LBQM — Liability Basis Qualification Module
LBQM — Liability Basis Qualification Module
Architecture: LIGA™ — Liability Governance Architecture
Parent Standard: Liability Basis Standard (LBS)
Category: Governance & Enforcement
Subcategory: Liability Governance
Type: Core Module
Governed Space: Liability Basis Qualification
Module ID: LIGA-LBS-LBQM-001
Origin ID: OOF.CM.LIGA.03.03.01
Version: 1.0
Status: Canonical · Open Standard
Effective Date: 21 September 2026
Compatibility: OOF® Methodology OS™ · Modular OOF® Architecture Ecosystem
AI-Readable: Yes
Authority: OOF® — OriginOpen® Foundation
Protection: MIP® — Methodological Intellectual Property
Canonical Language: English (UCL™)
Canonical Definition
The Liability Basis Qualification Module (LBQM) governs how a Classified Liability Basis is evaluated for sufficient methodological integrity, source authority, status, temporal relevance, structural coherence, dependency integrity, and potential applicability to proceed as a qualified foundation for subsequent Liability governance without determining whether Liability Conditions are satisfied, whether a Liability-Relevant Connection exists, whether Liability attaches, or whether Liability is ultimately determined.
LBQM governs the transition:
Classified Liability Basis → Qualification Evaluation → Basis Integrity & Authority Assessment → Potential Applicability Assessment → Qualification State → Qualified Liability Basis Its foundational distinction is:
Liability Basis Qualification ≠ Liability Determination.
Operational Role
The operational role of LBQM is:
to determine whether a Classified Liability Basis is sufficiently grounded and governance-ready to continue through the Liability lifecycle.
LBIM identifies the potential Basis.
LBCM determines what kind of Basis it is.
LBQM asks:
Is this Basis sufficiently established as a potential foundation for Liability governance to proceed?
Qualification filters unsupported, defective, inactive, irrelevant, or insufficiently grounded Basis Candidates without converting the qualification decision into a Liability conclusion.
Position in the Parent Standard Flow
The internal LBS progression is:
Basis Identification → Basis Classification → Basis Qualification → Basis Association → Basis Continuity LBQM governs:
Basis Qualification
Its principal input is:
Classified Liability Basis
Its principal output is:
Qualified Liability Basis
Its canonical handoff is:
Qualified Liability Basis → Liability Basis Association
Central Operational Question
Is this Classified Liability Basis sufficiently grounded, coherent, authoritative where required, temporally relevant, and potentially applicable to proceed as a governed foundation for Liability?
The question concerns Basis qualification.
It does not ask whether Liability exists.
Governed Space
LBQM governs:
Basis Qualification Criteria, Source Integrity, Source Authority, Basis Status, Structural Coherence, Basis Authenticity where relevant, Temporal Relevance, Potential Applicability, Dependency Integrity, Qualification Assumptions, Qualification Uncertainty, Qualification Conflict, Qualification Failure, Conditional Qualification, Provisional Qualification, Qualification Change, Qualification Reassessment, and Qualification Sufficiency.
LBQM does not govern Liability Attachment or final Liability Determination.
Qualification Input
LBQM receives a:
Classified Liability Basis
The input should preserve:
Basis Identity, Basis Origin, Basis Source, Basis Classification, Governed Liability Object reference, dependency structure, classification uncertainty, and relevant history.
Where those elements remain materially deficient, LBQM should not manufacture qualification certainty.
Qualification Purpose
The existence of an identifiable and classifiable Basis does not mean that the Basis is sufficiently grounded to support further Liability governance.
A Basis may be:
incorrectly sourced, inactive, superseded, temporally irrelevant, unsupported, structurally defective, dependent on a missing foundation, or unrelated to the governed matter.
Qualification exists to detect these conditions before the Basis is relied upon downstream.
Qualification Criteria
Qualification criteria should be appropriate to the Basis being evaluated.
Relevant criteria may include:
identifiable source, source integrity, sufficient authority, Basis status, temporal relevance, structural coherence, dependency integrity, potential Object relevance, known exclusions, material uncertainty, and sufficient traceability.
Not every Basis requires identical qualification criteria.
Therefore:
Uniform Qualification Criteria ≠ Reliable Qualification by default.
Basis Source Integrity
The source underlying a Basis must be sufficiently reliable for the Basis to proceed.
