Article

Can a company outside the US take part?

By TrustPast

Updated October 26, 2026

A roofer in Leeds, an electrical contractor in Cork and a plumbing firm in Brisbane all keep the same kind of files as a contractor in Ohio. Estimates, job sheets, change orders, service histories. Most of what owners read about licensing those files is written for American companies, so the owner abroad is left wondering whether the door is open at all. This page settles that. It sets out what micro1 publishes about companies outside the US, which of its rules matter most, what the regulators say about records crossing a border, and what a UK, Irish or Australian trade company would actually bring.

We, TrustPast, send every company outside the US to micro1, whatever its size. That is our routing rule. micro1 sets its own bar and makes its own decisions, and everything below about micro1 comes from its published pages, quoted where it matters.

The short answer

Yes, a company outside the US can take part. micro1’s data partnerships page asks the question itself: “Can companies participate from anywhere in the world?” Its answer starts with one word: “Yes.”

The rest of the answer is the part to read slowly. “While the program accepts referrals globally, current demand is strongest for companies based in the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada. Companies from other regions may still be considered, but selection will depend on the specific needs of active opportunities and customer demand at the time.”

As our own reading, those two lines make two groups: the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada, where micro1 says demand is strongest; and everyone else, Ireland and Australia included, who may still be considered, depending on what micro1 needs at the time.

Two more rules carry over from the US bar. micro1 wants established companies with 30 or more full-time employees. And it wants records kept mostly in English. Both are covered below, because for a company abroad the second one decides more than the first.

Apply & License Your Data

The words micro1 uses about place

micro1 says the same thing in a few places, with small differences. It is worth having them side by side.

On its data partnerships page, under who is eligible: “We’re looking for established companies with 30+ full-time employees, mature business operations, and substantial historical operational data.” The same answer ends: “We’re currently prioritizing US companies, followed by other Western markets.”

Its company referral page lists the requirements for its programme for operating companies, the Enterprise Data Partnership, as four short lines: “30+ employees”, “US and Western markets”, “English” and “All industries”.

The same page lists a second programme, the Defunct Company Data Partnership, for companies that have closed. Its requirements read “30+ employees”, “10+ Countries”, “English” and “All industries”. micro1 doesn’t explain what “10+ Countries” means. As our own advice, ask before you read anything into it.

None of these lines says a company outside the US is turned away. Prioritising is not excluding. What the wording does say is that a US company starts at the front of the queue and a company in a market micro1 calls Western comes next.

micro1 doesn’t publish a list of what it counts as a Western market. Our reading is that the UK, Ireland and Australia sit closer to that line than most, and the UK is the one market outside North America that micro1 names outright. If your company is somewhere else, the answer is still the same word: apply, and micro1 decides.

Headquarters is one of three questions

micro1’s payout page asks three things before it shows a range. “How many employees does your company have?” “How many years of data do you have?” And “Where is your company headquartered?”

The headquarters question has four answers: United States, Canada, Europe and Other. A company in Dublin or Manchester picks Europe. A company in Perth or Auckland picks Other.

micro1 doesn’t publish how much each answer moves the number. Its own label under the range is plain: “Indicative estimate only.” The line after it names what decides the real figure: “Final payout is determined based on data sources, volume, quality, access terms, and due diligence.” Location is not on that list. As our own reading, the headquarters answer shapes the first range, and the records shape the final figure.

The years question matters just as much for a company abroad. micro1 notes that years of data are “Typically the number of years you’ve been in business”. A Scottish roofer that has run since 2006 has twenty years to describe, whichever box it ticks for headquarters.

Our estimate asks the same kind of questions. In the first, pick “Outside the US”. It gives a range of our own, not an offer.

English is the bigger test

For a company in Leeds, Cork or Brisbane, this line costs nothing. For a company in Lyon or Rotterdam, it can decide the whole thing.

micro1 writes: “At this time, we are primarily looking for companies that operate in English and maintain their documentation, workflows, and knowledge bases in English.” Its eligibility answer says it more briefly: “Data should be primarily in English.”

There is a second half that owners skip. “Company representatives must also be able to communicate with the micro1 team in English throughout the partnership and onboarding process.” So micro1 names two things: the language the records were written in, and the language of the person who will speak for the company.

