# BR-O-02

> An Invoice that contains an Invoice line (BG-25) where the Invoiced item VAT category code (BT-151) is "Not subject to VAT" shall not contain the Seller VAT identifier (BT-31), the Seller tax representative VAT identifier (BT-63) or the Buyer VAT identifier (BT-48).

Checked against Peppol BIS Billing 3.0 2026.5

Canonical: https://einvoicecheck.eu/rules/br-o-02

## Official rule text

An Invoice that contains an Invoice line (BG-25) where the Invoiced item VAT category code (BT-151) is "Not subject to VAT" shall not contain the Seller VAT identifier (BT-31), the Seller tax representative VAT identifier (BT-63) or the Buyer VAT identifier (BT-48).

## Why did my invoice fail BR-O-02?

When an invoice line (BG-25) carries VAT category 'O' (Not subject to VAT, i.e. outside the scope of VAT), the document must not contain any VAT identifier — neither the Seller VAT identifier (BT-31), the Seller tax representative VAT identifier (BT-63), nor the Buyer VAT identifier (BT-48). The rationale is that if the transaction is genuinely out of scope of VAT, no party should be acting in a VAT-registered capacity for it.

## Common causes

- The seller's PartyTaxScheme with a VAT company ID is emitted by default even though category 'O' is used.
- The buyer's cac:PartyTaxScheme/cbc:CompanyID (VAT ID) is populated on an out-of-scope invoice.
- Category 'O' was chosen when the correct code was 'E' (Exempt) or 'S' (Standard), which do require VAT IDs.
- A tax representative VAT ID is present from a template while the supply is not subject to VAT.

## How do I fix it?

```
Remove every VAT PartyTaxScheme when using category O — delete <cac:PartyTaxScheme><cbc:CompanyID>...</cbc:CompanyID><cac:TaxScheme><cbc:ID>VAT</cbc:ID></cac:TaxScheme></cac:PartyTaxScheme> from Seller, tax representative and Buyer parties (a non-VAT scheme ID such as legal registration may remain).
```