Returning an HTTP status code of 200 when a payment fails is controversial.

The current thinking seems to be that 200 is the right thing to do as the message was processed successfully (that's what the 200 is referring to). The result of processing the message, however, has nuance that may be dependent on the payment method used.

As a thought experiment, what should the HTTP response code be in the following cases:

1. Funds transfer was initiated and completed. Clearly 200, right?
2. Funds transfer was initiated, but network delay may cause it to fail at a later point in time (ACH, etc.). 102 or 202?
3. Request for subscription was noted and is setup, but no funds were moved. 200?
4. Payment submitted to network, but network didn't respond with an auth code. 504?
5. Cryptocurrency payment was submitted to network but a fork has been detected and it is unclear if we're on the winning or losing fork. 102 or 202?