Clear sourcing, careful review, and visible corrections.

1. Scope

This policy applies to Bit Bookkeeper articles, guides, service-page explanations, and other educational content. Marketing statements about services follow the same standards for accuracy and scope.

2. Research and sourcing

• We prefer primary and authoritative sources, including government guidance, statutes, standards setters, and official technical documentation.
• Time-sensitive accounting and tax statements should identify the relevant period and be checked against current sources before material updates are published.
• Blockchain data and software output are treated as evidence inputs, not automatic proof of ownership, business purpose, basis, classification, or tax treatment.
• Claims that depend on a client’s facts are described as questions for professional review rather than universal conclusions.

3. Authorship and professional review

A page may identify Bit Bookkeeper as the publisher when it represents the firm’s educational work. A named author or reviewer is shown only when that person actually wrote or reviewed the published version. Credentials and affiliations are stated only when they can be substantiated.

Automated tools may assist research, organization, or editing, but they are not presented as the author or final professional reviewer. Responsibility for published content remains with Bit Bookkeeper.

4. Updates, consolidation, and dates

Material factual, structural, or sourcing changes receive an updated date. Minor spelling or formatting changes may not. When older pages substantially overlap or no longer reflect current guidance, we may consolidate them into a stronger current resource and redirect the retired address to the most relevant replacement.

5. Corrections

We review credible correction requests against the cited authority and available evidence. Material corrections are made promptly and reflected in the page’s update date; content may be removed or redirected when correction would not be sufficient.