PEPPOL-COMMON-R050 The Seller electronic address (BT-34) is "51824753557" under scheme "0151", which identifies the Australian Business Number (ABN)
The Seller electronic address (BT-34) is "51824753557" under scheme "0151", which identifies the Australian Business Number (ABN). A value in that scheme must be exactly eleven digits, weighted and summed to a multiple of 89, and this one is not. The ABN's modulus-89 construction subtracts one from the first digit before weighting, which is why an otherwise plausible eleven-digit number fails: the algorithm is deliberately not a plain checksum, so that a random number almost never validates. Peppol flags this fatal: the identifier is what an access point resolves to find your counterparty, so a value that fails its own check digit is undeliverable. 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-34- Severity
fatal
What the library returns
The exact object in result.errors when this rule fires.
Generated by running @attestwire/en16931, not transcribed:
{
"rule": "PEPPOL-COMMON-R050",
"field": "BT-34",
"severity": "fatal",
"message": "The Seller electronic address (BT-34) is \"51824753557\" under scheme \"0151\", which identifies the Australian Business Number (ABN). A value in that scheme must be exactly eleven digits, weighted and summed to a multiple of 89, and this one is not. The ABN's modulus-89 construction subtracts one from the first digit before weighting, which is why an otherwise plausible eleven-digit number fails: the algorithm is deliberately not a plain checksum, so that a random number almost never validates. Peppol flags this fatal: the identifier is what an access point resolves to find your counterparty, so a value that fails its own check digit is undeliverable. 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 seller.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\": \"0151\", \"value\": \"51824753556\" }",
"xpath": "/ubl:Invoice/cac:AccountingSupplierParty/cac:Party/cbc:EndpointID",
"docsUrl": "https://attestwire.com/rules/PEPPOL-COMMON-R050"
}
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
"electronicAddress": { "schemeId": "0151", "value": "51824753556" }The fix
Correct seller.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.