Attestwire

Rule reference

BR-E-06 The document level allowance at allowances[0] uses VAT category E (Exempt from VAT), so its VAT rate (BT-96) must be 0 (zero), but it is 19

The document level allowance at allowances[0] uses VAT category E (Exempt from VAT), so its VAT rate (BT-96) must be 0 (zero), but it is 19. An exempt supply carries no VAT, so neither does an adjustment to it. Note that exempt is not the same as zero rated even though both produce 0 in BT-117: an exempt supplier generally cannot deduct input tax on the related costs, which is why the two categories exist separately.

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-96
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-E-06",
  "field": "BT-96",
  "severity": "fatal",
  "message": "The document level allowance at allowances[0] uses VAT category E (Exempt from VAT), so its VAT rate (BT-96) must be 0 (zero), but it is 19. An exempt supply carries no VAT, so neither does an adjustment to it. Note that exempt is not the same as zero rated even though both produce 0 in BT-117: an exempt supplier generally cannot deduct input tax on the related costs, which is why the two categories exist separately.",
  "fix": "Set allowances[0].vatRate to 0, or omit it — this library normalises the rate for category E either way. If you did mean to charge 19% VAT on this allowance, the category should be S instead, and that will change which breakdown group it nets into.",
  "example": "\"vatCategory\": \"E\", \"vatRate\": 0",
  "xpath": "/ubl:Invoice/cac:AllowanceCharge[1]/cac:TaxCategory/cbc:Percent",
  "docsUrl": "https://attestwire.com/rules/BR-E-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

the shape this field expects
"vatCategory": "E", "vatRate": 0

The fix

Set allowances[0].vatRate to 0, or omit it — this library normalises the rate for category E either way. If you did mean to charge 19% VAT on this allowance, the category should be S instead, and that will change which breakdown group it nets into.

All 292 rules →

Nearby: BR-E-07 — The document level charge at charges[0] uses VAT category E (Exempt from VAT), so its VAT rate (BT-103) must be 0 (zero), but it is 19; BR-E-05 — A line uses VAT category E (Exempt from VAT), so the invoiced item VAT rate (BT-152) must be 0, but it is 19; BR-E-08 — The taxable amount of that group, checked against the lines behind it, for Exempt from VAT.

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.