Reference
Markdown exportBR-CO-3 Value added tax point date and date code are mutually exclusive
The Value added tax point date (BT-7) and the Value added tax point date code (BT-8) cannot both be present on the same invoice. Provide at most one of them; neither is mandatory.
Problem Description
ERROR
EN 16931 calculation and consistency rule (BR-CO)
Interactive pipeline
Where BR-CO-03 is checked
Click a stage to see what it checks, or type a rule ID to light up the stage that reports it.
BR-CO-03 EN 16931 calculation rule
Reported in stage 2: EN 16931 rules.
Level error: the report recommends rejecting the invoice.
Stage 2 · What it checks
EN 16931 rules
- The core business terms are present (BR-01 to BR-65).
- Totals add up and related fields agree (BR-CO); codes and decimals are valid (BR-CL, BR-DEC).
- Each VAT category is consistent: S, Z, E, AE, K, G, O, L, M (BR-S, BR-Z, BR-AE, BR-IC …).
Example codes
Typical fix
Recalculate totals and VAT from the line data, and correct the VAT category in the source data.
Context and Significance
EN 16931 lets the issuer state the VAT point either as an explicit date (BT-7) or as a code that points to another date (BT-8, for example the invoice date). Both at once would make the VAT point ambiguous. The error usually occurs when an ERP export fills both fields by default, for example a tax point date plus a fixed date code in the invoicing period.
Solution
Remove either BT-7 or BT-8. In UBL, BT-7 is cbc:TaxPointDate and BT-8 is cac:InvoicePeriod/cbc:DescriptionCode; in CII, they are ram:TaxPointDate and ram:DueDateTypeCode in ram:ApplicableTradeTax.
Quick actions
Valid Examples
- BT-7 = 2026-03-31, BT-8 absent
- BT-8 = 3 (invoice date), BT-7 absent
- Neither BT-7 nor BT-8 present (both are optional)
Invalid Examples
- BT-7 = 2026-03-31 and BT-8 = 35 set on the same invoice
- UBL: cbc:TaxPointDate (BT-7) and cac:InvoicePeriod/cbc:DescriptionCode (BT-8) both filled