Skip to main content

Guide · 2026-05-16

Markdown export

Due date or payment terms (former BR-CO-25)

The CEN Schematron rules 1.3.16 no longer contain BR-CO-25. For XRechnung, Peppol UBL and the ZUGFeRD and Factur-X EN 16931 profile, a missing due date (BT-9) or missing payment terms (BT-20) do not block the download. The Schematron of the ZUGFeRD and Factur-X EXTENDED profile still checks BR-CO-25. Add one of the two in every format so that the buyer knows when to pay.

What you may see

  • Review shows the payment timing hint (IC-PAYMENT-TIMING-01). The check of the ZUGFeRD and Factur-X EXTENDED profile, or an older validator, reports BR-CO-25.
  • Amount due for payment (BT-115) is positive.
  • Neither Payment due date (BT-9) nor Payment terms (BT-20) is present in the reviewed data.

Why it still matters

Recipient systems need to know when a payable invoice is due. Bank details alone do not define a due date, and vague wording on the PDF is not enough unless it is captured as structured payment terms.

How to fix it

  1. If the PDF shows a date such as “payable by 30 June 2026”, enter that date as Due date (BT-9).
  2. If the PDF shows wording such as “Net 30 days” or “payable immediately”, enter it as Payment terms (BT-20).
  3. If the source invoice has neither, ask the issuer or finance owner for the intended terms before exporting.

Before you retry

  • Run review validation again after editing the field.
  • Check that the amount due still matches the invoice total.
  • Only download after the review result is current for the edited data.

Common question

Is BT-9 always mandatory?

No. The CEN Schematron rules 1.3.16 require neither BT-9 nor BT-20. The Schematron of the ZUGFeRD and Factur-X EXTENDED profile still requires one of the two when the amount due is positive. Validators with an older rule set also still report BR-CO-25.