Syncing SecurityAgent ONE net sheets and jurisdiction rate tables

Every seller net sheet and buyer estimate SecurityAgent ONE prints starts from a city- and county-level schedule of title premiums, recording fees, transfer or doc-stamp tax and tax proration, then runs it through PalmAgent's calculation logic and stamps the agent's photo and company branding onto a PDF. The teams that move a real estate transaction — a brokerage, the sponsoring title underwriter, a transaction-management or CRM platform — want those same numbers without an agent re-keying them on a phone. This brief covers what the app holds, the authorized way to reach it, and what we hand back.

The bottom line: the durable value here is the per-jurisdiction rate set plus PalmAgent's net-sheet math, and both sit behind a subscription account rather than in the app binary. We would map the request the app makes when it builds a sheet, capture the jurisdiction table it pulls, and reproduce the computed line items so the output matches the agent's PDF. Native export exists and is useful, but it hands you a flattened document, not the fields underneath it.

The figures and tables the app holds

Reaching the data under your authorization

Three routes apply to this app. They differ in how much structure you get back and how much survives an app update.

Authorized interface integration / protocol analysis

We observe the traffic between SecurityAgent ONE and the PalmAgent backend during a consenting session, then document the net-sheet and buyer-estimate request, the jurisdiction-table fetch, and the auth chain that gates them. This returns every structured field the app itself uses and is the most durable option, because it follows the same calls the app depends on. The capture environment is set up with you during onboarding — a consenting account or a sponsor test account, your choice.

User-consented account access

Where you already operate the agent accounts, the integration drives the session through a consenting account's own credentials and entitlements. It is a clean fit when the accounts and the consent record are yours to give, and it keeps the data flow tied to a real subscription state.

Native export as a fallback

The app emails and socially shares finished sheets and produces a branded PDF. That output is low effort to consume but lossy: you get a rendered document, not the line-item fields. We treat it as a reconciliation check against the structured feed, not as the feed itself.

For most teams the first route is the spine of the build and the third is the test harness that proves the numbers line up. We make that call explicitly with you once we have seen which jurisdictions and report types you actually need.

A net-sheet request, start to finish

The shape below is illustrative — the exact field names and the auth chain are confirmed during the build against a consenting account, not assumed here. It shows the pattern we map: a subscription-gated token, then a jurisdiction-scoped computation request, then the line items the PDF is rendered from.

POST /one/session/token
{ "device_id": "...", "build": "SecurityAgent.AZ.Two",
  "credential": "<agent login>" }
-> 200 { "access_token": "...", "entitlement": "premium",
         "trial_expires": "2026-06-04" }

POST /one/netsheet/compute            # Authorization: Bearer ...
{ "sponsor_id": "...",                # pins the branded rate set
  "jurisdiction": { "state": "AZ", "county_fips": "04013" },
  "transaction": { "type": "seller",
                    "sale_price": 525000,
                    "loan_payoff": 318400,
                    "commission_pct": 5.5 } }
-> 200 {
     "title_premium": 1719.00,
     "recording_fees": 138.00,
     "transfer_tax": 0.00,            # AZ has none; varies by jurisdiction
     "tax_proration": -1942.55,
     "net_to_seller": 174861.45,
     "report_pdf_url": "https://.../sheet/....pdf" }

# Unsupported jurisdiction for this build:
-> 422 { "error": "jurisdiction_not_loaded",
         "detail": "county not in sponsor rate set" }

The error path matters as much as the happy path. A sponsor build does not carry every county, so the integration has to distinguish "no data for this jurisdiction" from "transaction rejected" and surface that cleanly upstream rather than emitting a zeroed sheet.

What we hand back

Concrete artefacts, tied to this app's surfaces:

• An OpenAPI specification covering the session/token call, the net-sheet and buyer-estimate compute endpoints, and the jurisdiction-table fetch.
• A protocol and auth-flow report: the login to subscription-gated token chain, refresh behaviour, and how entitlement state changes the response.
• Runnable client source in Python and Node.js for the key endpoints, including the jurisdiction-not-loaded path.
• A jurisdiction-table extractor that produces the county/city fee dataset as structured records.
• Automated tests that reconcile computed fields against the app's own generated PDF for sample transactions.
• Interface documentation and data-retention guidance for the consumer figures a net sheet can carry.

Three ways teams wire this in

• A brokerage transaction-management system generates a seller net sheet automatically the moment a listing is published, using the county table for that property's address.
• The sponsoring title underwriter pushes its branded figures into its own quote portal so agents stop re-keying numbers from the phone into another tool.
• A CRM enriches a buyer lead with a cash-to-close estimate for the property the lead is viewing, computed from the same jurisdiction set the agent would see in-app.

RESPA context and the PII inside a net sheet

The rate tables are reference data and carry little privacy weight on their own. A finished net sheet is different: it can hold a seller's name, the sale price and a loan payoff, which is personal information under US state privacy law such as California's CCPA and CPRA, and equivalents elsewhere. We minimise consumer identifiers in the feed by default and move computed totals plus the rate tables, not client identities, unless your workflow specifically needs them. Because this is a title-sponsor-branded agent tool, the RESPA Section 8 anti-kickback context and the TRID disclosure path are relevant: we keep the sponsor's rate logic unmodified so the integrated figures stay consistent with what flows into a Loan Estimate or Closing Disclosure, and we do not repackage a sponsor quote in a way that misstates who is providing it. Access is authorized and consented, sessions are logged, and proprietary sponsor rate tables are handled under NDA where the sponsor requires it.

