Rule reference

BR-55 Preceding invoice reference 1 (BG-3) carries no invoice number (BT-25)

Preceding invoice reference 1 (BG-3) carries no invoice number (BT-25). BG-3 is how a corrective or partial invoice says which document it adjusts, and the number is the only part of it that identifies one. A date alone does not: a seller who issued four invoices that day has said nothing. Without BT-25 the buyer cannot net the correction against the original, and your own VAT return cannot show which period the adjustment belongs to.

This rule is implemented and its error payload below is real, but the long-form write-up — normative text, worked example, divergence note — is not written yet. Everything the library knows about this rule is on this page. Ask and we will prioritise it.

Business term
BT-25
Severity
fatal

What the library returns

The exact object in result.errors when this rule fires. Generated by running @attestwire/en16931, not transcribed:

TeachingError
{
  "rule": "BR-55",
  "field": "BT-25",
  "severity": "fatal",
  "message": "Preceding invoice reference 1 (BG-3) carries no invoice number (BT-25). BG-3 is how a corrective or partial invoice says which document it adjusts, and the number is the only part of it that identifies one. A date alone does not: a seller who issued four invoices that day has said nothing. Without BT-25 the buyer cannot net the correction against the original, and your own VAT return cannot show which period the adjustment belongs to.",
  "fix": "Set precedingInvoices[].invoiceNumber to the BT-1 of the invoice being corrected or referenced, exactly as it was issued. Add issueDate (BT-26) alongside it when your numbering is not unique across years.",
  "example": "\"precedingInvoices\": [{ \"invoiceNumber\": \"2026-000141\", \"issueDate\": \"2026-07-31\" }]",
  "xpath": "/ubl:Invoice/cac:BillingReference[1]/cac:InvoiceDocumentReference/cbc:ID",
  "docsUrl": "https://attestwire.com/rules/BR-55"
}

xpath locates the element in the generated UBL document, which is where a KoSIT or Peppol validator will report the same problem.

A passing value

the shape this field expects
"precedingInvoices": [{ "invoiceNumber": "2026-000141", "issueDate": "2026-07-31" }]

The fix

Set precedingInvoices[].invoiceNumber to the BT-1 of the invoice being corrected or referenced, exactly as it was issued. Add issueDate (BT-26) alongside it when your numbering is not unique across years.

Arrived from a stack trace? The docsUrl on every error links straight here. Something wrong on this page — tell us.