Your company. Your brand.
One Corporate Engine.

How growth would be verified.

The proposed process starts with agreed measures and a comparison period. Production records, delivery confirmations and financial records would be checked together, with returns, cancellations and duplicate entries accounted for. The record would distinguish physical output, sales, collected revenue and changes caused by prices or exchange rates.

Illustrative production example: a factory increases accepted output from 1,000 to 1,100 comparable units over equivalent periods. Supporting records establish the additional 100 units and the 10% volume increase. Published currency rules would then determine whether that verified change qualifies for issuance and how any new coins are allocated.

Verification would combine source records, cross-checks and accountable review. Recording an event on a blockchain preserves a record; confirming the underlying production still requires evidence. “FACE Mining” describes the proposed economic rule, while the blockchain’s transaction validation is a separate function.

For companies with a complex value chain.

The initial focus is large manufacturers, technology and AI businesses, and groups operating across multiple entities or countries. The Engine is intended for situations where a single order, product or service passes through several systems and management needs a reliable view across them. Suppliers and smaller partners could connect the relevant part of their activity.

Follow one customer order. Link the materials purchased, the production batch, the shipment, the customer invoice and the payment received. Operations could trace a delivery problem; finance could see which invoice remains unpaid; management could compare the order’s recorded costs with its sales value. That connected view would make the underlying data useful before a cryptocurrency is introduced.

Your brand on a shared technology foundation.

White label means the company would present the service under its own name and visual identity. Its customer experience, access roles, connected systems and currency programme would be configured around its business. FACE would provide the underlying Engine and coordinate the agreed software integrations.

What would happen in practice?

1. Connect

Start with one product line, factory or region. The company’s integration team or appointed provider would map the required records and configure APIs, connectors or scheduled imports. An initial pilot could use read-only access. The company would choose which data to share and who could see it; its existing systems would continue operating.

2. Reconcile

The Engine would link an order to its production batch, shipment, invoice and payment. It would flag missing records, duplicates and conflicting quantities. AI could assist with matching and exception detection. Responsible people would check the evidence, resolve exceptions and approve the rules used to recognise verified activity, with a history of corrections.

3. Use the result

Operations and finance teams would see linked activity, outstanding issues and reviewed metrics. Where separately enabled, the Engine could send authorised requests to financial partners and receive their status. Partners would handle the relevant banking, custody, exchange or card services. Any coin issuance would require its own approved programme rules.

The first measurable result: follow a real order from purchase to payment, identify unresolved gaps and compare the time needed to produce that view with the company’s current process.

View the step-by-step workflow

Proposed personal fintech layer

Everyday finance, open beyond the company.

A company’s financial services could serve employees and ordinary customers, including people who do not work for it. The everyday experience would be simple: add money, keep a payment balance and pay for goods and services with a company-branded card wherever its card network is accepted.

For employees

Receive funded salary and other payments into a personal account, then use the available balance for everyday spending. The aim is fast access to pay; actual timing depends on the payroll and payment partners.

For customers

Open an eligible account and top up with personal funds. Keep money for purchases, or choose to buy the company’s cryptocurrency through supported purchase and trading services. Employment by the company would not be required.

For the company

Connect payroll, customer payments and loyalty through one branded service. A rewards programme could offer the corporate currency or supported third-party crypto assets as an additional benefit.

Crypto would be a choice. A customer could use the ordinary payment features without buying a token. Employees could choose to convert part of their pay, and cardholders could opt into crypto rewards where available.

FACE would provide the software and connections. Banking, custody, currency conversion and card issuance would be delivered by selected financial partners. The illustrated card represents the proposed payment service; product terms and availability would depend on those partners.

How a company would issue its currency.

Each white-label deployment would have a company-specific currency programme. The Engine would provide the record and calculation workflow; the programme would define the decisions that authorise an actual issue.

1. Set the rules

The company and its appointed issuer would define the currency’s purpose, holders’ rights, supply policy, distribution and release schedule. For production-linked issuance, they would publish the growth metric, starting baseline, calculation formula and any limits applied.

2. Verify activity

The Engine would gather the relevant records, reconcile them and flag discrepancies. Assigned reviewers would confirm the evidence under the published method, with independent verification where the programme requires it. Returns, cancellations and duplicate entries would be addressed before calculating eligible growth.