Read the word “primarily” carefully. It is not “only”. As we read it, a Welsh contractor with a few bilingual site notices is still a company that operates in English. As we read it, an Irish firm whose job sheets carry the odd place name in Irish is still writing its records in English. A company whose estimates and work orders were written in another language is the harder case. As our own advice, say so at application and let micro1 decide. Our page on records that are not in English covers mixed-language files and what a translation does and does not change.

Spelling and wording are not a test either, as far as micro1’s pages go. “Colour”, “programme” and “tonne” are English. So is a job sheet that calls a skip a skip and a bin lorry a bin lorry.

Who receives the records

Owners abroad ask where the records end up before they ask about money. micro1 answers it in one line.

Among the things it says it confirms with a company “Before any participation”, the first is “U.S. and allied buyers only”. The line under it reads: “Your data is licensed exclusively to labs and enterprises based in the U.S. and allied countries”.

micro1 doesn’t publish a list of which countries count as allied. As our own advice, if that matters to you, ask for the answer in writing at contracting.

The same list carries three more commitments, each in micro1’s words. “Data segregation”: “Your data is kept separate from other companies’ data, with access restricted to authorized personnel”. “De-identified before sharing”: “Personal and identifying information is removed or transformed before your data is shared with third parties”. And “Defined retention periods”: “Raw data is deleted according to an agreed schedule”.

On ownership, micro1 is short: “Companies retain ownership of their underlying data.” That is the same answer a US company gets.

Our reading of all this: for a company in the UK, Ireland or Australia, the records may leave the country. Read the next section, and bring the question to counsel.

When records cross a border

This section is not legal advice. It sets out what three official sources say, in their own words, so you know which questions to bring to a lawyer in your own country. We are not lawyers, and we don’t know your contracts.

The rules below are about personal data. In plain words, and in ours: information about people who can be identified. A job sheet can hold both: the work done, and the name and address of the person it was done for. That difference matters, and the section after this one comes back to it.

In the EU and the EEA, which covers Ireland. The European Commission says: “EU data protection rules apply to the European Economic Area (EEA), which includes all EU countries and non-EU countries Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway.” It adds: “When personal data is transferred outside the European Economic Area, special safeguards are foreseen to ensure that the protection travels with the data.” The tools it lists include adequacy decisions, standard contractual clauses and binding corporate rules.

An adequacy decision, the Commission explains, means “personal data can flow from the EU (and Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland) to that third country without any further safeguard being necessary.” Its list of countries recognised so far includes the United Kingdom, Canada for commercial organisations, and the United States for “commercial organisations participating in the EU-US Data Privacy Framework”. On that framework, it says “personal data can flow freely from the EU to companies in the United States that participate in the Data Privacy Framework.” As our own advice, ask whether a given recipient participates; don’t assume it.

In the United Kingdom. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) says “The UK GDPR primarily applies to organisations located in the United Kingdom.” It calls it a “restricted transfer” when the UK GDPR applies to the information, you start the transfer, and the receiver is a separate organisation outside the UK. It says “transfer” covers both sending the information and making it accessible. Every restricted transfer, it says, must be covered by “UK adequacy regulations”, “appropriate safeguards” or “an exception”. And “The rules apply to all restricted transfers, even small, infrequent ones.” The ICO says the rules apply to all organisations that handle personal information, “including sole traders and self-employed individuals”.

In Australia. The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) sets out APP 8. Before an organisation covered by the Privacy Act “discloses personal information to an overseas recipient, the entity must take such steps as are reasonable in the circumstances to ensure that the overseas recipient does not breach the APPs”. It also says such an organisation “is accountable for any acts or practices of the overseas recipient in relation to the information that would breach the APPs”. The OAIC notes there are exceptions to both. The OAIC adds that “Most small businesses are not covered by the Privacy Act 1988, but some are”. It puts the small business line at an annual turnover of three million Australian dollars or less, and it lists businesses that are covered regardless of turnover. As our own advice, a plumbing firm with 40 staff should check where it sits, not guess.

As our own advice, take three questions to counsel. What will leave the country: the raw export with names in it, or records already de-identified? Who initiates the transfer: you, or micro1 when it collects? And which mechanism covers it? micro1’s referral page says timelines vary with, among other things, “legal requirements”. Budget for this step.

