This post was originally written by Oriol Bausa as: “¿ISO 20022 Financial Invoice o ebXML CCTS CIIv2? (“ISO 20022 Financial CIIv2 Invoice or ebXML CCTS?) on: http://blog.invinet.org/?p=767.

Oriol Bausa is owner and CEO at Invinet Sistemes

Politically, it is understandable that a standard is recommended by an organization such as UN / CEFACT, which has had the task of facilitating e-business in the world for many years now.

For this reason it is understandable that the E-invoicing Expert Group recommend the UN / CEFACT Cross Industry Invoice version 2 (CII2).  CII2 is a standard but not very useful for practical purposes, as described in this post: http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=nl&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.invinet.org%2F%3Fp%3D739

However, it is hard to understand that some members of the E-invoicing Expert Group – that originally recommended the UN/CEFACT CIIv2 standaard – are now trying to promote an entirely different standard: the ISO 20022 Financial Invoice.

How is it possible that within UN/CEFACT, the TBG1 group has been working with the CCTS methodology for many years to develop the model bill v.2 CII, while another group of the same organization (TBG5), dedicated to the development of a model called Financial Invoice, are using an entirely different approach, the ISO 20022?

And although politically intended to believe otherwise, the ISO 20022 and CII2 standards have nothing to do with each other, neither technically nor semantically. The mapping between ISO20022 and CII2 is so complicated (or simple) as between any of them and other standards like UBL, Facturae, Svefaktura, ebInterface …

In short, although very well recommended, for an electronic invoicing standard in Europe, it would be desirable to:

1. agree to creating/using a single model bill or abandoning its efforts.
2. recommend the members of the E-invoicing Expert Group to a bit of advice before deciding on a certain standard, and do research to what you recommend also really works.

A pity is also that countries where electronic billing is more advanced, couldn’t wait to have these standards that may have facilitated global interoperability and have already taken an other (proprietary) approach.

[Admin thoughts: In the meantime we see a serious uptake in the use of UBL. So, which will it be: UBL, ISO20022 or CII2? Or all at the same time..]

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: UN/Cefact ISO 20022 XML or/and UN/Cefact CII2?.

Read more…

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: “3-corner model – a problem on our hands”, EU Expert Group Chair states.

The European Commission has published the feedback statement summarising the responses received to its public consultations on the Final report of the Expert Group on Electronic Invoicing.
.

http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/payments/einvoicing/index_en.htm

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: EC: feedback statement on final report of the Expert Group on e-Invoicing.

They wrote to the EU Expert Group shortly before its closure. Their comments and suggestions were not taken on board. Still, they find their positions reflected in many of the comments submitted to the Final Report of the Expert Group.

As outlined in the Open Letter underneath, they believe that a number of the base assumptions behind recent policy initiatives and in particular the Commission’s proposal for modifying the VAT Directive’s rules on e-invoicing are incorrect. As a consequence, some of the policy directions currently being explored in the negotiations on this topic among Member States are allegedly harmful for jobs and growth in Europe.

Read about the proposed compromise in their Open Letter:
http://www.epractitionersvoice.eu/assets/Position_Practitioners_FINAL.pdf

Anyone wishing to join the list of supporters can send a mail to einvoicing.practitioners@gmail.com

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: Open letter on EU E-invoicing – proposal for Article 233 compromise.

Unique identifiers are provided by registration authorities like official Commercial Registries, GS1, D&B or others which in turn are qualified by meta-identifiers. Applying and verifying such identified information opens up a new range of applications in areas like eInvoicing  and eCommerce in general, supply chain management, conformity assessment or using such logical identifiers as a reliable routing and addressing scheme.

This CWA 16036 has already had an impact on the eBusiness community. The Expert Group on eInvoicing mandated by the European Commission has released its final report. The report analyzes the situation of eInvoicing in Europe and makes recommendation for improvement.

The according guidance recommendations for development of a fully interoperable environment recommend the use of existing business identifiers for addressing and routing and those solutions shall be implemented based upon CWA 16036 (section 5.5.5 of the report).

