attestwireAttestwire › Rule reference › BR-65
BR-65 An item classification code needs a scheme identifier
noun · EN 16931 · fatal · BT-158
For a sample invoice, the library reports: Classification 1 on line 1 carries an item classification identifier (BT-158) of "72154000" with no scheme identifier (BT-158-1).
- Business term
BT-158- Severity
fatal
The fix
Set line.itemClassifications[].schemeId to the UNTDID 7143 code of the classification system — "HS" harmonised system, "MP" product/service identification number, "SRV" GS1 product classification, "ZZZ" mutually defined. Add schemeVersion (BT-158-2) when the system is versioned.
A passing value
"itemClassifications": [{ "code": "43211508", "schemeId": "MP" }]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": "BR-65",
"field": "BT-158",
"severity": "fatal",
"message": "Classification 1 on line 1 carries an item classification identifier (BT-158) of \"72154000\" with no scheme identifier (BT-158-1). Classification codes are not self-describing and they collide freely across systems — a bare \"43211508\" is a UNSPSC commodity to one reader and a customs heading to another. The scheme is what makes the code resolvable, and it is what a buyer's spend-analysis or a customs declaration reads before the code itself.",
"fix": "Set line.itemClassifications[].schemeId to the UNTDID 7143 code of the classification system — \"HS\" harmonised system, \"MP\" product/service identification number, \"SRV\" GS1 product classification, \"ZZZ\" mutually defined. Add schemeVersion (BT-158-2) when the system is versioned.",
"example": "\"itemClassifications\": [{ \"code\": \"43211508\", \"schemeId\": \"MP\" }]",
"xpath": "/ubl:Invoice/cac:InvoiceLine[1]/cac:Item/cac:CommodityClassification[1]/cbc:ItemClassificationCode/@listID",
"docsUrl": "https://attestwire.com/rules/BR-65"
}
xpath is always a UBL path. On a CII invoice, look for the
matching CII field instead.