Rule reference

BR-CL-01 The invoice type code (BT-3) must be a code from the invoice-related subset of UNTDID 1001, but "999" is not in it

The invoice type code (BT-3) must be a code from the invoice-related subset of UNTDID 1001, but "999" is not in it. UNTDID 1001 splits into an invoice list (carried on cbc:InvoiceTypeCode) and a credit-note list (carried on cbc:CreditNoteTypeCode of a separate CreditNote document); a credit-note code on an invoice fails this rule even though the code itself is perfectly valid. The invoice list holds 50 codes, beginning "71", "80", "81", "82", "84", "102".

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-3
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-CL-01",
  "field": "BT-3",
  "severity": "fatal",
  "message": "The invoice type code (BT-3) must be a code from the invoice-related subset of UNTDID 1001, but \"999\" is not in it. UNTDID 1001 splits into an invoice list (carried on cbc:InvoiceTypeCode) and a credit-note list (carried on cbc:CreditNoteTypeCode of a separate CreditNote document); a credit-note code on an invoice fails this rule even though the code itself is perfectly valid. The invoice list holds 50 codes, beginning \"71\", \"80\", \"81\", \"82\", \"84\", \"102\".",
  "fix": "Use \"380\" for an ordinary commercial invoice. Other codes you are likely to want: \"326\" partial invoice, \"384\" corrected invoice, \"389\" self-billed invoice, \"875\"/\"876\"/\"877\" construction invoices. Under XRechnung the list narrows further — BR-DE-17 admits only those plus \"381\".",
  "example": "\"invoiceTypeCode\": \"380\"",
  "xpath": "/ubl:Invoice/cbc:InvoiceTypeCode",
  "docsUrl": "https://attestwire.com/rules/BR-CL-01"
}

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
"invoiceTypeCode": "380"

The fix

Use "380" for an ordinary commercial invoice. Other codes you are likely to want: "326" partial invoice, "384" corrected invoice, "389" self-billed invoice, "875"/"876"/"877" construction invoices. Under XRechnung the list narrows further — BR-DE-17 admits only those plus "381".

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