attestwireAttestwire › Rule reference › ATW-CREDIT-NOTE-NO-PRECEDING-INVOICE
ATW-CREDIT-NOTE-NO-PRECEDING-INVOICE A credit note should name the invoice it credits
noun · Attestwire · information · BG-3 / BT-25
For a sample invoice, the library reports: This credit note names no preceding invoice (BG-3 / BT-25). No rule requires one: BR-DE-26 is often read as demanding it, and it does not — its test fires on the corrected-invoice code 384, on either document type, and never on 381.
- Business term
BG-3 / BT-25- Severity
information
The fix
Set precedingInvoices to the invoice being credited — [{ "invoiceNumber": "2026-000142", "issueDate": "2026-08-09" }]. BT-26, the issue date, is optional and worth supplying: it is what lets the buyer find the original after a numbering reset. If the credit note is genuinely standalone (a goodwill credit, a volume rebate over many invoices), leave it out — that is a real case and this finding is advisory for exactly that reason.
A passing value
"precedingInvoices": [{ "invoiceNumber": "2026-000142", "issueDate": "2026-08-09" }]What the library returns
The full error returned by @attestwire/en16931. It includes the rule ID,
affected field and suggested correction. Developers can use this object in their application:
{
"rule": "ATW-CREDIT-NOTE-NO-PRECEDING-INVOICE",
"field": [
"BG-3",
"BT-25"
],
"severity": "information",
"message": "This credit note names no preceding invoice (BG-3 / BT-25). No rule requires one: BR-DE-26 is often read as demanding it, and it does not — its test fires on the corrected-invoice code 384, on either document type, and never on 381. KoSIT accepts a credit note with no reference, and so does the EN 16931 schematron. What it leaves is a reconciliation problem: the buyer holds a credit with nothing to net it against, and your own VAT return cannot show which supply the adjustment belongs to. A credit note that says what it credits is the ordinary case, which is why this is worth one line of advice at the level the regulator uses for advice.",
"fix": "Set precedingInvoices to the invoice being credited — [{ \"invoiceNumber\": \"2026-000142\", \"issueDate\": \"2026-08-09\" }]. BT-26, the issue date, is optional and worth supplying: it is what lets the buyer find the original after a numbering reset. If the credit note is genuinely standalone (a goodwill credit, a volume rebate over many invoices), leave it out — that is a real case and this finding is advisory for exactly that reason.",
"example": "\"precedingInvoices\": [{ \"invoiceNumber\": \"2026-000142\", \"issueDate\": \"2026-08-09\" }]",
"xpath": "/ubl:CreditNote/cac:BillingReference/cac:InvoiceDocumentReference/cbc:ID",
"docsUrl": "https://github.com/attestwire/en16931#not-implemented-yet"
}
xpath is always a UBL path. On a CII invoice, look for the
matching CII field instead.