BR-AG-06: VAT rate of document level allowance with category M (IPSI) is missing or negative
Official message
[BR-AG-06] In a Document level allowance (BG-20) where the Document level allowance VAT category code (BT-95) is "IPSI" the Document level allowance VAT rate (BT-96) shall be 0 (zero) or greater than zero.
[BR-AG-06] In a Document level allowance (BG-20) where the Document level allowance VAT category code (BT-95) is "IPSI" the Document level allowance VAT rate (BT-96) shall be 0 (zero) or greater than zero.
[BR-AG-06] In a Document level allowance (BG-20) where the Document level allowance VAT category code (BT-95) is "IPSI" the Document level allowance VAT rate (BT-96) shall be 0 (zero) or greater than zero.
- 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-20, BT-95, BT-96
What does this mean?
For a document level allowance (BG-20) with VAT category (BT-95) M (IPSI, tax for production, services and importation in Ceuta and Melilla) the document level allowance VAT rate (BT-96) must be 0 (zero) or greater than zero. The rate is negative or missing.
Typical causes
The rate was not stated.
The rate was taken over with a negative sign.
How to fix the error
State a rate of 0 or more for every document level allowance of category M.
If the rate does not match the category, correct the category and adjust the VAT breakdown (BG-23).
CII: ram:SpecifiedTradeAllowanceCharge (ChargeIndicator false)/ram:CategoryTradeTax/ram:RateApplicablePercent, UBL: cac:AllowanceCharge (cbc:ChargeIndicator false)/cac:TaxCategory/cbc:Percent.
In E-Rechnungsfreund
In the invoice form ("Experte" view), section "Zu-/Abschläge auf Dokumentenebene (BG-20/BG-21)" (document level allowances and charges), for every entry of type "Abschlag (BG-20)" (allowance) with "St-Kat." (VAT category) M fill in the field "St-Satz %" (VAT rate). An empty field is not written to the XML for the allowance/charge.
Example
Wrong
<ram:SpecifiedTradeAllowanceCharge>
<ram:ChargeIndicator>
<udt:Indicator>false</udt:Indicator>
</ram:ChargeIndicator>
<ram:ActualAmount>50.00</ram:ActualAmount>
<ram:Reason>Discount</ram:Reason>
<ram:CategoryTradeTax>
<ram:TypeCode>VAT</ram:TypeCode>
<ram:CategoryCode>M</ram:CategoryCode>
</ram:CategoryTradeTax>
</ram:SpecifiedTradeAllowanceCharge>
Correct
<ram:SpecifiedTradeAllowanceCharge>
<ram:ChargeIndicator>
<udt:Indicator>false</udt:Indicator>
</ram:ChargeIndicator>
<ram:ActualAmount>50.00</ram:ActualAmount>
<ram:Reason>Discount</ram:Reason>
<ram:CategoryTradeTax>
<ram:TypeCode>VAT</ram:TypeCode>
<ram:CategoryCode>M</ram:CategoryCode>
<ram:RateApplicablePercent>10.00</ram:RateApplicablePercent>
</ram:CategoryTradeTax>
</ram:SpecifiedTradeAllowanceCharge>
For developers: test expression per syntax
EN 16931 (CII) (CII)
Context: //ram:SpecifiedTradeAllowanceCharge[ram:ChargeIndicator/udt:Indicator=false()]/ram:CategoryTradeTax[ram:CategoryCode = 'M'][upper-case(ram:TypeCode) = 'VAT']
ram:RateApplicablePercent >= 0
EN 16931 (UBL) (UBL)
Context: cac:AllowanceCharge[cbc:ChargeIndicator=false()]/cac:TaxCategory[normalize-space(cbc:ID)='M'][cac:TaxScheme/normalize-space(upper-case(cbc:ID))='VAT']
(cbc:Percent) >= 0
Factur-X / ZUGFeRD EN 16931 (CII)
Technical ID in the source: FX-SCH-A-000092
Context: //ram:SpecifiedTradeAllowanceCharge[ram:ChargeIndicator/udt:Indicator='false']/ram:CategoryTradeTax[ram:CategoryCode = 'M']
ram:RateApplicablePercent >= 0
Related validation rules
- BR-AG-01: VAT breakdown for category M is missing
- BR-AG-02: Seller VAT or tax registration identifier missing for invoice line with category M
- BR-AG-03: Seller VAT or tax registration identifier missing for document level allowance with category M
- BR-AG-04: Seller VAT or tax registration identifier missing for document level charge with category M
- BR-AG-05: VAT rate of invoice line with category M (IPSI) is missing or negative
- BR-AG-07: VAT rate of document level charge with category M (IPSI) is missing or negative
Last updated:
Explanation of the validation rule, not legal or tax advice.