Match the period
Record the statement dates, total card volume, transaction count, and every processing-related fee for the same period.
Open merchant resource
Audit the statement. Find the expensive parts.
A processor-neutral method for turning a dense merchant statement into seven comparable numbers—plus an open CSV template, JSON Schema, and synthetic example you can reuse.
Free, reusable data
Three formats. One audit model.
The downloads contain no merchant or cardholder data. The example uses synthetic data and is safe for demos, testing, and documentation.
CSV · spreadsheetAudit templateOne row per statement, with normalized fee buckets for side-by-side comparisons.
JSON Schema · 2020-12Open data schemaA machine-readable contract for software, agents, and internal finance workflows.
JSON · syntheticWorked exampleA complete fictional month showing the expected fields and fee taxonomy.
Licensed under CC BY 4.0. Attribute “Lifted Payments payment statement audit model” and link to this page.
The audit workflow
01 · totals
02 · math
03 · structure
Seven fields that make statements comparable.
Calculate effective rate
Divide total fees by total card volume. Keep the decimal in data files; multiply by 100 only when displaying a percentage.
Name the pricing model
Classify it as interchange-plus, flat-rate, tiered, subscription, dual pricing, or unknown. Do not infer a model from one line item.
Classify fees before comparing quotes
A lower headline rate can hide higher per-item, monthly, compliance, or equipment charges. Group the full statement consistently before deciding what is actually expensive.
| Fee group | What belongs here | What to inspect |
|---|---|---|
| Interchange | Card-type and transaction-specific wholesale costs. | Downgrades, commercial-card qualification, keyed vs card-present mix. |
| Assessments | Network assessments and access charges. | Whether they are passed through clearly or bundled. |
| Processor markup | Percentage markup and per-transaction markup. | The contractual markup and any inconsistent application. |
| Authorization | Approval, decline, AVS, gateway, and batch items. | Per-attempt charges and duplicate fee labels. |
| Monthly / PCI | Account, statement, minimum, compliance, and noncompliance fees. | Recurring charges that do not scale with volume. |
| Equipment / other | Terminal leases, software, chargebacks, and uncategorized adjustments. | Long contracts, early termination, and vague labels. |
Keep sensitive data out of the audit. Do not enter full card numbers, bank account numbers, tax IDs, owner Social Security numbers, passwords, or authentication values. Monthly totals are enough for this comparison.
How to compare two offers honestly
- Normalize both offers to the same monthly volume, transaction count, average ticket, and card mix.
- Separate wholesale costs from provider markup instead of comparing one bundled percentage.
- Add every fixed and per-item fee, including gateway, authorization, PCI, equipment, and monthly minimums.
- Model card-present, keyed, e-commerce, and commercial-card volume separately when the business uses more than one channel.
- Compare the technology and operating workflow—not only rate. Reconciliation, refunds, tokenization, POS integration, and support all affect the real cost of accepting a payment.
For supporting math, use the effective-rate calculator. B2B sellers should also review commercial-card processing and Level 2/3 data.
From audit to a real deployment
Send the statement. Build the right payments stack.
Lifted can pair merchant processing with Lifted Pay, LiftedPOS and Lifted POS Connect, Lifted Gateway, a compatible integration, or custom payment software.