Source Integrity may concern:
identity, completeness, authenticity, version, provenance, internal consistency, and relationship to the identified Basis.
A source defect may prevent or limit qualification.
Therefore:
Identified Basis Source ≠ Qualified Basis Source.
Source Authenticity
Where authenticity is material, LBQM should determine whether the represented source can be treated as authentic for methodological purposes.
This may require evidence from ADIT® or validation from VALIDOS™.
LBQM does not independently own evidence or validation governance.
Therefore:
Source Authenticity Assessment ≠ Liability Determination.
Source Authority
Some Liability Bases require an authoritative source.
LBQM should evaluate whether the identified source possesses the relevant authority necessary for the Basis to operate as proposed.
Authority may depend on:
issuer, jurisdiction, delegation, organizational competence, contractual authority, governance role, or another relevant structure.
Therefore:
Existence of a Source ≠ Authority of the Source.
Authority and Applicability
Even an authoritative source may not apply to the governed matter.
Therefore:
Source Authority ≠ Basis Applicability.
Authority establishes one qualification dimension.
Applicability requires separate evaluation.
Basis Status
LBQM should determine the relevant status of the Basis.
Possible states may include:
Active
Conditionally Active
Inactive
Expired
Suspended
Superseded
Terminated
Disputed
Status Uncertain
A Basis cannot be qualified reliably without understanding its material status.
Active Basis
An active Basis is one whose foundational structure remains operative within the relevant governance context.
Active status does not establish applicability.
Therefore:
Active Basis ≠ Applicable Basis by default.
and:
Active Basis ≠ Attached Liability.
Inactive or Expired Basis
A Basis may exist historically while no longer being active.
This does not automatically make it irrelevant.
A historically active Basis may remain relevant to an earlier Liability-relevant moment.
Therefore:
Currently Inactive Basis ≠ Historically Irrelevant Basis.
Temporal qualification is required.
Superseded Basis
A Basis may have been replaced by a later Basis or version.
LBQM must determine which state is relevant to the matter being governed.
Supersession does not erase the earlier Basis.
Therefore:
Basis Supersession ≠ Basis Erasure.
The earlier Basis may remain relevant to historical Liability governance.
Temporal Relevance
A Basis must be evaluated against the relevant lifecycle time.
Relevant questions may include:
When did the Basis become effective?
Was it active at the Liability-relevant moment?
Was it amended?
Was it superseded?
Was it terminated?
Which version governed the relevant period?
Therefore:
Current Basis State ≠ Relevant Historical Basis State by default.
Retrospective Distortion
Later Basis states must not silently replace earlier states when historical Liability is being governed.
A later amendment may clarify or change a Basis.
It must not automatically be projected backward.
Therefore:
Later Basis State ≠ Earlier Basis State.
Temporal qualification must preserve historical integrity.
Structural Coherence
A Basis should possess sufficient internal coherence to function as a governable Liability foundation.
Structural coherence may require:
an identifiable source, a meaningful governed foundation, consistent classification, identifiable dependencies, and a coherent relationship between the source and proposed Basis.
Therefore:
Basis Label ≠ Structurally Coherent Basis.
Basis Identity Integrity
Qualification should confirm that the Basis being evaluated remains the same Basis that was identified and classified.
A change in wording or representation should not silently substitute a different foundation.
Therefore:
Qualification of Basis A ≠ Qualification of Basis B.
Basis Identity must remain stable throughout the qualification process.
Classification Integrity
Qualification should use the governed classification established by LBCM.
Where qualification reveals that the classification is materially incorrect, the matter should return to classification governance.
LBQM should not silently rewrite the Basis classification.
Therefore:
Qualification Finding ≠ Silent Reclassification.
Dependency Integrity
A dependent Basis cannot be qualified reliably without examining the material dependency upon which it relies.
The canonical structure may be:
Foundation A → Dependent Basis B If A is absent, invalid, inactive, or otherwise insufficient, B may fail qualification.
Therefore:
Dependent Basis Qualification requires Dependency Integrity.
Dependency Failure
Where a required dependency fails, the Basis may become:
unqualified, conditionally qualified, suspended, or subject to reassessment.
The exact state depends on the structure of the Basis.
Therefore:
Dependency Failure ≠ Automatic Liability Determination.
It is a Basis governance outcome.
