Was in eine Akte zur Vermögensherkunft gehört, Seite für Seite
Diese Seite erscheint nur auf Englisch.
The five pages a reviewer reads, with model wording for each and notes on what belongs where. Work through it alongside the guide rather than at the end, take what fits your case into your own document, replace every [bracket], leave the grey notes behind, and keep the order: a reviewer reads a file top to bottom once.
Cover
Source of wealth file
Prepared by [full name as on your ID], born [dd mm yyyy], of [address as
the bank holds it].
Prepared for [bank], [contact or branch if you have one].
Date of this file: [dd mm yyyy].
Why this document
The reviewer opens the file not knowing what it is, who made it or what it is built on. Three short paragraphs answer that before they reach a single figure. This is not the declaration on page five: this says what the document is, that one is what you stand behind.
My disclosure for [bank]
This document is my Source of Wealth claim. It is prepared to support [a review of my account / a cash-out / an account opening / an account review / an enhanced due diligence request] involving funds of crypto origin.
It is based on wallet, exchange and transaction data that I hold, control or have confirmed myself[, including the data used for my crypto tax reporting for [years]]. I have organised that information into a structured Source of Wealth narrative so that [bank] can review my explanation more efficiently.
This document is supported by [number] attachments, listed at the end: [bank statements for the transfers on page three, the full exchange history, proof of control of the wallets on page two, and the documents behind the events on page five].
Contents: 1 what I hold and what I am asking for · 2 wallets, accounts and movements · 3 origin of wealth · 4 how the wealth was created · 5 significant events and open points · annex · attachments.
Page oneWhat I hold, and what I am asking for
Lead with the number. A reviewer who knows the size of the question reads everything after it in proportion.
At [date] I hold crypto assets worth approximately EUR [amount], across the wallets and accounts listed on page two.
I intend to sell [quantity] [asset] on [exchange] in [month year] and transfer approximately EUR [amount] to my account [IBAN] at [bank]. The rest stays where it is.
| Where it sits (ref) | Value EUR at [date] |
|---|---|
| [wallet or exchange] (A) | [value] |
| [wallet or exchange] (B) | [value] |
| Total | [sum] |
One date for the whole page, stated in the sentence above rather than repeated down a column. Assets and quantities are not needed here. You may add the split per asset in the annex if it is relevant for the story, which it rarely is.
Page twoWallets, accounts and movements
Every exchange account you have ever opened and every address you have ever controlled, including empty, closed and forgotten ones. Skip the ones already listed on page one and carry on from their references. Then how the bank can check the data itself.
| Ref | Platform or wallet | Type | Active |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | [exchange] | Exchange account | [from] to [to] |
| B | [wallet] | Self-custody, [asset] | [from] to [to] |
How to verify this yourself: the full addresses and account identifiers are in the annex. They are public and can be read on any explorer. Read-only access to my exchange accounts can be arranged on request.
Reconciliation, leg one: bank to exchange and exchange to bank
| Date sent | Amount EUR | From and to | Date credited | Amount EUR | Matches* |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [date] | [amount] | [bank, last 4] to [exchange] | [date] | [amount] | Yes / No |
| [date] | [amount] | [exchange] to [bank, last 4] | [date] | [amount] | Yes / No |
| Total in | [sum] | [sum] | |||
| Total out | [sum] | [sum] |
* with bank statement
Reconciliation, leg two: intra-wallet flows, exchange to wallets and other exchanges
| Date | Asset | Withdrawn | Fee | Received | To (ref) | Network | Transaction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [date] | [asset] | [qty] | [fee] | [qty] | [ref, e.g. B] | [network] | [hash] |
Since [date] [wallet or account, ref] shows [no outgoing transactions / the movements listed above / the statistically relevant movements listed above, where there were too many to set out in full].
Reconciliation, leg three: third-party transfers received
Everything that arrived from someone other than you. This records the movement: that it arrived, where it landed, and which transaction shows it. Who sent it and why belongs on page three, so keep this one to the facts and let page three carry the story.
| Date | Asset | From | Received | To (ref) | Network | Transaction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [date] | [asset] | [sending address, exchange or person] | [qty] | [ref, e.g. B] | [network] | [hash] |
Or, if there were none: Nothing was received from any third party. Everything in these accounts arrived either from my own bank or from another account of mine listed above.