The CWA 16036 can be downloaded from the CEN FTP-server at
ftp://cenftp1.cenorm.be/PUBLIC/CWAs/Cyber_Identity/CWA_CyberIdentity.pdf (83 pages).

A short summary of CWA 16036 can be downloaded at
http://www.cyber-identity.com/documents#CWA16036 (7 pages).

The Final Report of the Expert Group on eInvoicing can be downloaded at
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/ict/files/finalreport_en.pdf

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: CEN CWA on unique identifiers: impact on eInvoicing community.

The major objective of the Work Shop is to provide support for a continuing technical platform, compared to the EEI Platform which focuses on awareness and adoption of e-invoicing.

Mission

The mission of what is called the technical “CEN e-invoice Platform” is to:

• be open to the participation of any interested party
• be neutral and be without commercial purposes
• reach stakeholder consensus on standards-related issues
• provide the appropriate interface with international and other European standards activities

Target deliverables

The overall target of Phase 3 will be “Integration of efforts in standardisation and developments” in the following technical areas:

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: CEN/ISSS eInvoicing Phase 3: a continuing technical platform.

The EEI Platform supports the European Commission and the EU E-invoicing Expert group by this online survey that you can fill out after reading the report.

Report

The report together with information on the consultation is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/2009/e-invoicing_en.htm

The Framework = Recommendations

The proposed framework is presented as a set of coherent recommendations designed to promote the uptake of e-invoicing and which requires a response by identified stakeholders.

The EEIF sets out a vision for the future European e-invoicing environment and presents a target picture as an objective for all stakeholders:

-          Within five to eight years structured e-invoicing will become the predominant invoicing method throughout Europe. All sectors and market segments will be fully engaged.

-          The legal and tax environment for the conduct of e-invoicing will have been harmonized across all Member States and trading parties will have access to clear, easy-to-use and unambiguous guidance as to achieving compliance. Electronic invoices will be treated on an equal basis with traditional paper-based invoices.

-          Trading parties will have a wide choice of solutions and services to support einvoicing, which may be conducted on a bilateral basis directly between counterparties, or through service providers of various kinds. Trading parties will be able to conduct structured e-invoicing in a highly convenient and secure manner.

-          Standards for invoicing and related processes will have been widely adopted; in particular the UN/CEFACT Cross-Industry Invoice (CII) v.2 will have been implemented by the majority of trading parties. Other standards and formats will remain in use and appropriate facilities for format conversion will be readily accessible.

-          European enterprises will have made further substantial investments in cost efficient procurement, payments and accounting processes and the supporting ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) systems and services. Such processes will require minimal manual intervention, and. ERP systems will be fully capable of generating einvoices both for direct transmission between trading parties and for service provider processing.

-          End-users and SMEs in particular will be using low-cost and user-friendly solutions and services that can be easily accessed and integrated with internal systems as well as being interoperable with external systems. The absence of IT skills and resources will not act as a roadblock to e-invoicing adoption. Users will be able to reuse investments and business habits to the maximum degree possible.

-          E-invoicing will have acted as a spur to the dematerialization and digitalization of other usiness documents and processes and to the reduction of administrative burdens on businesses. The ecosystem will be open and capable of maximum flexibility and evolution supporting both European enterprises and linkages to global supply chains. The report gives guidance for the implementation of the recommendations at Member State and EU level.

Further information:

Report of the Expert Group on e-Invoicing and information on the consultation
EU Single Market thematic website on Europa – E-Invoicing page
European Commission Directorate-General for Entreprise and Industry – E-Invoicing page

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: EU: 2009 Final Report of the Expert Group on e-Invoicing.

“The EC Expert Group on e-Invoicing has approved its final report. It will be published in within the next weeks. The work has involved a total of close to 60 experts over nearly two years and has already had a significant effect on the activities both in the market uptake, in the standardization  area and in the regulatory simplification and unification efforts by the EC and Member States.”