De-identified before use, and why it matters more abroad

What a buyer wants from a trade company is not who the customers were. It is how the work was done. That is the point of our cornerstone page on what data buyers actually want from a trade business, and it holds in every country.

micro1 says, “We are looking for data that reflects how work is actually performed within an organization.” Its announcement of 9 October 2026, a commitment “to spend $1 billion over the next 12 months acquiring and licensing enterprise operational data”, says it “uses de-identified company data”. On its data partnerships page, under protection: “Personally identifiable information (PII) is removed when relevant”.

You don’t have to do the stripping yourself. Asked whether a company must anonymize its data before transferring it, micro1 answers: “No, micro1 has processes for de-identifying and transforming sensitive information.”

Here is where the regulators’ words come back in. The ICO says “Data protection law does not apply to anonymous information.” It also warns that “Pseudonymous information is still personal data and the law applies to it.” And: “if you can still identify people using additional information you hold separately, the data is not anonymised.”

As our own reading, that splits the question in two. Whether the records, once de-identified, count as anonymous or still as personal data is a question for counsel. The raw export, before anyone removes the names, still holds personal data, and the transfer rules above may apply to it. Ask micro1 where de-identification happens and when, and bring the answer to the same conversation. Our page on how de-identification works explains the steps.

Local formats are fine

Owners outside the US worry that their paperwork looks wrong. Pounds, euros, Australian dollars. Dates written day first. VAT on every invoice, or GST. Job numbers in a system nobody in America has heard of.

micro1’s pages set no format and no currency. It says “There’s no fixed minimum number of files, documents, or terabytes.” It says it evaluates “the historical depth, breadth, quality, and relevance of the available data.” And it adds: “Companies with several years of records across multiple business systems are generally a stronger fit.”

Local tax rules may even have kept more of your history than you think. HMRC’s record-keeping notice says “Generally, you must keep all your business records for VAT purposes for at least 6 years.” It says a VAT invoice shows “the total amount of VAT chargeable, expressed in sterling”. Ireland’s Revenue says a business “must keep certain records for tax purposes”, including sales invoices, and that the originals must be kept for six years.

A VAT invoice is not, on its own, what is wanted. It shows what was charged. The estimate behind it, the revisions, the site notes and the change order show how the price was reached. Our page on estimates and quotes goes through which parts of that chain carry the value.

What this means for a UK roofer, an Irish electrical contractor and an Australian plumbing firm

Three companies, as our own hypothetical examples. Each has 30 or more staff and fifteen years or more of records.

A roofing company in the north of England, 45 staff. It keeps survey notes with photos, quotes in pounds with VAT, revised quotes after scaffolding costs moved, and variations agreed with main contractors on commercial jobs. It keeps a defects log from the end of each job, and warranty callbacks with what was found. The variation thread is where a price was argued and settled. The callback log is where the company learned which details fail in wet winters. What is wanted is that chain: how a survey became a quote, how a quote became a job, how a variation was agreed. The client’s name on the quote is not.

An electrical contracting firm in Ireland, 60 staff. It keeps tenders and their pricing sheets in euros, and job files for fit-outs and rewires. It keeps test and inspection sheets, snag lists, and the emails where a client added sockets halfway through a job. Its service team keeps fault reports: a tripping circuit, the readings taken, the faulty appliance found two rooms away. That is a repair diagnosed step by step. Our page on job files and work orders shows which of these records matter most.

A plumbing and gas firm in Queensland, 35 staff. It keeps quotes and GST tax invoices in Australian dollars, and maintenance contracts with strata managers. It keeps job cards from its field software with the fault reported, the fault found and the parts used. It keeps photos of blocked drains before and after, and the notes on why a hot water unit was replaced rather than repaired. Ten years of visits to the same buildings show how the company learned which systems fail first.

In each case the test, as we read micro1’s published bar, comes down to three questions. Was the work written down while it happened? For how many years? In English? If yes, the records likely fit what micro1 describes. micro1 makes the call, country by country and company by company.

How it runs from outside the US

micro1 publishes one set of steps and no separate route for companies outside the US. Its referral page says the company sets up a profile and completes a data manifest. Then “Our team reviews the company and determines whether it’s a fit for a data partnership.” Qualified companies “are invited to connect with a Data Partnership Manager to discuss their data, licensing terms, and next steps.”

micro1’s data partnerships page then names four steps: discovery and pricing, contracting, delivery and acceptance, and payment. On delivery it says: “You securely transfer your data through our APIs or other approved methods. We review the data for completeness.” On timing: “Once your company transfers its data, micro1 has 30 days to review and approve it.” After approval, “payment will be made within 30 days of invoicing.”

