Rule reference

PEPPOL-COMMON-R048 The Buyer electronic address (BT-49) is "IT01234567890" under scheme "9906", which identifies the Italian VAT number (Peppol endpoint scheme 9906)

The Buyer electronic address (BT-49) is "IT01234567890" under scheme "9906", which identifies the Italian VAT number (Peppol endpoint scheme 9906). A value in that scheme must be "IT" followed by eleven digits whose last digit is a check digit, and this one is not. Scheme 9906 is the endpoint-only spelling of the Partita IVA, addressed as a routing identifier rather than quoted as a tax number. Same value, same check. Peppol flags this one as a warning rather than a rejection, so the document will be delivered — but a wrong identifier is delivered to the wrong place, or to nowhere. This is a Peppol BIS Billing 3.0 profile rule: it applies because profile is "peppol-bis-3". It does not apply to the en16931, xrechnung-ubl or xrechnung-cii profiles, whose validators will accept the same document.

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-49
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": "PEPPOL-COMMON-R048",
  "field": "BT-49",
  "severity": "warning",
  "message": "The Buyer electronic address (BT-49) is \"IT01234567890\" under scheme \"9906\", which identifies the Italian VAT number (Peppol endpoint scheme 9906). A value in that scheme must be \"IT\" followed by eleven digits whose last digit is a check digit, and this one is not. Scheme 9906 is the endpoint-only spelling of the Partita IVA, addressed as a routing identifier rather than quoted as a tax number. Same value, same check. Peppol flags this one as a warning rather than a rejection, so the document will be delivered — but a wrong identifier is delivered to the wrong place, or to nowhere. This is a Peppol BIS Billing 3.0 profile rule: it applies because profile is \"peppol-bis-3\". It does not apply to the en16931, xrechnung-ubl or xrechnung-cii profiles, whose validators will accept the same document.",
  "fix": "Correct buyer.electronicAddress, or change its scheme identifier if the value belongs to a different register. A check digit failing almost always means one digit was transposed or dropped in transcription — compare it against the source register rather than re-typing it.",
  "example": "\"electronicAddress\": { \"schemeId\": \"9906\", \"value\": \"IT01234567897\" }",
  "xpath": "/ubl:Invoice/cac:AccountingCustomerParty/cac:Party/cbc:EndpointID",
  "docsUrl": "https://attestwire.com/rules/PEPPOL-COMMON-R048"
}

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
"electronicAddress": { "schemeId": "9906", "value": "IT01234567897" }

The fix

Correct buyer.electronicAddress, or change its scheme identifier if the value belongs to a different register. A check digit failing almost always means one digit was transposed or dropped in transcription — compare it against the source register rather than re-typing it.

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