The readers will see that the report is recommending rapid actions by all parties involved based on the fundamental principles of technology neutrality, substance over form and furthering of competition. The focus has from the beginning been on next-to-eliminating the thresholds for SMEs to move into digitalized business communicating – increasingly demanded by their trading partners and the public sectors.

A very important step in this direction would be EU-wide implementation of the equal treatment principles (no additional demand on electronic invoices – in relation to less secure paper/fax/PDF invoices) in the new VAT-directive. WIthout this it will be more costly and much slower to move into a single market – and if for example digital signatures would stay mandatory – virtually impossible for law-abiding enterprises to exchange e-invoices bilaterally without use of service providers.

A rapid migration away from inputting information into unstructured form is needed. Also the wasteful practises of de-digitizing invoice information with print or pdf and then re-digitizing scant information left must end fast.

Both actions needed for direct productivity improvements and above all to rise to a new paradigm in all aspects of business administration. This will enable in practise totally automated accounting, reporting and VAT-payments in real time and producing new dimension of value for both customers and public authorities. We call it a Centurial Reform. Demontrating the huge benefits to SMEs should take away the last resistance to changing old habits – especially as it can be done without investments and IT-skills.

The new paradigm presents a real opportunity for EU to both improve productivity with much more than the impact of 25% cut in administrative costs by 2012 set as a goal by DG Enterprise (as such not realistic without mass digitalization) and also to continue to lead global standardization and rollouts in this fundamental area.”

Source: blog Bo Harald

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: Final report on e-invoicing approved by EC expert group.

Practically all responding stakeholders emphasised the importance of harmonised legal and regulatory requirements for electronic invoicing across the EU, in particular concerning VAT legislation. Opinions diverged however on the question how prescriptive such requirements should be. While the principle of equal treatment between electronic and paper invoices was explicitly endorsed by 7 of 13 respondents, others shared their concern that this principle without further specification would lead to differing interpretations across Member States and thereby add to fragmentation. These latter respondents highlighted the proven value of advanced electronic signatures in that
context.

Beyond the VAT aspect, some respondents specifically called for more clarity and harmonisation of archiving requirements, in particular relating to accounting legislation. Conversion of electronic invoicing documents was another point for which legal clarity should be encouraged. Two respondents supported the reference of the midterm report to the CEN/Fiscalis guidelines.

Five of 13 respondents stressed the necessity of a common and robust semantic standard for e-invoices. It was strongly recommended that the major international standard bodies should agree on a converging model. It was highlighted that especially from an SME perspective the need for manual conversions between different semantic standards should be avoided. In this context, the vision of a ‘core’ e-invoice as suggested in the midterm report was endorsed by one respondent.

In terms of infrastructure and networks, respondents endorsed the need for interoperability between different models, avoiding the emergence of ‘silo’ solutions. One response criticised the focus on 3- and 4-corner network models in the midterm report and called for inclusion of peer-to-peer solutions, especially from an SME point of view.

Several feedbacks highlighted that an EEI framework would need to be ‘SME friendly’ in terms of implied investments and ease-of-use. It was pointed out that the current e-invoicing landscape from an SME perspective was still very fragmented preventing the mass adoption of integrated e-invoicing solutions on a broader scale.

Two reactions highlighted the link between invoices and payments and called for ensuring that the EEI framework should be in line with existing payment legislation and were an integral part of a broader e-procurement process. In that context, it was highlighted that strong cooperation should be ensured with other EU e-business initiatives, such as PEPPOL and CEN BII.

Feedback on comments received on the mid-term report of the Expert-Group on e-invoicing

Mid Term Report of the European Commission Expert Group on e-Invoicing

Here some other comments:
- From BDC EDV Consulting – Austria
- Mr Jean-Yves Muylle, European Commission
- Jan Vermeulen
- Henk Wildeboer and Gerhard Heumer
- European Banking Federation
- Osservatorio 2009 – Collection of the opinions
- Mikael Svensson
- Iris Vissers
- Swedish Bankers´ Association
- Hans Ekman and Peter Björebo
- Pavol Matyasovszky
- OFS Portal, LLC
- American Petroleum Institute

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: The mid-term report of the Expert Group on e-invoicing.