Engineering notes for a sponsor-branded PalmAgent build

Two things about this specific build shape the work, and we account for both rather than handing them to you as conditions.

• Per-sponsor rate isolation. SecurityAgent ONE is one of many sponsor builds on the shared PalmAgent ONE engine, alongside siblings like PalmAgent ONE, FidelityAgent ONE and CTOAgent ONE. We pin the integration to this build's sponsor id and rate set, so a different sponsor's title-premium bands can never leak into a Security-sponsored workflow; if you run across more than one sponsor we parameterise the client per build.
• Jurisdiction-table drift. Recording fees and transfer or doc-stamp tax change when a county updates its schedule, and the app's table changes with it. We design the sync around the build's table refresh and add a periodic re-check that diffs the app's county schedule against our cached copy, so a stale transfer-tax constant does not silently flow into a disclosure.
• Subscription-gated sessions. Premium calculators sit behind the ONE Premium subscription, sold as a low monthly or annual plan with a 30-day trial per its Play Store listing. We design token refresh around that entitlement state so the sync degrades to a clear "not entitled" signal if a trial lapses, instead of returning a partial or zeroed sheet.

Screens from the app

Store screenshots, shown for interface reference. Select one to enlarge.

How this brief was put together

Checked on 18 May 2026: the Google Play listing for this package, PalmAgent's own site, an independent comparison catalogue of net-sheet and title-rate calculators, and the National Association of Realtors' RESPA reference for the disclosure and Section 8 context. The data domains and the sponsor-build structure are drawn from those sources; the request shape is a mapping pattern confirmed during a build, not a published spec.

Sources opened: Google Play — SecurityAgent ONE, palmagent.com, netsheetcalc.com calculator catalogue, NAR — RESPA.

Compiled by the OpenBanking Studio integration desk, May 2026.

Other net-sheet and title-rate tools agents use

Same category, listed for ecosystem context rather than ranking — each holds data a unified integration could normalise alongside SecurityAgent ONE.

• PalmAgent ONE — the generic build of the same engine, with city/county closing costs, seller net sheets and buyer estimates.
• TitleCapture — a multi-calculator title-quote platform spanning buyer estimates and seller net sheets across markets.
• TitleTap Net Sheet Calculator — title premiums and seller, buyer-finance, buyer-cash and refinance net sheets, web and mobile.
• Net Sheet Calc — an off-the-shelf branded title-quote and net-sheet tool for agents.
• PRISM by First American — seller net sheets, buyer estimates, refinance quotes, recording fees and transfer taxes for First American agents.
• Stewart Title Rate Calculator — title and escrow estimates with buyer and seller net sheets.
• Chicago Title Rate Calculator — underwriter rate lookups under the Fidelity group.
• Old Republic Title Rate Calculator — state-specific title premium and endorsement calculations.
• ClosingCorp — a closing-cost rate database used to source fee data.
• The Fund — a Florida members' tool covering closing costs, buyer cost sheets and seller net sheets.

The PalmAgent ONE family also ships sibling sponsor builds such as FidelityAgent ONE, CTOAgent ONE and ClearTitleApp ONE, which share the engine and differ mainly by rate set and branding.

Questions integrators ask about SecurityAgent ONE

Does the integration cover every county SecurityAgent ONE ships, or only the jurisdictions our sponsor build loads?

It tracks whatever jurisdiction set this specific build serves. SecurityAgent ONE is a sponsor-branded deployment of PalmAgent's engine, and the county and city schedules it returns are scoped to that sponsor. We map the jurisdiction table the build actually fetches, so the feed matches what an agent sees in-app rather than a generic national set.

Will a synced net sheet match the PDF the agent hands the client?

That is the acceptance test we build to. We replicate the computed fields — title premium, recording fees, transfer or doc-stamp tax, proration and net to seller — and reconcile them line by line against the app's own generated PDF for sample transactions before sign-off, so the integrated numbers are the same numbers the client is shown.

This is a Security-sponsored build — can the same work target a FidelityAgent ONE or PalmAgent ONE deployment too?

Yes. The PalmAgent ONE family runs many sponsor builds off shared logic with per-sponsor rate sets and branding. We parameterise the integration by build and sponsor id so a Fidelity-branded rate set never bleeds into a Security-sponsored workflow, and adding a sibling build is a configuration step rather than a rewrite.

Where do RESPA and state privacy law actually bite for a tool like this?

The rate tables are reference data, but a finished net sheet can carry a seller's name, sale price and loan payoff, which is personal information under US state privacy law such as California's CCPA and CPRA. Because the build is title-sponsor branded, RESPA Section 8 and the TRID disclosure context also matter: we keep the sponsor's rate logic unmodified so integrated figures stay consistent with the Loan Estimate and Closing Disclosure path, and we minimise consumer identifiers in the feed.

We already operate the agent accounts — can you build against those instead of standing up a sponsor sandbox?

We can. Access is arranged with you during onboarding; the capture work runs against a consenting account you control or a sponsor-provided test account, whichever is cleaner for your situation. You give us the build and what you want out of its data, and we handle the access and compliance setup as part of the engagement.

Putting it to work

Source for the net-sheet, buyer-estimate and jurisdiction-table calls, the OpenAPI spec and the reconciliation tests land in your repository within one to two weeks. You can take that as delivered source code from $300, paid after delivery once the figures match the app's own PDF and you are satisfied; or you can skip hosting entirely and call the same endpoints as a metered API, paying per request with nothing upfront. Tell us the build and what you need out of its data at /contact.html and we will scope it from there.