3. Authorise issuance

The published formula would translate reviewed activity into a proposed quantity of coins. The authorised issuer would approve and execute the issue through the selected technical arrangement. The record would show the inputs, rule version, approvals and quantity issued.

4. Allocate and disclose

The distribution plan would identify the recipients of newly issued coins. Depending on the programme, these could include purchasers, customer or employee reward programmes, contributors and a company treasury. Allocations, retained holdings and future releases would be disclosed separately.

A reason to use it: the company could offer defined service access, discounts or rewards, funded under its commercial programme. People outside the company could buy and use the coin through supported services. Demand and market price would still develop independently of the issuance calculation.

The formula, issue quantities, allocations and practical benefits would be agreed and published for each company before launch. The white-label Engine provides a configurable framework; those parameters are not fixed by this presentation.

Proposed balance structure

Everyday money and the company’s cryptocurrency.

Spending balance

Money for salary payments, top-ups and purchases. If a branded stablecoin is used, a promise to redeem it at a fixed value needs matching liquid reserves and a defined redemption process.

Corporate cryptocurrency

The company’s market-facing crypto asset, bought with money or received as a reward. Customers could choose to hold it, transfer it, sell it or use supported payment conversion. Its floating price means its purchasing power could rise or fall. Holding it would not automatically mean owning shares.

For example: a customer who does not work for the company could add $500, keep $400 in an ordinary money balance and choose to use $100 to buy the company’s cryptocurrency. The app would display the spending balance and the cryptocurrency’s current value separately.

At checkout, a payment partner could convert a supported digital asset into the payment currency. The merchant would receive an ordinary card payment without needing to accept the company’s token directly. Visa explains this card-payment model.

Verified production growth can inform the corporate asset’s design. Cash settlement and fixed-value redemption need their own funding and reserves; a record of economic growth does not supply them by itself.

What would companies and people gain?

Illustrative service offer: an AI company could price a $100 service at $95 when paid with its cryptocurrency at the quoted conversion rate. The customer’s $5 gross saving comes from the company’s discount. Fees reduce that saving, and a fall in the token’s price before use could outweigh it.

The company would need to fund rewards from its business economics and measure whether repeat sales justify their cost. Minting more rewards creates more tokens; it does not create the money needed to honour benefits.

A payment card and wallet can work with ordinary money or existing digital currencies. A new cryptocurrency needs a reason for people to use and hold it. In the FACE model, demand could develop around company services and a wider network of people and businesses that choose to accept the currency.

Issued by a company. Held and traded by people.

The proposed currency is intended for open circulation. Once coins are sold or paid out, they belong to their recipients under the applicable ownership and custody arrangements. They could then move between holders, merchants and market participants who have no direct relationship with the originating company. The company would not need to be the counterparty to each transfer or trade.

A published distribution plan would identify the coins offered to the market, any allocation retained by the company and the schedule for releasing further supply. Subject to the applicable framework, the company could hold an initial allocation and acquire additional coins on the market. Its holdings would remain separate from those owned by other people. Any continuing control over issuance, network rules or transfers would also need to be disclosed.

Issuer allocations are an established possibility: EU MiCA, Annex I, Part G(3), specifically requires information about crypto-assets retained by the issuer where applicable. The requirements for a particular launch depend on its jurisdiction and asset type.

The dollar analogy is about ownership and circulation. Dollars held by households and businesses are not government property simply because they were issued through the monetary system. The dollar also benefits from established institutions, broad acceptance and deep markets. A private cryptocurrency would need to build its own acceptance and liquidity. Federal Reserve Education explains these foundations of the dollar’s role.

Open circulation and convertibility are different. Holders may be able to transfer coins freely under the network rules, while conversion into dollars or another currency depends on available trading services, willing buyers and liquidity. A freely traded asset does not automatically carry a promise of fixed-value redemption.

Use, investment and speculation can coexist.

People may acquire a corporate cryptocurrency to use its benefits, to invest in its expected future value, or to trade price movements. A market connects buyers and sellers and establishes a trading price. An exchange listing alone does not create customer demand or guarantee that a holder can sell at the displayed price.

Our proposed economic test is simple: would people still want to use or hold this currency if its price stopped rising? Merchant acceptance, convenient transfers, credible supply rules and useful services would give buyers something concrete to assess. Such use could extend well beyond the company that first issued it.