In the corporate market, banks see potential for generating additional revenue by integrating e-invoicing with existing cash management, supply chain and financing services.

However, in the absence of widely accepted standards. many see their projects as long-range efforts, with an average estimated five year payback in terms of return on investment.

Swift says its potential involvement in the market was welcomed by approximately three-quarters of the banks surveyed.

The Euro Banking Association and an EU Commission Expert group are currently researching the market for e-invoicing and the potential for wider banking industry involvement.

Swift says it will await the findings of both these efforts before setting up its own Ad Hoc advisory group. This would seek to set out and test a business case for an interoperable e-invoicing platform, and identify the key functionality and the role of Swift and other parties in the provision of this capability.

Source: www.finextra.com  

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: Swift set for greater involvement in e-invoicing.

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: European Commission: webpage on e-invoicing.

I was disappointed to find that one of the conclusions implies that electronic signature is seen as a barrier for further development of the electronic invoice, and a feature that some of the members of the expert group see as superfluous feature.

In my opinion, electronic documents need ways to reinforce security to allow to tell apart fake documents from authentic documents. Ths is generally true even for informative documents with less impact on companies results.

It is also true that electronic signature is not the only way to reinforce security regarding autenticity of documents. For example, a document can be assumed to be authentic if it is retrieved from a trusted source, even if it is not completed with an electronic signature. But then we must define what are the requirements of such “trusted sources” to keep that assumption.

On the other hand, both approaches, electronic signatures and reference or trusted sources (which in turn frecuently are based in electronic signature derived schemes) need more precise definition to avoid lack of interoperability, which, in my opinion is the real barrier for electronic invoice wide deployment.

Some common authenticity mechanisms are required both for electronic invoices (those that are born electronically from the beginning) and for invoices certified scanning (invoices digital copies that become equivalente to an original, after a security mechanism has been added to a common scanning).

This approach, “certified scanning”, has been initiated in Spain with high success.

Certified scanning is a process in which an electronic signature is applied to a image file while it is scanned from a document paper. This image is stored in a secured database and the main concepts and terms of the paper document are added as metadata to the contextual fields of the image file in the database.

Once a paper document is “certifiedly scanned” the digital copy becomes equivalente to an original, and the paper source can be destroyed. The new “electronic original” can then be used for auditing purposes.

For the companies that receive thousands of invoices, “certified scanning” adoption imply benefiting from most of the advantages of the electronic invoice without dealing with the slow adoption pace that their suppliers could show.

If we want to support “certified scanning” we need a common definition of the requirements for that conversion. And they should not be very different form the requirements for “electronic invoices” .

If we accept authenticity mechanisms not based in electronic signature, they should be common for both approaches. And if electronic signature is still to be used in the future as the authenticity mechanism of the electronic invoice, the broad options in variants should be reduced and clearly defined (in my opinion, the XL definition of CAdES -TS 101 733- or XAdES -TS 101 903- should be used, including both validation and timestamping, from the signer side).

Source: ePractice

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: Future trends in electronic invoicing.

Source: Bo Harald: Blogger
 
It is evident – paper invoices will disappear from the business to business and business to government sectors and then later in practise also in the business to consumer/government to citizen area.  The 5 mega-class reasons are exceptionally powerful and clear to see. Everyone will benefit – especially the consumers and tax payers.

It is only a question of time. And how this can be very short.

In the EU Expert Group work it is becoming clear that there are two domains:

1. Mindset

Once the mindset is that there is NO future for this wasteful practise things will start to happen. And it is already – public sectors in 6 countries and many progressive enterprises have declared e-invoicing mandatory (with near or already passed deadlines). 10 more EU-countries have similar plans. As these heavy duty players defacto force invoice senders to take the step and the market has come up with the needed open standards and economical tools it is inevitable that e-invoicing will be used in all directions. Paper invoices will quickly become an oddity.