Composite Basis Qualification
A Composite Basis may require qualification of several constituent elements.
The Basis should not be treated as fully qualified merely because one component is sufficient.
Therefore:
Qualified Component ≠ Qualified Composite Basis by default.
The required structural relationship among components must also remain coherent.
Multiple Basis Qualification
Where several distinct Liability Bases exist, each should be qualified independently unless their governance structure explicitly requires joint qualification.
Therefore:
Qualification of Basis A ≠ Qualification of Basis B.
One successful Basis does not validate another.
One failed Basis does not automatically invalidate another.
Alternative Basis Qualification
Alternative Bases may each proceed through qualification.
LBQM does not need to select the final Basis merely because several alternatives qualify.
Therefore:
Multiple Qualified Alternative Bases ≠ Basis Selection.
Later governance may determine whether one, several, or none proceed.
Concurrent Basis Qualification
Concurrent Bases may each be qualified where they remain structurally independent.
Qualification should preserve their separate identities.
Therefore:
Concurrent Qualification ≠ Basis Merger.
Potential Applicability
Qualification includes determining whether the Basis is potentially capable of applying to the Governed Liability Object.
Potential applicability is not final applicability.
It means the Basis is sufficiently relevant to continue into formal association and later governance.
Therefore:
Potential Applicability ≠ Final Applicability.
Object Relevance
LBQM should test whether the classified Basis has a meaningful relationship to the Governed Liability Object.
A Basis may be valid in general but irrelevant to the specific Object.
Therefore:
Generally Valid Basis ≠ Object-Relevant Basis by default.
Object relevance must be explicit.
Object Relevance and Association
Qualification establishes whether the Basis is sufficiently Object-relevant to proceed.
Formal Object–Basis Association belongs to the next LBS governance function.
Therefore:
Potential Object Relevance ≠ Governed Object–Basis Association.
This boundary prevents qualification from absorbing association governance.
Known Exclusions
A Basis may contain exclusions limiting its potential applicability.
LBQM should identify material exclusions where they affect qualification.
An exclusion may:
prevent qualification, limit qualification, create conditional qualification, or require further governance.
Therefore:
Basis Exclusion ≠ Basis Absence.
The Basis may exist while being inapplicable to the particular matter.
Exception and Exclusion
An exception may modify how a Basis operates.
An exclusion may remove a matter from its potential reach.
These should remain distinguishable where material.
However, LBQM should not perform the full Conditions analysis owned by LCOS.
The purpose is only to determine whether the Basis remains sufficiently qualified to proceed.
Qualification and Liability Conditions
A Basis may be fully qualified while one or more later Liability Conditions remain unsatisfied.
Therefore:
Liability Basis Qualification ≠ Liability Condition Satisfaction.
This is a foundational LIGA™ boundary.
LBQM asks whether the Basis can legitimately proceed.
LCOS later asks whether the required Conditions exist, fail, change, or are satisfied.
Qualification and Liability Connection
Qualification does not establish a Liability-Relevant Connection between:
Subject, Object, conduct, conditions, or consequences.
Therefore:
Qualified Liability Basis ≠ Liability-Relevant Connection.
Connection is governed later by LCNS.
Qualification and Liability Attachment
A Qualified Liability Basis does not attach Liability to any Subject.
Therefore:
Qualified Liability Basis ≠ Attached Liability.
Attachment belongs to Liability Determination governance.
Qualification and Liability Determination
Qualification establishes the governance readiness of the Basis.
It does not determine whether Liability exists.
Therefore:
Basis Qualification ≠ Liability Determination.
A Basis may qualify and still produce a negative Liability Determination later.
Qualification and Harm
A Basis may depend on Harm.
Where so, a governed Harm state may become a qualification input.
However:
Qualified Harm-Dependent Basis ≠ Established Harm by LIGA™.
HAGA™ owns Harm governance.
LIGA™ uses the governed Harm state only to the extent relevant to Liability Basis qualification.
Qualification and Responsibility
Responsibility may be relevant to a Basis.
Where responsibility is required, LBQM may use a governed Responsibility state as an input.
However:
Established Responsibility ≠ Qualified Liability Basis by itself.
and:
Qualified Responsibility-Related Basis ≠ Liability.
Qualification and Evidence
Evidence may support:
Basis Source Integrity, authority, status, temporal relevance, dependency, and potential applicability.
