Attestwire

Rule reference

BR-AF-10 A VAT breakdown with the VAT category code (BT-118) L (Canary Islands general indirect tax (IGIC)) must not have a VAT exemption reason code (BT-121) or reason text (BT-120), but you supplied vatExemptionReasons.L = "Exento"

A VAT breakdown with the VAT category code (BT-118) L (Canary Islands general indirect tax (IGIC)) must not have a VAT exemption reason code (BT-121) or reason text (BT-120), but you supplied vatExemptionReasons.L = "Exento". Category L charges IGIC, which is a tax actually levied on the supply — an exemption reason would claim relief from the very tax the breakdown says you collected. BR-AF-10 is fatal at document level; this finding is a warning because the library drops the value rather than emitting it, so the generated XML still passes — but your intent was silently discarded, which you should know about.

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-120 / BT-121
Severity
warning

What the library returns

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

TeachingError
{
  "rule": "BR-AF-10",
  "field": [
    "BT-120",
    "BT-121"
  ],
  "severity": "warning",
  "message": "A VAT breakdown with the VAT category code (BT-118) L (Canary Islands general indirect tax (IGIC)) must not have a VAT exemption reason code (BT-121) or reason text (BT-120), but you supplied vatExemptionReasons.L = \"Exento\". Category L charges IGIC, which is a tax actually levied on the supply — an exemption reason would claim relief from the very tax the breakdown says you collected. BR-AF-10 is fatal at document level; this finding is a warning because the library drops the value rather than emitting it, so the generated XML still passes — but your intent was silently discarded, which you should know about.",
  "fix": "Remove the \"L\" entry from vatExemptionReasons. If you need to say something to the buyer about this line, use the invoice note (BT-22) or the line note (BT-127), which carry free text without making a VAT claim.",
  "example": "\"vatExemptionReasons\": { }, \"lines\": [{ \"id\": \"1\", \"description\": \"Beratung\", \"quantity\": 1, \"unitCode\": \"C62\", \"unitPrice\": 100, \"vatCategory\": \"L\", \"vatRate\": 7 }]",
  "xpath": "/ubl:Invoice/cac:TaxTotal/cac:TaxSubtotal/cac:TaxCategory/cbc:TaxExemptionReason",
  "docsUrl": "https://attestwire.com/rules/BR-AF-10"
}

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
"vatExemptionReasons": { }, "lines": [{ "id": "1", "description": "Beratung", "quantity": 1, "unitCode": "C62", "unitPrice": 100, "vatCategory": "L", "vatRate": 7 }]

The fix

Remove the "L" entry from vatExemptionReasons. If you need to say something to the buyer about this line, use the invoice note (BT-22) or the line note (BT-127), which carry free text without making a VAT claim.

All 292 rules →

Nearby: BR-AG-01 — The VAT breakdown must carry a group for this category, for IPSI, Ceuta and Melilla; BR-AF-09 — The VAT amount of that group, checked against its own taxable amount, for IGIC, Canary Islands; BR-AG-02 — A line uses VAT category M (Tax on production, services and imports in Ceuta and Melilla (IPSI)), so the invoice must carry the seller VAT identifier (BT-31), the seller tax registration identifier (BT-32), or a seller tax representative (BG-11).

Check this rule against your invoice via the hosted API → https://api.attestwire.com/docs

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