Re: [ubl-dev] Representing taxable freight charges in an Invoice

[Jon Bosak <bosak@pinax.com>]

I'd like to follow up on Ken's note by observing that comments on
UBL 2.0 are four years behind the development process at this
point.  The UBL Technical Committee needs and wants your input,
but it should be aimed at UBL 2.1, which is currently in its first
public review cycle.  We're accepting comments on UBL 2.1 PRD1
until 24 November.  For further details, see

http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tc-announce/201009/msg00012.html

Jon

G. Ken Holman wrote:
> At 2010-10-29 11:26 +1100, Tim Anderson wrote:
>> G. Ken Holman wrote:
>>> At 2010-10-29 09:54 +1100, Tim Anderson wrote:
>>>> Also, whats the rationale behind including TaxCategory in 
>>>> AllowanceCharge but not on InvoiceLine?
>>>> On InvoiceLine it looks like it must be specified via the 
>>>> TaxSubtotal, requiring elements to be duplicated.
>>> The structure supports a total tax for the line item plus a breakdown 
>>> of how that tax was calculated.  In my jurisdiction there used to be 
>>> PST and GST (provincial sales tax and goods and services tax), so 
>>> there would be a total tax and a breakdown of the two components.  
>>> Now that there is only HST, there is both the total and a one-item 
>>> breakdown, just as above.  The type of tax is described in the 
>>> breakdown.
>>>
>>> Remember that in UBL the recipient must not do any calculations on 
>>> the values received:  the UBL instance conveys both the components of 
>>> a total and the total itself.  The recipient should find *everything* 
>>> they need in the instance without doing any arithmetic.
>> Does this apply to orders? The order LineItem just specifies a tax 
>> total without describing how it was arrived at.
>> Or is this supposed to be inferred from the customer's PartyTaxScheme?
> 
> I hope one of the business experts on the UBL TC will respond to this 
> with a confirmation, but I *believe* the answer is that the party 
> placing the order can only really estimate what the taxes might be.  I 
> believe the ordering party cannot constrain the invoicing party on what 
> the tax breakdown is, so that in an order the tax value is simply a 
> placeholder of some kind.
> 
> If you feel that the order line item is incomplete, please use the 
> committee comment form and send in your thoughts for consideration.  We 
> are in the first public review draft for UBL 2.1 and all public input 
> will be very helpful to us:
> 
>  http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/comments/index.php?wg_abbrev=ubl
> 
> But, again, I hope one of the business experts will respond ... I'm just 
> one of the angle-bracket-guys on the committee.
> 
> . . . . . . . . . . Ken
> 
> 
> -- 
> Crane Softwrights Ltd.          http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/
> G. Ken Holman                 mailto:gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com
> Male Cancer Awareness Nov'07  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/u/bc
> Legal business disclaimers:  http://www.CraneSoftwrights.com/legal
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: ubl-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: ubl-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org
> 
>