The distinction between demand from users and demand from investors is also examined in BIS Working Paper 1201 on exchange tokens. Applying that distinction here is an assessment of the proposed FACE model.

These are scenarios, not price forecasts. Investor.gov describes volatility and liquidity risks in crypto asset markets.

Corporate production and market price measure different things. A 20% increase in production does not imply a 20% rise in the currency’s price. The Engine could verify production for the issuance rules, while the market values the circulating currency. Issuing more coins after verified growth increases supply, so demand must be assessed separately.

Holding the currency would not automatically give someone a share of corporate profit or assets. If a separate instrument is intended to provide those rights, its structure and obligations need explicit documentation, including the applicable securities framework. The SEC explains why the rights and structure of tokenized securities matter.

Where does the money go? In an issuer sale, proceeds go to the issuer under the offering terms. In a resale between holders, payment goes to the selling holder; the company does not automatically receive that trading money. Any issuer sales or fees must be identified separately. This follows the distinction between primary and secondary markets. Market capitalization is a quoted valuation, not cash raised by the company.

A global business, a currency that can travel.

For an illustrative example, consider a business on the scale of Toyota or Apple adopting its own cryptocurrency. Its operations earn revenue in dollars, euros, yen and other national currencies. The proposed Engine would connect verified regional activity into one corporate economic record, while the company’s cryptocurrency could circulate internationally.

Local demand, connected markets. Some users could value payments and services in the company’s network; others could use the currency for transfers, holding or trading beyond that network. Prices across venues can differ after currency conversion because of fees, access and liquidity. Where trading between markets is possible, it can narrow those differences.

A stronger regional business could increase interest in the currency if it creates more useful activity or strengthens confidence. Regional revenue and the coin’s market price would still be separate measures; sales growth would not set the exchange rate.

This is an illustrative enterprise scenario. IMF Working Paper 24/133 examines regional crypto price differences and market segmentation; it does not assess or endorse this proposed corporate currency.

Shared evidence across a business network.

A supplier’s delivery and a manufacturer’s receipt could be matched as two records of the same transaction. Connecting them would help resolve quantity, timing or payment discrepancies. These links would distinguish newly produced goods from transfers of the same goods between companies.

Each participant would choose which records and confirmations its partners can access. Commercially sensitive details could remain private, while agreed summaries and supporting verification could inform corporate reporting or public currency disclosures.

Companies could continue settling in national currencies or choose supported digital assets through financial partners. The shared economic record would help explain the transaction regardless of the payment method.

Current status: Coming soon. This site presents the intended functionality and deployment model. Production access, branded financial services and individual currency launches would be confirmed for each implementation. Companies and partners can use the contact options below to discuss the proposed scope.

A practical path to launch.

1. Define a pilot

Select a business process, responsible teams, source systems and measurable outcomes. Agree how the starting position and subsequent growth will be recorded.

2. Establish the record

Connect the data, reconcile real transactions and review exceptions. Assess coverage, accuracy and the practical value of the resulting Corporate Value Chain.

3. Add financial services

Select the banking, payment, wallet and card partners needed for the chosen market. Introduce funded business and personal payment services as those connections become ready.

4. Launch the currency

Complete the issuance model and disclosures, validate the technology and prepare distribution, liquidity and trading access with the relevant partners and venues.

This is the proposed development sequence. The first pilot would establish scope and evidence for the next stage; launch dates would depend on the implementation and partner agreements.

Who would do what?

FACE / Leviev Group International

Provide the white-label Corporate Engine under an agreed licence and implementation scope, including its software connections, verification workflows and partner integrations.

The participating enterprise

Define its brand and commercial offer, connect its systems, assign responsible reviewers and approve the operating rules and economic model for its corporate currency.

Specialist partners

Provide the contracted banking, identity checks, custody, payments, card issuance and market services. Independent verification would be engaged where the programme calls for it.

The starting point for a company: identify one operational problem, the systems that hold the relevant evidence and the people responsible for those records. That creates a concrete basis for defining a pilot and evaluating the Engine’s usefulness.

Start a conversation.

Discuss a white-label deployment for your company or the services your organisation could bring to the partner network.

These links open your email app with a short enquiry template. You can also write directly to info@levievgroupinternational.com.