But:
Evidence Sufficiency ≠ Basis Qualification by itself.
LBQM interprets the governed evidence in relation to the qualification question.
ADIT® retains governance ownership of evidence.
Qualification and Validation
VALIDOS™ may validate information or structures used by LBQM.
Validation may support qualification.
However:
Validation ≠ Liability Basis Qualification.
Qualification remains a LIGA™ methodological determination concerning the Basis.
Qualification Assumptions
Qualification may depend on unresolved assumptions.
Material assumptions should remain explicit.
They may concern:
authority, source status, temporal state, dependency, Object relevance, or external governed states.
Therefore:
Qualification Assumption ≠ Qualification Fact.
Qualification Uncertainty
A Basis may not be capable of definitive qualification at the current stage.
Possible qualification states may include:
Qualified
Provisionally Qualified
Conditionally Qualified
Qualification Uncertain
Qualification Disputed
Qualification Failed
Qualification Suspended
These states preserve methodological precision.
Provisional Qualification
Provisional Qualification may be used where the Basis is sufficiently grounded to proceed temporarily but a material issue remains unresolved.
Provisional status must identify the unresolved issue.
Therefore:
Provisional Qualification ≠ Full Qualification.
Downstream governance should be able to detect the provisional state.
Conditional Qualification
Conditional Qualification may be appropriate where qualification depends on an explicit unresolved requirement.
The condition must remain visible.
Therefore:
Conditionally Qualified Basis ≠ Unconditionally Qualified Basis.
Conditional qualification should not be confused with Liability Conditions under LCOS.
The qualification condition concerns governance readiness of the Basis itself.
Qualification Conflict
Different governed inputs may support different qualification outcomes.
For example:
one source may indicate that a Basis was active, while another indicates that it had been superseded.
LBQM should preserve the conflict until it can be legitimately resolved.
Therefore:
Qualification Conflict ≠ Authority to Manufacture Certainty.
Qualification Failure
A Basis fails qualification where it cannot sufficiently function as a potential Liability foundation.
Reasons may include:
invalid or insufficient source, absence of required authority, material structural incoherence, failed dependency, temporal irrelevance, clear Object irrelevance, or another material deficiency.
The failure should identify why qualification failed.
Qualification Failure and Liability
Failure of one Basis does not establish absence of Liability generally.
Another Basis may exist.
Therefore:
Failed Liability Basis ≠ No Liability by default.
Likewise:
Failed Basis A ≠ Failed Basis B.
The architecture must preserve Basis-specific outcomes.
Qualification Change
A previously qualified Basis may later change state.
For example:
new information may reveal that the Basis was superseded, a dependency may fail, or an authority state may change.
Therefore:
Qualified Once ≠ Qualified Forever.
Qualification may require lifecycle reassessment.
Qualification Correction
An earlier Qualification State may be found incorrect.
Correction must preserve:
the earlier Qualification State, the corrected state, the reason for correction, the supporting governance inputs, and the effective relationship between states.
Therefore:
Qualification Correction ≠ Historical Erasure.
Qualification Reassessment
A Basis may require reassessment after:
new evidence, source correction, authority change, temporal clarification, classification correction, dependency change, or Object change.
Reassessment may confirm, modify, suspend, condition, or withdraw qualification.
Therefore:
Qualification Reassessment ≠ New Basis by default.
Qualification History
Qualification history should preserve materially relevant states across the Basis lifecycle.
The current Qualification State must not replace the historical record.
Therefore:
Current Qualification State ≠ Complete Qualification History.
This becomes important when later Liability governance must reconstruct which Basis was treated as qualified at an earlier time.
Qualification Sufficiency
Qualification is sufficient when downstream governance can determine:
which Basis is being qualified, its relevant source, its authority where required, its status, its temporal relevance, its structural coherence, its material dependencies, its potential Object relevance, its material exclusions, and unresolved uncertainty.
Qualification sufficiency does not require later Liability Conditions to be satisfied.
Therefore:
Qualification Sufficiency ≠ Liability Determination Readiness.
Handoff to Basis Association
Once the Basis is sufficiently qualified, LBQM produces:
Qualified Liability Basis
The handoff should preserve:
Basis Identity, Basis Source, Basis Classification, Qualification State, Authority State where relevant, Temporal State, Dependency State, potential Object relevance, material exclusions, uncertainty, assumptions, and qualification history.
