Why Tamga Network is non-profit and bound for a foundation

Tamga Network is non-profit, and its operation will be handed over to a foundation, because a trust network only works if everyone who relies on it can believe that the keeper of the list favours no one. States, institutions, several wallets and competing service companies all read the same list. So the network sells no services, runs no wallet and gives nobody privileges, and every role it holds today on a provisional basis is designed to be handed over. When states join, a council or foundation takes over the operation and each state takes over its own list.

Why must the keeper of a trust list be neutral?

A trust list decides who is believed. An institution in the list can issue credentials that verifiers accept; a verifier in the list can ask wallets for data; a wallet provider in the list can receive credentials. If the party that keeps the list also sold integration, ran a wallet or offered paid support, every listing decision would be open to the question: was this approved on the rules, or because it helps the list keeper's business?

The EU separates these roles for the same reason. In the eIDAS 2.0 model (Regulation (EU) 2024/1183) member states supervise and publish trusted lists, wallet providers operate wallets and relying parties register; the roles are kept apart. When Tamga set its positioning, the record named this as a known tension: a list operator that sells services has a conflict of interest (ADR-0035). The separation was then made explicit (ADR-0037).

What does "non-profit" mean in practice?

Three binding rules:

• The network sells no services (PO5). Its documents and sites carry no pricing and no sales language. Integration, support, contracted hosting and consulting are offered by companies outside the network, under their own names.
• Same terms for everyone (PO6). The reference services and the registration process are open to all participants on the same terms. No service provider gets priority, and the decision states explicitly that this includes the company founded by the Tamga team.
• Reference services exist so the network works. The trust list publisher, the hosted verifier, hosted issuance with the Institution Console, the provisional identity service and the sandbox are there so that institutions can join and anyone can try the rules. They are not products.

The Tamga ARF states it in its governance section: Tamga Network is non-profit, its operation will be handed over to a foundation, it sells no product and offers no commercial service (Tamga ARF; how the framework is built is in Tamga ARF: how we adapted the European framework).

Why does the network run no wallet?

Because a list that also operates one of the listed wallets is not neutral towards the others. In the EU model each wallet is operated by the organisation that offers it, its wallet provider, and the trust framework only lists wallet providers.

Tamga Network follows that model (ADR-0042):

• It does not operate or host any wallet's app, wallet provider, website or support service.
• No wallet service runs under the network's domain names. The wallet services that used to run at wallet.tamga.network were removed from the network on 6 October 2026.
• The network's interfaces and packages do not hard-code a wallet's name; "open in your wallet" is the wording, and a wallet's name, when needed, comes from its list entry.
• There is one sandbox, and it belongs to the network. Wallet developers register their own provider there and test against the same institutions, identity service and verifier as everyone else.

Tamga Wallet, one of the wallets on the network and a separate product, follows the same path. Its wallet provider is run by the wallet's own operator under the wallet's own domain, not by the network. Its provider entry (TAMGA-WP-1) is reserved in the list today and has no keys yet; it receives a certificate when that provider service opens, like any other wallet's.

Who owns the lists?

The states do. Governance has three layers, and a different party decides in each (ADR-0002):

Two consequences follow. A state can leave without anyone's vote. And removing a state does not invalidate the credentials in its citizens' wallets; it only stops new records. Even after a council exists, it governs the network's shared rules and cannot decide about a state's own institutions.

What is the path from today to a foundation?

Today Tamga is the provisional operator. It publishes the Türkiye list on behalf of the national authority and says so in the list itself: the operator field reads "status": "provisional" with an on_behalf_of value that is never left empty. No heavy institution is set up before anyone needs it.

When one or two states are willing to join, a governance body is formed: a council of member states and a foundation or secretariat to take over the operation. The lists are handed over to their owners, and network-level decisions, such as admitting a member or adding a shared credential type, are taken jointly.

Once there are at least two independent operators, the records also move to a permissioned shared ledger, so no single party can change them alone. A ledger kept by one operator would add cost and no trust, which is why it waits (Why we start without a blockchain).

How can the operator change without breaking credentials?

Because the identifiers do not belong to the operator. An institution's issuer_id is computed from its own certificate, credential types are named by fixed URNs, and the list format already has a slot for each state and the full set of roles. A hand-over changes the operator field, the list's address and its signer. For wallets and verifiers, only the address and the signer change; credentials already in people's wallets stay valid.

The parts that code cannot move, such as the domain name, the root certificates, the list archive and the keys, pass under a written succession agreement. The rule behind this is that every power code cannot limit (hosting, the domain, record-keeping, statistics) is limited by policy, a measurable hand-over threshold and a transparency report (principle P7).

What keeps the provisional operator honest until then?

Not good intentions alone. The lists are signed, versioned and hash-chained, and nothing is ever deleted. Every revocation list publication goes into a public, hourly anchor log. Every build is recorded in a public change log at trust.tamga.network. The rules add a quarterly transparency report and independent audit; the report's page is not published yet.

We also say where this stops. Today the anchor rests on one operator's signature, and the public records deter misuse rather than make it impossible. That gap is what the second independent operator, and the shared ledger after it, is there to close. Details: How a signed trust list works.

What does this mean for each participant?

• Institutions register on the same terms whatever service company, if any, helps them integrate.
• Wallets are recognised by their entry and their conformance with the rules, not by their name.
• Service companies compete outside the network; the network's rules are the same for all of them.
• States keep the only say over their own lists, and can take over the roles Tamga holds provisionally for Türkiye today whenever they are ready (For states).

Frequently asked questions

Has the foundation been set up?

Not yet. The governance body is formed when one or two states are willing to join. Until then Tamga is the provisional operator, and the lists say so.

Can a company pay for priority or a better listing?

No. The network sells no services, and its reference services and registration process are open to all participants on the same terms. No company is treated differently.

Does Tamga Wallet have a special position in the network?

No. It is one of the wallets on the network, run by its own operator, and it is listed the same way as any other wallet.

What happens to people's credentials if a state leaves the network?

They stay valid. Leaving stops a state from writing new records; it does not cancel what was issued. Whether other states keep accepting those credentials is each state's own recognition decision.

Could one state take over the network?

Each state writes only its own list, admitting a new member needs two-thirds of the member states, and recognition is decided by each state for itself. No single state controls another's list.