4 ms·

Latvia: As of this year it is required in B2G transactions. Next year, mandatory for B2B

• Toutouxc 2y ago
  And what are the official guidelines? Are you just supposed to find a 3rd party provider and pay whatever they ask? That’s kinda shitty if you ask me.
  • cuu508 2y ago
    In Latvia, there's a requirement to prepare invoices in PEPPOL xml format (B2G from 2025, B2B from 2026), but no requirenent to send them over PEPPOL network.
    • Semaphor 2y ago
      And if I check here [0] > The new required fields were added as part of the harmonisation between Peppol BIS Billing and the XRechnung standard. Peppol BIS Billing is the equivalent of XRechnung for sending e-invoices via Peppol. By harmonising the XRechnung standard and incorporating it into the Peppol “National Ruleset”, the two formats (XRechnung and Peppol BIS Billing) are now almost fully equivalent. It seems that this ends up the same way and compatible with the solution in Germany and France, and doesn’t have any of the issues OP describes. [0]: https://en.e-rechnung-bund.de/new-version-xrechnung-standard-3-0-1-available/ https://en.e-rechnung-bund.de/new-version-xrechnung-standard...
      • Muromec 2y ago
        So the EU mastered the trick of solving the problem of 23 competing formats and we aren't all taking notes?
        • Semaphor 2y ago
          The formats seem to all be extensible in a way that allows you to update the version to make them compatible. The magic of XML.
  • elric 2y ago
    That's what the Belgian guideline seems to be, yeah. From what I gather, the extra costs are deductible at 120% during the first year. But it still all feels pretty shitty.