[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Tax Rate Structure
Dear all, yesterday's discussion in the Indirect Tax CC about tax (rate) structure, calculation (or not) on individual lines etc. made me think about these issues again. If we agree on: (1) The process of tax calculation itself is out of scope of standardisation on business documents. (2) However, business documents like invoices have to contain all information necessary to do (maybe better: verify) such calculation. (3) Therefore for every line item in an invoice there has to be an indicator of the tax treatment applied to that line. Then we may also agree on: (A) For every line item we want an attribute that provides the indication of tax treatment applied (That is more or less the "tax rate structure", but it only needs to be a name, an identification, not the explicit structure: We might see it just as the name of a function.) (B) For every line either itself and/or the document structure "upstream" have to contain all data necessary to perform (or verify) that calculation (the arguments of the function). For a simple percentage-tax the name/identifier of the relevant tax structure for ease of understanding might be just that rate ("5%" instead of something like "LowRate"), but for a tiered structure, it would have to be a name of that structure and not the rate that happens to apply in the particular situation. The actual numeric rate resulting from the application of the function (you might say an intermediary result of the calculation) may or may not be something you want to include in the document along with the resulting tax amount. While the "function name" (the tax structure name) from a document interface perspective does not serve as a means to calculate, it may serve as a means to check for consistency of the document. For by virtue of (B) above it becomes clear what elements that are optional in the general document structure become mandatory in the particular situation (as they are needed as arguments in the function). The discussion about the calculation in the Canadian GST/HST environment (where my feeling was that something had to be relevant on the line level) could be resolved by a tax treatment indicator on the line level that relates to the treatment 'add amount of this line into such and such sum and apply such and such function on the final result on invoice level'. I hope this is a step to clarification, not to confusion. Kind regards Arndt
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]