Spreading the awareness that paper invoices have NO future is clearly the top priority.

2. Removing obstacles and increasing enablers for a wider unified market

Much of the progress happening now is by necessity countryspecific. Nothing wrong with that – on the contrary – efforts towards moving with the slowest should be firmly resisted. Interoperabity is not that difficult to achieve and move to the coming common mass market standard will anyway take time.

But for those who realize how much the continuos improvement in the wellbeing of European citizens is dependent on unifying European markets it is evident that firmer action should be taken also in the crossborder dimension of this omnipresent – and thus so potential document. Economic strength is both a question of scale and today even more of moving faster into the technology-enabled innovation space.

Some argue that the share of crossborder invoices out of the total number of 30 billion is so small that there is limited needs for EU efforts. Here one should remember that the very reason for both payments and invoicing being so local and fragmented has been national regulation and infrastructure. Now we are moving towards one-bank-account-being-enough for all of the €-area. What could be the reason for it not being possible to send invoices in the same way?  With the right mindset it should not be particularly difficult. But of course it takes the right attitude:

1. the e-invoicing service  must be irresistably easy to use for the 24m SMEs (just like payments are starting to be)

2. there must not – in the base case – be any  need to invest or install software – just a template in a secure environment – this makes both the knowledge and financial threshold disappear

3. all services where authenticity and integrity is on an acceptable level must be accepted – technology-neutrality (no mandatory PKI seriously adding cost and complexity)

4. electronic documents should not be treated essentially differently from paper documents – they are anyway automatically more safely transmitted and have traceability (the opportunity to fight fraud should naturally be used by creating rules for the network)

Excellent progress is being made – but there is naturally much more to do. But it all starts with the mindset – understanding the inevitability and the reasons for why it should really be speeded up and contribute to a stronger Europe sooner rather than too late.

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: Blogpost: Paper invoices have NO future.

In June, RBS entered into a multi-year electronic invoicing agreement with Accountis, a developer of secure financial document exchange and payment systems. The white label agreement will enable RBS to provide a VAT-compliant e-invoicing service to its corporate customers.

“For our customers we see e-invoicing as a fast-track to saving time and money. In addition to eliminating paper and automating manual processes, users of the service will quickly benefit from real-time document management, faster settlements and better working capital optimisation,” says Watkinson.

Transaction-based services such as e-invoicing are becoming more important as financial institutions seek to recoup revenues lost in other areas of banking such as investment banking and payments. E-invoicing is considered a first step in automating the financial supply chain – the flavour of the month in commercial banking. George Ravich, chief marketing officer at Accountis’ parent company Fundtech, says there are “many opportunities” for banks to extend their relationships with corporates to provide more fee-based services. Fundtech promotes the concept of “just in time cash”, where banks can service their corporate clients very well by knowing their cash needs at any moment in time. Electronic invoicing is fundamental in this, he says, as it provides the information that is needed throughout the supply chain.

Watkinson says e-invoicing is a strategic addition to RBS’ existing product portfolio. He agrees with Ravich on the significance of e-invoicing: “By offering additional transaction services such as e-invoice delivery, we will gain greater visibility of our customer’s end-to-end, financial supply chain transactions” he says. “This will help us to improve our understanding of their business and strengthen our long-term relationship. It also places us in a better position to offer additional services such as supplier finance provisions and other innovative finance arrangements.”

Along with working capital management, the financial supply chain is seen as an important area where banks can add value for corporate clients. Tom Buschman, founder, chairman and chief executive of corporate standards body Twist Process Innovations, told delegates at the International Payments Summit in London earlier this year that the supply chain was “all about collections”. Companies want predictability in collections processes, he added.

His views were endorsed by a number of other speakers. Ray Zabarte, global head of supply chain finance, transaction banking at Standard Chartered Bank said supply chain finance was about “getting information sooner” and the ideal would be to get information directly, in real time, from corporate customers.