The next governance question becomes:
How is this Qualified Liability Basis formally associated with the relevant Governed Liability Object and related Basis structure?
Minimum Implementation Framework
A conforming implementation of LBQM must provide at least the following eight capabilities:
Qualification Criteria Governance
Capability to establish and apply Basis-appropriate qualification criteria without treating qualification as Liability Determination.
Source Integrity & Authority Assessment
Capability to evaluate Basis Source integrity, authenticity where relevant, authority, and status while preserving unresolved evidence or validation dependencies.
Temporal & Status Qualification
Capability to determine whether the relevant Basis state is active, inactive, expired, suspended, superseded, terminated, disputed, or otherwise temporally relevant to the governed matter.
Structural & Dependency Qualification
Capability to evaluate Basis coherence, Basis Identity integrity, classification integrity, required dependencies, and composite structures.
Potential Applicability & Object-Relevance Assessment
Capability to determine whether the Basis is potentially capable of applying to the Governed Liability Object without performing formal Basis Association or later Liability Determination.
Exclusion, Assumption, Uncertainty & Conflict Governance
Capability to represent material exclusions, qualification assumptions, provisional or conditional states, uncertainty, and qualification conflicts explicitly.
Qualification Change, Correction & Reassessment
Capability to govern changes in Qualification State and preserve qualification history without historical erasure.
Qualification Sufficiency Determination
Capability to determine whether the Basis is sufficiently qualified for formal Liability Basis Association while preserving unresolved material limitations.
Governance Logic
The canonical LBQM governance logic is:
Classified Liability Basis
↓
Establish Qualification Criteria
↓
Evaluate Basis Source Integrity
↓ Evaluate Source Authority where required ↓
Determine Basis Status
↓
Determine Relevant Temporal State
↓
Evaluate Structural Coherence
↓
Evaluate Required Dependencies
↓
Evaluate Potential Object Relevance
↓
Identify Material Exclusions
↓
Identify Qualification Assumptions
↓
Identify Qualification Uncertainty or Conflict
↓ Can the Basis sufficiently function as a potential Liability foundation?
If no:
Qualification Failed / Suspended / Reassessment Required
If uncertain but sufficiently governable:
Provisional or Conditional Qualification
If yes:
Qualified Liability Basis
↓
Preserve Qualification State and History
↓
Handoff to Liability Basis Association
Governance Outputs
LBQM may produce:
Basis Qualification Criteria
Basis Source Integrity State
Basis Source Authority State
Basis Status
Basis Temporal Qualification State
Basis Structural Coherence State
Basis Dependency Qualification State
Basis Potential Applicability State
Basis Object-Relevance State
Basis Exclusion Record
Qualification Assumption Record
Qualification Uncertainty State
Qualification Conflict State
Provisional Qualification State
Conditional Qualification State
Qualification Failure Record
Qualification Change Record
Qualification Correction Record
Qualification Reassessment Record
Qualification History
Qualification Sufficiency State
The principal output is:
Qualified Liability Basis
Critical Distinctions
LBQM preserves the following distinctions:
Liability Basis Qualification ≠ Liability Determination Uniform Qualification Criteria ≠ Reliable Qualification by default Identified Basis Source ≠ Qualified Basis Source Source Authenticity Assessment ≠ Liability Determination Existence of a Source ≠ Authority of the Source Source Authority ≠ Basis Applicability Active Basis ≠ Applicable Basis by default Active Basis ≠ Attached Liability Currently Inactive Basis ≠ Historically Irrelevant Basis Basis Supersession ≠ Basis Erasure Current Basis State ≠ Relevant Historical Basis State by default Later Basis State ≠ Earlier Basis State Basis Label ≠ Structurally Coherent Basis Qualification of Basis A ≠ Qualification of Basis B Qualification Finding ≠ Silent Reclassification Dependency Failure ≠ Automatic Liability Determination Qualified Component ≠ Qualified Composite Basis by default Multiple Qualified Alternative Bases ≠ Basis Selection Concurrent Qualification ≠ Basis Merger Potential Applicability ≠ Final Applicability Generally Valid Basis ≠ Object-Relevant Basis by default Potential Object Relevance ≠ Governed Object–Basis Association Basis Exclusion ≠ Basis Absence Liability Basis Qualification ≠ Liability Condition Satisfaction Qualified Liability Basis ≠ Liability-Relevant Connection Qualified Liability Basis ≠ Attached Liability Established Responsibility ≠ Qualified Liability Basis by itself Evidence Sufficiency ≠ Basis Qualification by itself Validation ≠ Liability Basis Qualification Qualification Assumption ≠ Qualification Fact Provisional Qualification ≠ Full Qualification Conditionally Qualified Basis ≠ Unconditionally Qualified Basis Qualification Conflict ≠ Authority to Manufacture Certainty Failed Liability Basis ≠ No Liability by default Qualified Once ≠ Qualified Forever Qualification Correction ≠ Historical Erasure Qualification Reassessment ≠ New Basis by default Current Qualification State ≠ Complete Qualification History Qualification Sufficiency ≠ Liability Determination Readiness
Cross-Architecture Boundary
LBQM may use governed inputs from other OOF® architectures where they are necessary to qualify a Liability Basis.
