BR-CO-26: Seller identification (BT-29, BT-30 or BT-31)
Severity: fatal · Syntax: CII, UBL
Official message
In order for the buyer to automatically identify a supplier, the Seller identifier (BT-29), the Seller legal registration identifier (BT-30) and/or the Seller VAT identifier (BT-31) shall be present.
What this means
So the buyer can identify the supplier, at least one of these must be present: seller identifier (BT-29), seller legal registration identifier (BT-30) or seller VAT identifier (BT-31). The UBL assertion accepts a VAT identifier only with TaxScheme ID VAT, a party identification only when schemeID is not SEPA, or a CompanyID on PartyLegalEntity. Official text: In order for the buyer to automatically identify a supplier, the Seller identifier (BT-29), the Seller legal registration identifier (BT-30) and/or the Seller VAT identifier (BT-31) shall be present.
Typical cause
The only party identification is a SEPA creditor id, or the VAT identifier sits on a tax scheme other than VAT.
How to fix it
Calculate the named BT fields in the same currency and set the header amounts to the result of the assertion. The check helps you find the difference.
UBL
<cac:PartyIdentification>
<cbc:ID>1234567890</cbc:ID>
</cac:PartyIdentification>CII
<ram:SpecifiedLegalOrganization>
<ram:ID>HRB 12345</ram:ID>
</ram:SpecifiedLegalOrganization>Business term
BT-29, BT-30, BT-31
Related rules
Context and assertion
UBL cac:AccountingSupplierParty
CII //ram:SellerTradeParty
UBL
exists(cac:Party/cac:PartyTaxScheme[cac:TaxScheme/normalize-space(upper-case(cbc:ID))='VAT']/cbc:CompanyID) or exists(cac:Party/cac:PartyIdentification/cbc:ID[not(@schemeID = 'SEPA')]) or exists(cac:Party/cac:PartyLegalEntity/cbc:CompanyID)CII
(ram:ID) or (ram:GlobalID) or (ram:SpecifiedLegalOrganization/ram:ID) or (ram:SpecifiedTaxRegistration/ram:ID[@schemeID='VA'])Check a file now, free of charge
curl -F "file=@rechnung.xml" https://checkxrechnung.com/v1/validate
Questions
What does BR-CO-26 actually check?
So the buyer can identify the supplier, at least one of these must be present: seller identifier (BT-29), seller legal registration identifier (BT-30) or seller VAT identifier (BT-31). The UBL assertion accepts a VAT identifier only with TaxScheme ID VAT, a party identification only when schemeID is not SEPA, or a CompanyID on PartyLegalEntity. Official text: In order for the buyer to automatically identify a supplier, the Seller identifier (BT-29), the Seller legal registration identifier (BT-30) and/or the Seller VAT identifier (BT-31) shall be present.
How do I fix BR-CO-26?
Calculate the named BT fields in the same currency and set the header amounts to the result of the assertion. The check helps you find the difference.
If BR-CO-26 passes, is the invoice legally compliant?
No. This page helps you read this one Schematron assertion. A pass is not a statement about tax law, portal acceptance, or bank overlays.