PEPPOL-EN16931-P0109 You set vatExemptionReasonCodes.AE to "VATEX-EU-F", which attaches the VAT exemption reason code (BT-121) "VATEX-EU-F" to the VAT breakdown for category AE
You set vatExemptionReasonCodes.AE to "VATEX-EU-F", which attaches the VAT exemption reason code (BT-121) "VATEX-EU-F" to the VAT breakdown for category AE. Peppol requires that code to appear only on category E, because the code *is* a statement of the category: "VATEX-EU-F" means "Intra-community acquisition of second-hand goods", and a breakdown that says AE in BT-118 and Intra-community acquisition of second-hand goods in BT-121 says two different things about one group of money. A human reader would skim past the contradiction; an automated ledger would post it twice, once per claim. 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-121 / BT-118- 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-EN16931-P0109",
"field": [
"BT-121",
"BT-118"
],
"severity": "fatal",
"message": "You set vatExemptionReasonCodes.AE to \"VATEX-EU-F\", which attaches the VAT exemption reason code (BT-121) \"VATEX-EU-F\" to the VAT breakdown for category AE. Peppol requires that code to appear only on category E, because the code *is* a statement of the category: \"VATEX-EU-F\" means \"Intra-community acquisition of second-hand goods\", and a breakdown that says AE in BT-118 and Intra-community acquisition of second-hand goods in BT-121 says two different things about one group of money. A human reader would skim past the contradiction; an automated ledger would post it twice, once per claim. 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": "Either move the code — set vatExemptionReasonCodes.E instead of vatExemptionReasonCodes.AE — or pick a code that matches category AE. The VATEX list also carries article-level codes (VATEX-EU-132-1A and its siblings) which name a provision rather than a treatment and are not constrained to any category.",
"example": "\"vatExemptionReasonCodes\": { \"E\": \"VATEX-EU-F\" }",
"xpath": "/ubl:Invoice/cac:TaxTotal/cac:TaxSubtotal/cac:TaxCategory/cbc:TaxExemptionReasonCode",
"docsUrl": "https://attestwire.com/rules/PEPPOL-EN16931-P0109"
}
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
"vatExemptionReasonCodes": { "E": "VATEX-EU-F" }The fix
Either move the code — set vatExemptionReasonCodes.E instead of vatExemptionReasonCodes.AE — or pick a code that matches category AE. The VATEX list also carries article-level codes (VATEX-EU-132-1A and its siblings) which name a provision rather than a treatment and are not constrained to any category.