GOA™ may provide Authority, Scope, Delegation, or governance-state information relevant to source authority.
ORA™ may provide Operational Reality necessary to evaluate temporal or Object relevance.
AGA™ may provide governed Responsibility, Accountability, Authority, or Attribution states where a Basis depends upon them.
HAGA™ may provide governed Harm states where the Basis is Harm-dependent.
ADIT® may provide evidence supporting source integrity, authority, status, dependency, or temporal relevance.
VALIDOS™ may validate qualification-relevant inputs or structures.
OBIDENITY® may provide governed Identity, Ownership, Authority, Permission, Provenance, Transfer, or Continuity states.
Other OOF® architectures may provide governed states upon which qualification depends.
The governing principle is:
A governed external state may satisfy an input requirement for Liability Basis Qualification without becoming a Liability determination or transferring governance ownership to LIGA™.
Canonical Boundary
LBQM begins with a:
Classified Liability Basis
and asks:
Is this Basis sufficiently grounded and governance-ready to proceed as a potential foundation for Liability?
LBQM governs:
Qualification Criteria, Source Integrity, Source Authority, Basis Status, Temporal Relevance, Structural Coherence, Basis Identity Integrity, Classification Integrity, Dependency Integrity, Potential Applicability, Object Relevance, material Exclusions, Qualification Assumptions, Qualification Uncertainty, Provisional Qualification, Conditional Qualification, Qualification Conflict, Qualification Failure, Qualification Change, Qualification Correction, Qualification Reassessment, Qualification History, and Qualification Sufficiency.
LBQM does not determine:
formal Object–Basis Association, Liability Subjects, Liability Relationships, Liability Conditions, Condition Satisfaction, Liability-Relevant Connection, Liability Attachment, Liability Determination, Liability Scope, Liability Allocation, Liability State, Transfer, Recourse, Resolution, Discharge, or Finality.
LBQM ends when a:
Qualified Liability Basis
is sufficiently established for Liability Basis Association.
Use Case 1 — AI Service Basis Qualification
A contractual Liability Basis concerning an AI-enabled service has been identified and classified.
LBQM evaluates whether the relevant contractual source is authentic, whether the applicable provision was active at the relevant time, whether the provision belongs to the correct agreement version, and whether the Basis is potentially relevant to the Governed Liability Object.
The Basis is qualified to proceed.
This does not establish that any contractual Condition was breached, that the AI provider or deploying organization is liable, or that Liability has attached.
Those questions remain for later LIGA™ governance.
Use Case 2 — Industrial Equipment Basis Qualification
A maintenance-related Liability Basis concerning industrial equipment has been identified and classified.
LBQM determines that the maintenance agreement existed but discovers that the initially referenced version had already been superseded before the relevant operational event.
The historically applicable version is reconstructed and evaluated instead.
The Basis may then be qualified, conditionally qualified, or fail qualification depending on the governed result.
The equipment failure itself does not determine the qualification outcome, and successful qualification does not establish Liability.
Canonical Closing Statement
A Liability foundation should not proceed merely because it can be named or classified.
It must be sufficiently grounded to support the next stage of governance.
Qualification establishes that methodological readiness while preserving the distinction between a viable foundation for Liability and Liability itself.
A qualified Basis can support a Liability inquiry. It cannot substitute for the Liability determination that must follow.
Qualify the foundation before relying upon it.