Skip to content

BR-DE-26: Corrected invoice (384) without preceding invoice reference (BG-3)

Official message

[BR-DE-26] Wenn im Element Invoice type code (BT-3) der Code 384 (Corrected invoice) übergeben wird, soll PRECEDING INVOICE REFERENCE BG-3 mind. einmal vorhanden sein.

XRechnung (CII) · Warning · Message language: German · Version: xrechnung-3.0.2-validator-configuration-2026-08-31

[BR-DE-26] Wenn im Element "Invoice type code" (BT-3) der Code 384 (Corrected invoice) übergeben wird, soll PRECEDING INVOICE REFERENCE BG-3 mind. einmal vorhanden sein.

XRechnung (UBL) · Warning · Message language: German · Version: xrechnung-3.0.2-validator-configuration-2026-08-31
Severity
Warning Note: this does not make the invoice invalid, but it should be checked.
Applies to
XRechnung (CII), XRechnung (UBL)
Affected fields
BT-3, BG-3

What does this mean?

If the invoice type is "Corrected invoice" (code 384 in BT-3), at least one preceding invoice (Preceding invoice reference, BG-3) should be referenced. The invoice contains no such reference. The message is a warning.

Typical causes

A corrected invoice was created, but the number of the corrected invoice was not stated.
The number of the original invoice only appears in a note or in free text.

How to fix the error

Reference the corrected invoice: at least its invoice number (BT-25), ideally also its issue date (BT-26).
CII: ram:ApplicableHeaderTradeSettlement/ram:InvoiceReferencedDocument, UBL: cac:BillingReference/cac:InvoiceDocumentReference.
If no correction is intended, use the appropriate invoice type code (e.g. 380).
Generate and validate the invoice again.

In E-Rechnungsfreund

In the invoice form ("Experte" view), section "Vorausgehende Rechnungen (BG-3)" (preceding invoices), add an entry via "+ Vorausgehende Rechnung hinzufügen" and enter "Rechnungsnummer (BT-25)" and "Ausstellungsdatum (BT-26)" of the corrected invoice.

Example

Wrong

<rsm:ExchangedDocument>
  <ram:TypeCode>384</ram:TypeCode>
  ...
</rsm:ExchangedDocument>
...
<ram:ApplicableHeaderTradeSettlement>
  <!-- no ram:InvoiceReferencedDocument -->
  ...
</ram:ApplicableHeaderTradeSettlement>

Correct

<rsm:ExchangedDocument>
  <ram:TypeCode>384</ram:TypeCode>
  ...
</rsm:ExchangedDocument>
...
<ram:ApplicableHeaderTradeSettlement>
  ...
  <ram:InvoiceReferencedDocument>
    <ram:IssuerAssignedID>RE-2026-001</ram:IssuerAssignedID>
    <ram:FormattedIssueDateTime>
      <qdt:DateTimeString format="102">20260115</qdt:DateTimeString>
    </ram:FormattedIssueDateTime>
  </ram:InvoiceReferencedDocument>
</ram:ApplicableHeaderTradeSettlement>
For developers: test expression per syntax

XRechnung (CII) (CII)

Context: /rsm:CrossIndustryInvoice

not(normalize-space(rsm:ExchangedDocument/ram:TypeCode) = '384') or (rsm:SupplyChainTradeTransaction/ram:ApplicableHeaderTradeSettlement/ram:InvoiceReferencedDocument)

XRechnung (UBL) (UBL)

Context: /ubl:Invoice | /cn:CreditNote

((not(normalize-space(cbc:InvoiceTypeCode) = '384' or normalize-space(cbc:CreditNoteTypeCode) = '384') or (cac:BillingReference/cac:InvoiceDocumentReference)))

Related validation rules

  • BR-DE-1: Payment instructions (BG-16) are missing
  • BR-DE-10: Deliver to city (BT-77) is missing
  • BR-DE-11: Deliver to post code (BT-78) is missing
  • BR-DE-14: VAT category rate (BT-119) is missing in the VAT breakdown
  • BR-DE-15: Buyer reference (BT-10) is missing
  • BR-DE-16: Seller VAT ID, tax number or tax representative is missing

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