Do all of this per wallet and per account, not as one combined list. A reviewer checking one account has to be able to read it on its own, and the balance check below only works account by account. If you did the working in a spreadsheet, send that too: a workbook with one tab per wallet and account is easier to check than the same rows pasted into a PDF document, and it lets the bank sort and total for itself. Add it to the attachments.
If you had many wallets, this simplification starts to be a galaxy on its own. It is still better than a CSV file, but now you can see, one of the places where CashoutReady's Source of Wealth automation software can actually help to speed things up.
Reconciliation, the balance check
Add up every movement in and out, account by account, and compare the total with the balance actually visible today. A difference is normal: it is the capital gain or loss on what you held and traded, plus any other revenues. Do not try to resolve it here. Carry each figure forward to page four, where the categories account for it. What this check is really for is the difference page four cannot account for, which points at a wallet you have not listed, a movement your data does not contain, or a price applied wrongly.
| Ref | Balance today | Net of all movements in and out | Difference, to page four | Difference % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | [amount] | [amount] | [diff] | [%] |
| B | ||||
The differences above total EUR [sum]. They are accounted for on page four as capital gain, other revenues and fees[, apart from EUR [amount], which is [the open point at number N on page five]].
Page threeOrigin of wealth
Three parts: what you put in and where it came from, how the position grew, and anything that arrived from somebody else. Keep them apart. Third-party money blended into your own is what a reviewer stops on.
What I put in
The lists below are not exhaustive. Add whatever applies, including origins that never passed through a bank: mining rewards, airdrops, a P2P purchase, staking rewards, payment received for goods or services. Wealth that started as crypto is not a weaker claim than wealth that started as salary, but it has to be named rather than left to be inferred from the balance.
Delete whichever is false.
Between [date] and [date] I transferred EUR [total] in [number] payments from my account [IBAN, last four] at [bank] to my verified account at [exchange]. These funds came from [salary saved over N months / savings held since / the sale of / a gift from / an inheritance from].
Or: my holdings did not begin with a transfer of money. They began as [coins mined between [dates] / an airdrop received on [date] / coins bought peer to peer from [counterparty] on [date] / payment for [work or goods] received in [asset]], and everything since is set out on page four.
| # | Date | Amount EUR | Origin | Shown by |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | [date] | [amount] | [salary / savings / sale of an asset / gift / inheritance / loan] | [statement, deed, contract] |
| 2 | [date] | [value at the time] | [mining / airdrop / P2P purchase / staking rewards / payment for goods or services] | [pool records, the transaction, invoice, contract] |
| 3 | ||||
| Total | [sum] |
How the position grew
[No further funds have been added since [date]. / Further payments in and out are listed above and on page two.] How the difference between what I put in and what I hold today arose is set out on page four.
Anything that arrived from somebody else
Rank these by value and work down until what remains would not change a reviewer's view of the case. One transfer that moves a fifth of your wealth needs a paragraph. Ten transfers of a few euros do not need ten. What proves an origin depends on what it was: salary, payslips and a tax statement; business profits, accounts and dividend statements; a sale, the contract or deed; a gift or inheritance, the deed or a written record plus the giver's bank trail; a loan, the contract and the transfer that follows it.
Delete whichever is false.
Nothing was received from any third party. No staking, lending, mining, airdrops, or payment for goods or services.
Or: the transfers recorded in leg three on page two arrived from outside my own accounts. Each is a separate story with its own evidence:
| Row on page two | From whom | Why it was sent | Value EUR at the time | Shown by |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [leg three, row N] | [person or entity] | [gift, loan, invoice, inheritance, mining, staking] | [value] | [deed, agreement, invoice] |
Page fourHow the wealth was created
Two tables. The first sorts everything that created the balance into the seven categories a reviewer uses, and closes by testing whether they account for what you hold. The second shows how the position was built.
What the balance is made of
| Category | Value EUR | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Fiat flows, net | [amount] | [own money in, proceeds out] |
| Third-party crypto flows, net | [amount] | [per the table on page three] |
| DeFi flows, net | [amount] | [lending, liquidity, staking contracts, bridges] |
| Capital gain | [amount] | [realised and unrealised price movement] |
| Other revenues | [amount] | [staking and interest rewards, mining, airdrops, forks, cashback, referrals, refunds] |
| Margin trading | [amount] | [profit or loss on leveraged positions] |
| Fees | [amount] | [network and platform fees paid] |
| Explained | [sum] | |
| Held at [date of file] | [amount] | |
| Unexplained | [difference] | [% of the balance] |
Below ten percent unexplained, name it and move on. Above ten percent, do not name it and move on: find it. A gap that size is a wallet you forgot, a set of movements you did not load, or a price applied to the wrong date, and it is the first thing a reviewer will ask about.
