Electronic billing

EBPP is the abbreviation for electronic bill presentment and payment ( " electronic bill presentment and payment "). This can be a based email solution to a complete electronic payment system.

The following are the criteria and functionalities in EBPP systems:

  • Format of the invoice data structured: XML, Web Interface, EDIFACT, etc.
  • ( not processed further automated) frame: PDF, TIFF, JPEG, etc.

Furthermore, two different models of EBPP can be distinguished:

  • The Direct Billing Model
  • The Consolidator model

Direct Billing Model

The statement exhibiting company offers this model to their own customers the service, to consider bills electronically, either by e -mail or through a protected area of ​​your website at login with user name and password.

Direct billing ( e-billing also called ) here refers to the direct relationship between company and customer.

Advantages:

  • Customers can within our own system any technically possible to perform actions (such as registration for additional services, access to detailed data, etc.)
  • Access to account information in real time (hot billing )
  • Maximum flexibility

Cons:

  • High implementation costs
  • Generally low level of acceptance among end users due to access ( at least the URL, user name, password)

Many companies from the telecommunications, Internet service providers and energy supply have developed in recent years own Direct Billing solutions for their customers. Due to the generally weak consumer acceptance of an average of 3-8 % per sector, the direct access to end customers is increasingly being called into question.

Consolidator model

Instead of the direct connection of billers and bill recipient invoices on a neutral platform are summarized consolidated. The invoice recipient can thus use this platform for all participating in this Consolidator billers and retrieve an access.

If the Consolidator into an existing infrastructure, such as electronic banking, a credit institution incorporated, the invoice recipient can use at no extra access this service mostly.

Advantages:

  • New participants, invoice recipient and biller may use the already existing customer base of Consolidators
  • Service as a web service available, usually no high entry costs
  • Further assumes the operator of the Consolidator Platform
  • Liability for legal aspects, such as deduction capability, accepts the operator of the Consolidator Platform
  • Multiplier effect: advertising measures of billers to participate by their customers beat all other billers about

Cons:

  • Reduced flexibility as standard formats of the consolidators need to be supported
  • Hot Billing is usually not possible

Legal and regulatory framework

Thus, an electronic invoice in the same sense as a paper-based invoice entitled to deduct input tax, this in Germany to 2011 ( cf. § 14 UStG ) had to have a qualified electronic signature within the meaning of the Signature Act. Since July 1, 2011 are in Germany according to Tax Simplification Act 2011, with the EU Directive 2010/45/EU Directive was implemented, electronic invoices and paper invoices classic equated to make business processes simpler and more economical. In Austria, the provisions shall apply from 1 January 2013. A qualified electronic signature is no longer since 2011, the only assurance procedures for electronic invoices. In addition to the technical procedures ( signature and EDI / EDIFACT ) is allowed as an organizational process of the so-called reliable audit trail (audit trail ). When the method is used depends on the nature of the business relationship and the practical possibilities of verification of identity information (see MLA § 4) on the contractual partners.

Practice

In practice, bills are increasingly being sent as a PDF file attached to an e -mail. The bill recipient prints it out and puts them just like any other paper-based invoice. Since invoices in Germany (unlike in other European countries usual) not signed, as a rule, of the printed bill can no longer be considered that it was an electronic invoice once. Tax law, however, such an approach is not permitted.

However, the risk in the sales tax field audit is that the auditor the documents then checked whether this was printed out or have been but possibly transmitted electronically.

The test is always initiated by the dispatching company. That is, with an external audit in the shipping company is found that electronic invoices without a qualifying signature within the meaning of the Signature Act § 2, No. 3 or which were created 14 do not meet the requirement under § UStG. This is easy to verify, since every company meets a retention requirement under the principles of proper DV - based accounting systems. Then makes the tax office a cross notice to all affected tax assessment that form invalid documents have been sent to the recipient.

In effect, this means that the external auditor is the recipient into the house and knows the electronically transmitted documents already. He then checks only whether the receiver with its obligation under § 15 UStG has complied and has separated the bills submitted without signature. If the recipient has, however, from these electronic invoices contained the pilot brought to the deduction without meeting the conditions of § 15 UStG have been present, this tax amounts to be recovered.

252545
de