start with the referral's status in your dashboard; if you disagree with a decision, section 7 of the [program terms](/terms) asks for the referral details and supporting evidence.

## Four timelines across one group (Illustrative)

Illustrative. A generic 1,100-person building-products group: a holding company with 30 staff, a distribution subsidiary with 600, an installation subsidiary with 380, and a 90-person fabrication business the group acquired in July 2026. Invented dates; outcomes follow only what the cited terms say.

| Timeline | Dated events | Governing term | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Group introduced through the parent | May 4, 2026: you introduce the group CEO, naming all four entities in your packet. May 20: the group applies, with distribution as the licensing party | Section 2: first valid introduction, verified application within 90 days | Credited for the group's introduction if no earlier contact or introduction exists; one cap |
| 2. An acquired subsidiary with its own history | February 2026: fabrication's owner starts a company assessment on sourcex.si, before the acquisition. September 1: you introduce fabrication | Section 3: an existing application, however it began | Fabrication is reviewed as a duplicate; its effect on the rest of the group is question 2 |
| 3. Another partner reached one subsidiary first | June 2026: another partner introduces the installation subsidiary; you do not know. September 15: you introduce the group | Sections 2 and 3: one partner per company; an earlier valid introduction | Not credited for installation; credit for the rest is question 3, decided in review |
| 4. SourceX contacts a subsidiary after you | May 4: your introduction of the group. May 12: SourceX writes to the distribution CEO to schedule a call | Section 2: direct communication does not affect valid attribution | No effect on your credit |

Timeline 2 is the common trap in acquisitive groups: an entity's history with SourceX arrives with the acquisition. A company bought in July can bring an application from February, and section 3 does not ask who owned the company at the time.

On the reward side, the group's arithmetic stays simple whatever the credit answer. Illustrative: if SourceX pays the distribution subsidiary $300,000 and the installation subsidiary $220,000, the cumulative payout is $520,000, a quarter of that is $130,000, and the reward stops at the $100,000 cap. Running totals across entities are worked through in [subsidiaries share one cap](/guides/subsidiary-referral-reward-cap).

## Agree inside your own network before anyone submits

Most group conflicts start inside one firm or one fund: a partner who knows the parent's CEO, a colleague who audits the installation business, an operating partner who sits on the fabrication board. Each one can be the first to submit, and only one introduction can be first.

- Decide who introduces the group and record it, with the date, before anyone writes to a CEO. If two people at different firms both reach the group, the checks in [when two partners refer the same company](/guides/when-two-partners-refer-the-same-company) apply.
- Introduce at the level where an authorized CEO wants the conversation. That is often the parent, sometimes a subsidiary with its own systems; the [subsidiary with its own operating processes](/guides/how-to-refer-a-subsidiary-with-its-own-operating-processes) covers that case.
- Name every entity in the first introduction, so your dated record covers the boundary you meant.
- For any entity with uncertain history, run the six-question check in [whether an existing SourceX relationship affects credit](/guides/how-to-check-whether-an-existing-sourcex-relationship-affects-credit) first.

Holding company operators have their own overview in the [holding company referral program](/for/holding-company-referral-program).

## Where the packet can still go wrong

- **Groups change.** An acquisition after your introduction adds an entity with its own history. Update the packet and say so.
- **Public records are partial.** LEI coverage is incomplete and registries lag; the CEO's confirmation is the record that matters.
- **Brands, domains and legal names diverge.** An earlier contact under a brand or a sister company's domain may still belong to the group. List every name and domain you know.
- **Unsettled means unsettled.** Until SourceX answers, do not tell a subsidiary president that credit or the reward is secured, and never describe a group as worth more than one cap.

## 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.

When the entity table is complete and an authorized CEO wants the conversation, [register for a partner link](/register), check each licensing entity against [who qualifies](/who-qualifies) and send the packet with your introduction under the current [program terms](/terms).

## Sources

- https://refer.sourcex.si/terms
- https://refer.sourcex.si/
- https://www.gleif.org/en/lei-data/access-and-use-lei-data/level-2-data-who-owns-whom
- https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-17/chapter-II/part-230/subject-group-ECFR3ba3c08ffc29ca2/section-230.405
- https://sourcex.si/guides/scenarios/licensing-data-from-multiple-subsidiaries