but wouldn't classify it as voluntary. I suppose one could play games (and I am sure some will). And again, there are some potential legal hurdles despite it being part of the settlement. But this is a good summary of it and hope it will help explain a little better (from a March 2025 article): Deloitte, meanwhile, has been hired to oversee the NIL clearinghouse portion of the settlement in vetting deals worth $600 or more. The vision with this measure is to curb payment activity that is, in practice, pay-for-play being passed off under the guise of NIL deals. A source with knowledge of the committee’s thinking explained the clearinghouse is a structured system with two primary objectives: 1) vetting the range of compensation on varying deals; and 2) evaluating whether those agreements have a valid business purpose. In regard to enforcement if/when discrepancies arise, a second source familiar with the SIC’s dealings explained the penal process is designed to create a consistent and expedited proceeding with clear penalties if rules are violated (Re: circumventing the cap, not disclosing deals, etc.). What those exact penalties are is a work in progress, as a third source suggested the committee is workshopping a handful of options. The settlement also notably calls for an adjudication process in which NIL payment conflicts and new rules created in relation to its terms will be heard by an independent arbiter. “The arbitrator is like a judge, not like a district attorney,” plaintiffs' attorney Jeffrey Kessler told SBJ in July. “The NCAA and some other arm will still be enforcement, but they will say, ‘OK you’ve violated the discipline,’ and the athlete or the school will be able to say, ‘I’m challenging that before this neutral arbitrator.’”