[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ubl] Proposal of new business process model.
Peter This was discussed in the Pacific-time TC call last night and I was asked to send you details of the agreement we came to. The minutes will have a less detailed summary. We decided that there would be the need to extend the Payment phase to include post-remittance reconciliation. 1. There would need to be remittance reference details added to Invoice, DebitNote and CreditNote so that these three documents could be used to reconcile descrepancies found following remittance. Typically this would work as follows (though variations might be lilely): Where there is overpayment by the Buyer then - if there is frequent business between buyer(and/or originator) and seller then either a credit note and/or a debit note could be used to correct both remittance and tax in a following remittance (with reference to remittance advice details including related invoice/debit/credit details) but if there is infrequent business and less likelihood of a near-future remittance then the correction could be in the form of an invoice from buyer to seller (referencing the remittance and associated document id's). Reference(s) to a remittance advice may need to include remittance line details. A similar process would be used for corrections to errors which were in the favour of the buyer where the seller might need to send a further debit note (or credit note request) or invoice to the buyer referencing the remittance and associated documents. A debit note can be used for the correction by use with a further remittance where parties are agreed to its use in place of a credit note (such as where there is no need to reconcile taxes and where a further remittance with sufficient total for the reduction is expected). It is and important aspect of these corrections that they may involve tax payment/reclaiming corrections too. 2. The need for the help of a statement for information about possible overpayments, underpayments and duplicate (or more) payments requires that a Statement document be reinstated in the process. Invoice, CreditAdvice and DebitAdvice would need to be able to (optionally since not all collaborations would include statements) reference the statement at document and/or line level as well as (or instead of) the remittance. A typical use case for Statement would be where a duplicate payment occurred a long time after the original remittance or where a needed correction was a long time outstanding and the seller needed to give regularly repeated reference to it. After much time if the buyer agreed to make a further remittance to correct it but required, say, a credit note or copy invoice from the seller in order to do so then the buyer could send a debit note referencing the relevant statement line. A note about the Statement document is that it would be worth adding something in the documentation/definition of it to distinguish it from Invoice in that an Invoice is a document for the purpose of remittance (and possibly tax remittance) whereas a Statement is for information which may lead to the need for a further invoice or credit note or debit note whic reference it or reference the respective remittance(s) and/or previous invoice(s) and/or debit note(s) and/or credit note(s). [Apologies that in the above I use the terms CreditNote and CreditAdvice interchangeably.] I'd be happy to provide further details if you need them. All the best Stephen Green >>> Peter Larsen Borresen <firstname.lastname@example.org> 27/05/05 14:28:15 >>> <<Proposal for UBL 2.0 process.doc>> Dear all Here is my proposal for a procurement process in UBL 2.0. I look forward to receive you comments on the document. Kind regard Peter L. Borresen