The categories above account for [percentage] of what I hold at [date]. The unexplained remainder of EUR [amount] is [percentage] of the balance, and is [immaterial rounding across [n] dust balances / the open point at number N on page five].
Significant positions over time and their capital gains - simplified model
One row per significant purchase and per sale, plus one for today. Transfers between your own wallets and accounts do not belong here: they move the position without changing it. A history with hundreds of small trades does not need hundreds of rows either, so group them by month or by year and give the group one row. One price source, named, used for every snapshot. Where the exchange quoted you in euros at the moment of purchase, use its figure for that row and say so.
Grouping and rounding make the figures here approximate. That is fine, but it has to be said rather than left for the reviewer to work out, so the line below says it. It is also the limit of what a hand-built table can do: approximations are accepted for the simplest of stories, and once yours is not simple the figures have to be built transaction by transaction at the price of the day. This is another place where Source of Wealth automation software can help.
The figures in this table are approximate. Small movements are grouped and values are rounded, so that the table shows how the position was built rather than restating every transaction. The underlying records are attached.
| Date | Event | Asset | Change | Held | Price EUR | Source | Value EUR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [date] | Purchase | [asset] | +[qty] | [qty] | [price] | Exchange | [value] |
| [date] | Sale | [asset] | -[qty] | [qty] | [price] | Exchange | [value] |
| [date of file] | Today | [asset] | 0 | [qty] | [price] | [source] | [value] |
A per-position gain across a long history is arithmetic rather than judgement, so software that calculates it for you is a reasonable alternative to doing it by hand. What follows is the same either way.
The positions that built the wealth, and the ones that destroyed part of it. One block each, largest first, stopping when what remains would not change a reviewer's view. Losses belong here as much as gains: a run through a dozen tokens that ended where it started says something about appetite for risk and nothing about where the wealth came from, and it is better stated in one line than discovered by a reviewer across forty trades.
| Position | From / to | Put in EUR | Value or proceeds EUR | Estimated capital gain EUR |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [asset] | [date] to [date or today] | [amount] | [amount] | [amount] |
| Other positions, combined | [sum] | [sum] | [sum] |
My comments
1. EUR [amount] of my own money went in, EUR [amount] came out, and the remainder is [appreciation / appreciation and the items listed above]. My roughly estimated capital gain across all positions, realised and unrealised, is EUR [sum].
2. [Asset], [dates]. I [bought / mined / received] [quantity] for EUR [amount] and [still hold it / sold it in [month year] for EUR [amount]]. My estimated capital gain, realised and unrealised, on that position is EUR [amount]. [One or two sentences on what this position was and what it did to the overall picture.]
3. [Asset], [dates]. [Where a position lost value, say so as plainly: I bought [quantity] for EUR [amount] and the position is now worth EUR [amount]. Most of it landed in losses.]
4. [and so on, largest first.]
Yes, we know what you are thinking, and you are right.
1. Doing this by hand is hard, and realistically only possible for very simple cases.
2. A calculation presented like this will look messy to a bank, and it will not be reliable.
You can hand the data to an AI and ask it to prepare this for you. It will work, but only in simple cases: on a longer history it starts to lose the thread, and it will fill a gap with something that sounds right rather than leaving it open. It also puts you in danger of submitting a document you do not understand. Compliance officers are allergic to AI, and for a reason: compliance is deterministic.
This is why we built CashoutReady.
Page fiveSignificant events and open points
Events first. An unexplained event is worse than an unprovable one: the reviewer sees the movement either way, and the only question is whether they read your account of it first.
Significant events
| Date | What happened | Effect on the balance | Shown by |
|---|---|---|---|
| [date] | [theft, hack, lost keys, exchange collapse, inheritance, gift, divorce settlement, large purchase] | [quantity and EUR] | [police report, court order, deed, announcement] |
Or, if there were none: No significant events. Nothing left or entered these accounts except the movements on pages two and three.
