einvoice / EN 16931 / XRechnung rule reference

BR-DE-17

So beheben Sie den Fehler

Mit dem Element "Invoice type code" (BT-3) sollen ausschließlich folgende Codes aus der Codeliste UNTDID 1001 übermittelt werden: 326 (Partial invoice), 380 (Commercial invoice), 384 (Corrected invoice), 389 (Self-billed invoice) und 381 (Credit note),875 (Partial construction invoice), 876 (Partial final construction invoice), 877 (Final construction invoice).

Deutsche Fassung: Amtlicher KoSIT-Text (official KoSIT assert text).

BT-3 should be one of 326, 380, 384, 389, 381, 875, 876, 877.

Requires
BT-3 should be one of 326, 380, 384, 389, 381, 875, 876, 877.
Business terms
BT-3
Syntax
Binds the UBL-2.1 Invoice / CreditNote syntax and the UN/CEFACT-CII syntax
Location (UBL-2.1 path)
cbc:InvoiceTypeCode
Fix (Deutsch)
Korrigieren Sie `cbc:InvoiceTypeCode`, sodass gilt: Mit dem Element "Invoice type code" (BT-3) sollen ausschließlich folgende Codes aus der Codeliste UNTDID 1001 übermittelt werden: 326 (Partial invoice), 380 (Commercial invoice), 384 (Corrected invoice), 389 (Self-billed invoice) und 381 (Credit note),875 (Partial construction invoice), 876 (Partial final construction invoice), 877 (Final construction invoice).
Fix
Correct `cbc:InvoiceTypeCode` so that BT-3 should be one of 326, 380, 384, 389, 381, 875, 876, 877.
Severity
warning
Provenance source
xrechnung-ubl
Provenance assert

Mit dem Element "Invoice type code" (BT-3) sollen ausschließlich folgende Codes aus der Codeliste UNTDID 1001 übermittelt werden: 326 (Partial invoice), 380 (Commercial invoice), 384 (Corrected invoice), 389 (Self-billed invoice) und 381 (Credit note),875 (Partial construction invoice), 876 (Partial final construction invoice), 877 (Final construction invoice).

The Location above is a UBL-2.1 path, and no UN/CEFACT-CII path for this rule is published here; Fix and Fix (Deutsch), verbatim from remediation_catalog.json and not reworded here; the UN/CEFACT-CII binding of this rule is differentially proven against the official KoSIT XRechnung 2.5.0 (XRechnung 3.0.2) Schematron.

Korrektur prüfen: Laden Sie die geänderte Rechnung in den Browser-Validator unter /einvoice/validate/ — er führt dieselbe Engine lokal im Browser aus, ohne Upload, und meldet BR-DE-17 nicht mehr, sobald die Korrektur greift.

Where to check the fix: paste the corrected invoice into the browser validator at /einvoice/validate/ — it runs this same engine locally in your browser, with no upload, and stops reporting BR-DE-17 once the edit lands.

The same invoice, failing and fixed

No vendored test suite ships a labelled example for this rule, so this pair was found rather than written. The engine was run over the vendored instance corpus/xrechnung-testsuite/src/test/technical-cases/cius/01.06_minimal_test_ubl.xml under --profile xrechnung, then re-run over the same file with one mechanical edit applied to one element, over and over, until the edit below changed the verdict: the text content of InvoiceTypeCode was deleted, leaving the element present but empty. The page publishes it because the engine reported BR-DE-17 for the edited document and did not report it for the untouched one.

UBL Invoice — fails

The vendored file around the change, verbatim:

<cbc:InvoiceTypeCode></cbc:InvoiceTypeCode>

UBL Invoice — passes

The same lines as 01.06_minimal_test_ubl.xml actually ships them — this block is the fix for the block above:

<cbc:InvoiceTypeCode>380</cbc:InvoiceTypeCode>

What the engine reports for the edited invoice

{
  "element": "cbc:InvoiceTypeCode",
  "field": "cbc:InvoiceTypeCode",
  "fix_hint": "Correct `cbc:InvoiceTypeCode` so that BT-3 should be one of 326, 380, 384, 389, 381, 875, 876, 877.",
  "location": "cbc:InvoiceTypeCode",
  "message": "'Invoice type code' (BT-3) should be one of the codes 326, 380, 384, 389, 381, 875, 876, 877 (UNTDID 1001 subset); found '(absent)'.",
  "rule": "BR-DE-17",
  "severity": "warning",
  "terms": [
    "BT-3"
  ],
  "title": "BT-3 should be one of 326, 380, 384, 389, 381, 875, 876, 877."
}

Rule ids the engine reports for 01.06_minimal_test_ubl.xml untouched: BR-DE-TMP-32. After the edit, BR-04 BR-DE-17 are reported that were not before — one mechanical edit can break more than one rule at a time, and BR-04 is the neighbour this one takes with it.

Two honest limits. This is an edit that provokes the rule, not the only one, and it is not a claim about how real exporters break it. And it is the reverse of the fix a reader needs: the passing block is the vendored file's own content, which is what a conformant invoice looks like here.

Reproduce it yourself: take corpus/xrechnung-testsuite/src/test/technical-cases/cius/01.06_minimal_test_ubl.xml from this repository, apply the one edit named above, and run einvoice validate 01.06_minimal_test_ubl.xml --profile xrechnung --format json, or paste the file into the browser validator, which runs this same engine locally with no upload.

Everything here is free and open source — pick up whatever helps, at your own pace: