Attestwire

Rule reference

BR-G-03 This invoice contains a document level allowance (BG-20) whose VAT category code (BT-95) is G (Export outside the EU) — allowances[0] — so the invoice must contain the seller VAT identifier (BT-31) or the seller tax representative VAT identifier (BT-63)

This invoice contains a document level allowance (BG-20) whose VAT category code (BT-95) is G (Export outside the EU) — allowances[0] — so the invoice must contain the seller VAT identifier (BT-31) or the seller tax representative VAT identifier (BT-63). Export zero-rating is reconciled against customs export evidence, and that evidence is filed under a VAT identifier. This family is stricter than the standard-rated one on purpose: unlike BR-S-03 or BR-E-03, a national tax registration number (BT-32) does not satisfy it, so a seller invoicing on a Steuernummer alone cannot zero-rate an export.

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-31 / BT-63
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-G-03",
  "field": [
    "BT-31",
    "BT-63"
  ],
  "severity": "fatal",
  "message": "This invoice contains a document level allowance (BG-20) whose VAT category code (BT-95) is G (Export outside the EU) — allowances[0] — so the invoice must contain the seller VAT identifier (BT-31) or the seller tax representative VAT identifier (BT-63). Export zero-rating is reconciled against customs export evidence, and that evidence is filed under a VAT identifier. This family is stricter than the standard-rated one on purpose: unlike BR-S-03 or BR-E-03, a national tax registration number (BT-32) does not satisfy it, so a seller invoicing on a Steuernummer alone cannot zero-rate an export.",
  "fix": "Set seller.vatId, or supply the taxRepresentative group with its vatId if you export through a fiscal representative. seller.taxRegistrationId will not satisfy this rule however valid the number is.",
  "example": "\"seller\": { \"vatId\": \"DE123456789\" }",
  "xpath": "/ubl:Invoice/cac:AllowanceCharge[1]/cac:TaxCategory/cbc:ID",
  "docsUrl": "https://attestwire.com/rules/BR-G-03"
}

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
"seller": { "vatId": "DE123456789" }

The fix

Set seller.vatId, or supply the taxRepresentative group with its vatId if you export through a fiscal representative. seller.taxRegistrationId will not satisfy this rule however valid the number is.

All 292 rules →

Nearby: BR-G-04 — This invoice contains a document level charge (BG-21) whose VAT category code (BT-102) is G (Export outside the EU) — charges[0] — so the invoice must contain the seller VAT identifier (BT-31) or the seller tax representative VAT identifier (BT-63); BR-G-02 — A line uses VAT category G (Export outside the EU), so the invoice must carry the seller VAT identifier (BT-31) or the seller tax representative VAT identifier (BT-63); BR-G-05 — A line uses VAT category G (Export outside the EU), so the invoiced item VAT rate (BT-152) must be 0, but it is 19.

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.