Skip to content

BR-43: Invoice line charge amount (BT-141) is missing

Official message

[BR-43] Each Invoice line charge (BG-28) shall have an Invoice line charge amount (BT-141).

EN 16931 (CII) · Error · Message language: English · Version: xrechnung-3.0.2-validator-configuration-2026-08-31

[BR-43] Each Invoice line charge (BG-28) shall have an Invoice line charge amount (BT-141).

EN 16931 (UBL) · Error · Message language: English · Version: xrechnung-3.0.2-validator-configuration-2026-08-31

[BR-43] Each Invoice line charge (BG-28) shall have an Invoice line charge amount (BT-141).

Factur-X / ZUGFeRD EN 16931 · Error · Message language: English · Version: Factur-X 1.08 / ZUGFeRD 2.4
Severity
Error The invoice is invalid and may be rejected by the recipient.
Applies to
EN 16931 (CII), EN 16931 (UBL), Factur-X / ZUGFeRD EN 16931
Affected fields
BG-28, BT-141

What does this mean?

Every charge on an invoice line (Invoice line charge, BG-28) must contain an amount (Invoice line charge amount, BT-141). The element is missing for at least one line charge.

Typical causes

The line charge was only given as a percentage (BT-143), without the amount calculated from it.
An empty charge without amount was output on the line.

How to fix the error

State the amount without VAT for every line charge, with at most two decimals; for percentage charges additionally the base amount (BT-142) and the percentage (BT-143).
The charge increases the line net amount (BT-131).
CII: ram:SpecifiedLineTradeSettlement/ram:SpecifiedTradeAllowanceCharge (ChargeIndicator true)/ram:ActualAmount, UBL: cac:InvoiceLine/cac:AllowanceCharge (cbc:ChargeIndicator true)/cbc:Amount.
Generate and validate the invoice again.

In E-Rechnungsfreund

In the invoice form ("Experte" view), section "Rechnungspositionen (BG-25)" (invoice lines), tab "Zu-/Abschläge (BG-27/28)" (line allowances and charges) of the line, fill in the field "Betrag" (amount) for every entry "Zuschlag (BG-28)" (charge).

Example

Wrong

<ram:SpecifiedTradeAllowanceCharge>
  <ram:ChargeIndicator>
    <udt:Indicator>true</udt:Indicator>
  </ram:ChargeIndicator>
  <ram:Reason>Express surcharge</ram:Reason>
</ram:SpecifiedTradeAllowanceCharge>

Correct

<ram:SpecifiedTradeAllowanceCharge>
  <ram:ChargeIndicator>
    <udt:Indicator>true</udt:Indicator>
  </ram:ChargeIndicator>
  <ram:ActualAmount>15.00</ram:ActualAmount>
  <ram:Reason>Express surcharge</ram:Reason>
</ram:SpecifiedTradeAllowanceCharge>
For developers: test expression per syntax

EN 16931 (CII) (CII)

Context: //ram:SpecifiedLineTradeSettlement/ram:SpecifiedTradeAllowanceCharge/ram:ChargeIndicator[udt:Indicator = 'true']

(../ram:ActualAmount)

EN 16931 (UBL) (UBL)

Context: //cac:InvoiceLine/cac:AllowanceCharge[cbc:ChargeIndicator = true()] | //cac:CreditNoteLine/cac:AllowanceCharge[cbc:ChargeIndicator = true()]

exists(cbc:Amount)

Factur-X / ZUGFeRD EN 16931 (CII)

Technical ID in the source: FX-SCH-A-000220

Context: //ram:SpecifiedLineTradeSettlement/ram:SpecifiedTradeAllowanceCharge/ram:ChargeIndicator[udt:Indicator = 'true']

(../ram:ActualAmount)

Related validation rules

  • BR-01: Specification identifier (BT-24) is missing
  • BR-02: Invoice number (BT-1) is missing
  • BR-03: Invoice issue date (BT-2) is missing
  • BR-04: Invoice type code (BT-3) is missing
  • BR-05: Invoice currency code (BT-5) is missing
  • BR-06: Seller name (BT-27) is missing

Last updated:
Explanation of the validation rule, not legal or tax advice.