BR-CL-06 The VAT point date code (BT-8) is "99", which is not one of the 3 codes EN 16931 admits
The VAT point date code (BT-8) is "99", which is not one of the 3 codes EN 16931 admits. UNTDID 2005 is a large list of date qualifiers and the standard restricts it to exactly three: "3" the invoice date, "35" the actual delivery date, and "432" paid to date. The code is not a label for the period — it says which event determines the tax point, and therefore which VAT period and which rate the supply falls under. Anything outside the three leaves that undetermined.
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-8- Severity
fatal
What the library returns
The exact object in result.errors when this rule fires.
Generated by running @attestwire/en16931, not transcribed:
{
"rule": "BR-CL-06",
"field": "BT-8",
"severity": "fatal",
"message": "The VAT point date code (BT-8) is \"99\", which is not one of the 3 codes EN 16931 admits. UNTDID 2005 is a large list of date qualifiers and the standard restricts it to exactly three: \"3\" the invoice date, \"35\" the actual delivery date, and \"432\" paid to date. The code is not a label for the period — it says which event determines the tax point, and therefore which VAT period and which rate the supply falls under. Anything outside the three leaves that undetermined.",
"fix": "Set invoicingPeriod.descriptionCode to \"3\" (tax point is the invoice issue date), \"35\" (the actual delivery date) or \"432\" (paid to date). If you know the tax point as a date rather than as a rule, use taxPointDate (BT-7) instead — but not both, which BR-CO-03 forbids.",
"example": "\"invoicingPeriod\": { \"descriptionCode\": \"35\" }",
"xpath": "/ubl:Invoice/cac:InvoicePeriod/cbc:DescriptionCode",
"docsUrl": "https://attestwire.com/rules/BR-CL-06"
}
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
"invoicingPeriod": { "descriptionCode": "35" }The fix
Set invoicingPeriod.descriptionCode to "3" (tax point is the invoice issue date), "35" (the actual delivery date) or "432" (paid to date). If you know the tax point as a date rather than as a rule, use taxPointDate (BT-7) instead — but not both, which BR-CO-03 forbids.