Open points
| # | What cannot be fully shown | Why | What I did about it | What I have instead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | [e.g. no trade export from platform X] | [platform closed in yyyy] | [searched mailbox, requested records] | [bank statement, confirmation email, on-chain arrival] |
Or: No open points. Every movement can be followed end to end.
Excluded from the analysis
Noise is right to leave out and wrong to leave out silently. A reviewer who finds a transaction in your wallet that is missing from your file has to decide whether it was noise or whether it was hidden.
Excluded: [number] token receipts with no market value, none of which was ever sold or moved, listed in the annex by transaction hash; [number] dust balances below EUR [amount]; [spam and advertising tokens sent unasked to a public address]. No excluded item was disposed of and none contributes to the balance on page four.
Or: Nothing was excluded. Every transaction in these accounts is reflected in this file.
Tax
My tax position on these assets [has been confirmed by [adviser, firm] / is reflected in my returns for [years]].
Declaration
The wallets and accounts listed in this file are owned or controlled by me. I have made reasonable efforts to include all of them, and where data is missing or incomplete I have identified the gap rather than passed over it. The explanations in this file reflect my understanding of my own history. To the best of my knowledge the funds described are not derived from criminal activity.
[Place], [date].
Signature: ________________________
The exact form of this paragraph depends on your jurisdiction. What a declaration has to say, what signing it commits you to and whether it carries any legal weight at all differ from one country to the next, and some banks supply their own wording and expect you to use theirs. Treat the text above as a model of what a reviewer wants to see stated, not as a form of words settled for your country, and have it checked locally before you sign it.
Annex
Everything the five pages deliberately leave out, so that each page does one job. Nothing here needs reading unless a reviewer wants the detail behind a figure. Full addresses go here too: the pages use short references, and a reviewer who wants to pull the data themselves comes here for the strings to copy.
A1. Wallet and account addresses in full
| Ref | Label | Network | Full address or account identifier |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | [name used on page two] | [Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, exchange] | [full string] |
| B | |||
For a Bitcoin wallet that generates a new address for each receipt, list every address that has received funds, or give the extended public key and say so here.
A2. What is held, by asset, at [date of file]
Optional, and rarely relevant. Include it only where a particular asset is part of the story: one that dominates the balance, one an event on page five concerns, or one a reviewer has asked about. Otherwise delete this table. The bank is reviewing value and where it came from, not the ticker breakdown.
| Asset | Quantity | Value EUR | % of the total on page one |
|---|---|---|---|
| [asset] | [quantity] | [value] | [%] |
| Total | [sum, agreeing with page one] | 100% |
A3. Items excluded from the analysis
The detail behind the exclusions paragraph on page five. If nothing was excluded, delete this section rather than leaving it empty.
| What | Date | Transaction | Amount | Why excluded |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| [token name] | [date] | [hash] | [quantity] | [no market value / never sold or moved / dust / sent unasked] |
Attachments
Keep this short. The bank verifies the chain itself; documents are for what the data cannot show. If you hand over an API key rather than an export, create a new one that can read data and nothing else: never a key that can trade, transfer or withdraw, and revoke it once the review is closed.
| # | Document | Source |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Bank statements: transfers out to the exchange, and the account receiving the proceeds | [bank], official PDF |
| 2 | Where the original money came from, if it was not salary visible on the statements | [deed, contract of sale, gift letter] |
| 3 | Anything behind an event or an open point on page five | [varies] |
| 4 | Reconciliation workbook, one tab per wallet and account, if you kept the working in a spreadsheet | prepared by me |
| 5 | Exchange history: deposits, trades, withdrawals (wait until requested) | [exchange], full export or a read-only API key |
| 6 | Proof of control of self-custody wallets (almost never, wait until requested) | signed message or test transfer |
Before you send: six checks
- Does every euro you brought in and out of the exchanges appear on a bank statement in your name?
- Does the file list every address you control and every account you have used, with a way for the bank to pull that data itself?
- Does the balance on the explorer today match what pages one and four say you hold?
- Do the seven categories on page four add up to what you say you hold, with the unexplained remainder amount below ten percent of the balance and named?
- Is every jump in the balance either explained by a movement or named as an event?
- And if the gains are large, can you explain your tax position on them, ideally confirmed by somebody qualified rather than by you?
Six yeses and you have a file that can be reviewed rather than returned.