BR-E-04: exempt from VAT: BR-E-04
Severity: fatal · Syntax: CII, UBL
Official message
An Invoice that contains a Document level charge (BG-21) where the Document level charge VAT category code (BT-102) is "Exempt from VAT" shall contain the Seller VAT Identifier (BT-31), the Seller tax registration identifier (BT-32) and/or the Seller tax representative VAT identifier (BT-63).
What this means
When a document charge (BT-102) uses exempt from VAT (E), BR-E-04 requires a seller tax identifier: VAT identifier (BT-31), tax registration (BT-32) and/or the tax representative VAT identifier (BT-63). Official text: An Invoice that contains a Document level charge (BG-21) where the Document level charge VAT category code (BT-102) is "Exempt from VAT" shall contain the Seller VAT Identifier (BT-31), the Seller tax registration identifier (BT-32) and/or the Seller tax representative VAT identifier (BT-63).
Typical cause
The category is set, but none of the required identifier fields is filled in.
How to fix it
Align code E, the rate and the breakdown with the message. The snippet shows the elements involved; amounts have to match your invoice. The check helps you find the spot. It is not a tax opinion.
UBL
<cac:PartyTaxScheme>
<cbc:CompanyID>DE123456789</cbc:CompanyID>
<cac:TaxScheme><cbc:ID>VAT</cbc:ID></cac:TaxScheme>
</cac:PartyTaxScheme>CII
<ram:SpecifiedTaxRegistration>
<ram:ID schemeID="VA">DE123456789</ram:ID>
</ram:SpecifiedTaxRegistration>Business term
BG-21, BT-102, BT-31, BT-32, BT-63
Related rules
Context and assertion
UBL /ubl:Invoice | /cn:CreditNote
CII //ram:SpecifiedTradeAllowanceCharge[ram:ChargeIndicator/udt:Indicator=true()]/ram:CategoryTradeTax[ram:CategoryCode = 'E'][upper-case(ram:TypeCode) = 'VAT']
UBL
(exists(//cac:AllowanceCharge[cbc:ChargeIndicator=true()]/cac:TaxCategory[normalize-space(cbc:ID)='E'][cac:TaxScheme/normalize-space(upper-case(cbc:ID))='VAT']) and (exists(//cac:AccountingSupplierParty/cac:Party/cac:PartyTaxScheme/cbc:CompanyID) or exists(//cac:TaxRepresentativeParty/cac:PartyTaxScheme[cac:TaxScheme/(normalize-space(upper-case(cbc:ID)) = 'VAT')]/cbc:CompanyID))) or not(exists(//cac:AllowanceCharge[cbc:ChargeIndicator=true()]/cac:TaxCategory[normalize-space(cbc:ID)='E'][cac:TaxScheme/normalize-space(upper-case(cbc:ID))='VAT']))CII
/rsm:CrossIndustryInvoice/rsm:SupplyChainTradeTransaction/ram:ApplicableHeaderTradeAgreement/ram:SellerTradeParty/ram:SpecifiedTaxRegistration/ram:ID[@schemeID = ('VA', 'FC')] or /rsm:CrossIndustryInvoice/rsm:SupplyChainTradeTransaction/ram:ApplicableHeaderTradeAgreement/ram:SellerTaxRepresentativeTradeParty/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-E-04 actually check?
When a document charge (BT-102) uses exempt from VAT (E), BR-E-04 requires a seller tax identifier: VAT identifier (BT-31), tax registration (BT-32) and/or the tax representative VAT identifier (BT-63). Official text: An Invoice that contains a Document level charge (BG-21) where the Document level charge VAT category code (BT-102) is "Exempt from VAT" shall contain the Seller VAT Identifier (BT-31), the Seller tax registration identifier (BT-32) and/or the Seller tax representative VAT identifier (BT-63).
How do I fix BR-E-04?
Align code E, the rate and the breakdown with the message. The snippet shows the elements involved; amounts have to match your invoice. The check helps you find the spot. It is not a tax opinion.
If BR-E-04 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.