BR-CO-03: Value added tax point date (BT-7) and Value added tax point date code (BT-8) are…
Peppol BIS Billing 3.0.21 · UBL
Original rule text
[BR-CO-03]-Value added tax point date (BT-7) and Value added tax point date code (BT-8) are mutually exclusive.
(exists(cbc:TaxPointDate) and not(cac:InvoicePeriod/cbc:DescriptionCode)) or (not(cbc:TaxPointDate) and exists(cac:InvoicePeriod/cbc:DescriptionCode)) or (not(cbc:TaxPointDate) and not(cac:InvoicePeriod/cbc:DescriptionCode))BR-CO-03 is a fatal rule in the business layer of Peppol BIS Billing 3.0.21 · UBL. An invoice that breaks it is rejected. It refers to BT-7, BT-8.
What this rule requires
The rule requires that an invoice does not contain both a value added tax point date (BT-7) and a value added tax point date code (BT-8). The test passes if only one of these is present, or if neither is present; it fails only when both are present. In UBL, this corresponds to having both cbc:TaxPointDate and cac:InvoicePeriod/cbc:DescriptionCode; in CII, both ram:TaxPointDate and ram:DueDateTypeCode.
How to fix
Remove one of the two elements so that they are not both present. In UBL, delete either cbc:TaxPointDate or cac:InvoicePeriod/cbc:DescriptionCode; in CII, delete either ram:TaxPointDate or ram:DueDateTypeCode. Choose which one to keep based on the business meaning you need to convey; both may be absent if neither applies.
Guidance on this rule. The original text above is authoritative.
Where to go next
No published Peppol BIS Billing UBL release comparison lists a change to BR-CO-03.
Validate an invoice against these rules · All release changes