For a company abroad, two parts of that run deserve more time. As our own advice, contracting is where the transfer question gets its answer, so bring counsel in before contracting, not after. And the calls happen in English; micro1 asks that representatives “be able to communicate with the micro1 team in English throughout”.

micro1’s referral page says: “There is no guaranteed timeframe between application and partnership completion.” It lists “legal requirements” among the things timelines depend on. As our own reading, a cross-border deal may take longer.

What is never included

micro1 doesn’t publish one fixed exclusion list. It says it protects “sensitive information through data anonymization and secure handling”, and in its first step it says: “We identify licensable datasets across your business and tailor an offer based on the nature, scale, and value of your data.”

The following is TrustPast’s own advice, not micro1’s guidance. Keep these out unless micro1 agrees otherwise in writing: legally privileged records, health information, payment-card and bank details, national identity and tax numbers, minors’ data, biometric data, and classified or export-controlled material. Leave out payroll and staff files; our page on employee personal data covers why. Leave out anything a client owns under its contract with you, and the customer list itself.

Customer names and payments are never what is wanted. The work is. Our page on what is never included shows where those records tend to hide in an export, and How it’s safe gives the short version of the protections.

Before you apply

Five things to settle first, as our own advice.

Count the people. Everyone, now and at peak. micro1’s published line is 30 or more full-time employees. Our page on who qualifies for the data partnership covers the rest of the bar.
Count the years. Find the oldest quote and the oldest job sheet. Your tax records may have kept six years at least.
Check the language. Are the estimates, work orders and procedures written mainly in English? Is there someone who can carry the calls in English?
Find the client contracts. Anything a client owns stays out, and only the contracts say which is which. Our page on whether licensing company records is legal lists whose rights to check.
Ask counsel about the transfer. Which country’s rules apply, and which mechanism covers the move. Do it before contracting.

If the company has already closed, the questions change. Our count of company closures outside the US shows how many companies in the UK, Ireland, Singapore, Australia and France we have found dissolved, deregistered, or in liquidation or administration.

Worth two minutes to see your range?

Where we fit

We, TrustPast, explain how this works and give you a range with our estimate. You apply to micro1 yourself, through the button below. micro1 pays us a referral fee. You pay us nothing. We never hold your records, and we are not a party to your agreement. This page is not legal advice, in any country.

TrustPast

Questions and answers

Can a company outside the US apply to micro1?

Yes. micro1’s data partnerships page answers “Can companies participate from anywhere in the world?” with “Yes.” It goes on: “While the program accepts referrals globally, current demand is strongest for companies based in the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada.” And: “Companies from other regions may still be considered, but selection will depend on the specific needs of active opportunities and customer demand at the time.”

Do our records have to be in English?

Mostly. micro1 says: “At this time, we are primarily looking for companies that operate in English and maintain their documentation, workflows, and knowledge bases in English.” The people who speak for the company also need English: “Company representatives must also be able to communicate with the micro1 team in English throughout the partnership and onboarding process.”

Does it matter where the company is headquartered?

micro1 asks. Its payout estimator puts “Where is your company headquartered?” beside headcount and years of data, with four answers: United States, Canada, Europe and Other. It doesn’t publish how much each answer moves the figure.

Who ends up using the records?

micro1 says: “Your data is licensed exclusively to labs and enterprises based in the U.S. and allied countries”. It lists “U.S. and allied buyers only” among the things it confirms with a company before any participation. It doesn’t publish which countries count as allied.

Can our customers’ details be sent abroad?

Customer names and payments are never what is wanted. micro1 says “Personal and identifying information is removed or transformed before your data is shared with third parties”. Sending personal data across a border has its own rules: the European Commission, the UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office and the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner each publish them. This page is not legal advice; ask counsel in your own country.

Do we have to convert our invoices or currency first?

No, as we read micro1’s pages. They set no format and no currency. micro1 says “There's no fixed minimum number of files, documents, or terabytes” and that it evaluates “the historical depth, breadth, quality, and relevance of the available data.” A VAT invoice in sterling or a GST invoice in Australian dollars is still a record of a job.