attestwireAttestwire › Rule reference › ATW-VAT-SCENARIO-CONFLICT
ATW-VAT-SCENARIO-CONFLICT A line must not state both a vatScenario and a different VAT category of its own
noun · Attestwire · fatal · BT-151
For a sample invoice, the library reports: Line 1 states vatScenario "domestic", which stands for VAT category S (Standard rated), and also vatCategory "Z". The scenario says what happened and the category is its code, so one of the two is wrong.
- Business term
BT-151- Severity
fatal
The fix
Remove one of the two from lines[0]: drop vatCategory to let the scenario decide the code, or drop vatScenario if "Z" is what you meant.
A passing value
"vatScenario": "domestic"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-VAT-SCENARIO-CONFLICT",
"field": "BT-151",
"severity": "fatal",
"message": "Line 1 states vatScenario \"domestic\", which stands for VAT category S (Standard rated), and also vatCategory \"Z\". The scenario says what happened and the category is its code, so one of the two is wrong. An explicit category wins over a scenario, so the document would say \"Z\" and nothing from the scenario would be written.",
"fix": "Remove one of the two from lines[0]: drop vatCategory to let the scenario decide the code, or drop vatScenario if \"Z\" is what you meant.",
"example": "\"vatScenario\": \"domestic\"",
"xpath": "/ubl:Invoice/cac:InvoiceLine[1]/cac:Item/cac:ClassifiedTaxCategory/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.