tegwick
7a3d97ecfe
The outstanding half of RISK-F-0008 that needed no authorisation. Grounds stated per category rather than as a blanket exemption: Art 6(1)(f) with Art 32 for operator and agent records, Art 17(3)(e) for counterparty transaction evidence, Art 17(3)(b) only where a commercial or tax duty independently applies. The weak part is named as duration rather than existence, and audit-core's co-residency horizon is identified as the most likely point of failure in the whole position. Not legal advice, and the record says so. Also opens docs/regulatory/ with the record format — dated, sourced, and reviewed, because a regulatory answer expires. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
20 lines
1,016 B
Markdown
20 lines
1,016 B
Markdown
# Regulatory intake
|
|
|
|
Moved here from `policy-nexus` on 2026-08-17: deciding what an external rule
|
|
demands of the estate is a judgement about risk, not an act of publishing.
|
|
|
|
One file per question. Each record states **what a source says and when**, and
|
|
what the estate therefore relies on. What the estate must consequently *do* is
|
|
the owning repo's decision, not this repo's — `INTENT.md`.
|
|
|
|
A record carries `sources_read`, `determined`, `external_review` (usually
|
|
`none`, and it must say so rather than implying otherwise), and `review_by`.
|
|
A regulatory answer expires; that is why it is dated and reviewed rather than
|
|
consulted once and discarded, which is the failure that moved this remit here.
|
|
|
|
**These records are not legal advice** and this repo cannot make them into any.
|
|
Where a position is weak, the record says which part and why.
|
|
|
|
| Record | Question | Finding |
|
|
| --- | --- | --- |
|
|
| `audit-retention-basis.md` | On what basis are audit records retained against an erasure request? | `RISK-F-0008` |
|