Roger Ward, financial services EMEA consultant at CSC Computer Sciences, said that in optimising the use of cash, the company looked to its banks for solutions. However, the offerings are very fragmented, as were the needs of different corporates.

Chris Pickles, head of marketing, BT Global Financial Services, said one of the main problems regarding collections was that “inefficiency makes money”. He wants to know how banks can help speed up the collections process for a large corporate such as BT, which has a wide variety of customers using different payments methods. Top of BT’s wish list is clearing and finality of payments on a T+1 basis. However, there are significant stumbling blocks such as the cheque, which slow down collections considerably.

Electronic invoicing holds promise, he says, because the earlier an invoice is delivered, the earlier a payment could be made and this was applicable all the way through BT’s customer base, down to retail clients. Banks should also work on integrating bank account data to help with reconciliations. “Consolidation and reconciliation are key in the collections process, but we are amazed at the lack of standards in the banking industry. Banks told everyone they were using ISO standards but that is not the case.”

Despite the championing of e-invoicing at conferences and elsewhere, 20 years on from its inception, less than 5% of invoices are electronic, according to the Euro Banking Association. In a study by Cap Gemini, released to coincide with the launch of the single euro payments area, the European Commission identified potential savings of €238 billion through the use of e-invoicing. There are barriers, however, including the fragmented nature of the market (there are around 300 service providers and a wide variety of models) and legal and VAT issues, along with a lack of standards have also contrived to stymie significant growth.

Bo Harald, head of the executive advisors unit at TietoEnator, says one way of accelerating the adoption of e-invoicing would be to declare that “paper invoices have no future”. Harald is chairman of the European Commission’s Expert Group on E-invoicing, which is working to develop a single standard for e-invoicing.

Implementing a bank e-invoicing service within a corporate’s accounts receivable department will improve operational efficiencies, leading to faster payments and reduced days sales outstanding (DSO). This in turn will reduce a corporate’s working capital requirements. A bank can also provide invoice-based financing services such as factoring and reverse factoring. In accounts payable departments, e-invoicing provides an opportunity to implement early payment discounting schemes, reducing overall spend.

In developing its system, RBS wanted to make the service as easy as possible, says Watkinson. “We did not want to force change on our corporates in the way their accounting and ERP systems work. The service is designed to make it easier for corporates to exchange financial trade documents with their suppliers and customers.” While many of RBS’ large corporate clients are happy to make electronic payments, they continue to invoice in paper.

Watkinson says RBS will further develop the service and is investigating the possibility of more closely integrating payments and linking with supplier finance. “In approving invoices more efficiently, customers can get closer to the benefits of the supplier finance model.”

Dave Shilling, a corporate business analyst at software developer Misys, says a major issue in commercial banking is the shrinking of margins. Banks have to look beyond traditional services to improve revenues and they are turning to treasury and transaction banking.

Misys is focusing its attentions on cash pooling and will launch its Global Cash Pooling product at Sibos in Vienna in September. He says cash pooling has been a relatively underdeveloped space in cash management. “Corporates have cash and it is all over the place. They want it in the one place so they have greater visibility and control,” he says.

There are barriers to this, however. For example, regulations can prohibit the free movement of money across borders. There are also cultural barriers – local companies are not always happy for headquarters to centralise cash away from local managers. Banks also present barriers when it comes to cash pooling, says Shilling. “Corporates like the sound of cash pooling services but their banks are reluctant to offer them. Very few banks offer cash pooling as a service and if they do, it is generally expensive and sometimes a bank will insist the corporate moves all of its accounts to be with the providing bank.”

At present, corporates currently have very little overall visibility of the financial supply chain. E-invoicing services can provide detailed status information, such as proof of delivery, acceptance, query and approval status for all documents involved in a business transaction from purchase order to invoice.

Sarah Jones, chief executive of SCF Capital, a boutique merchant bank specialising in supply chain finance, says corporates do not realise they can gain financing much earlier if they invoice electronically. Underlying business models, including terms and conditions, need to be reviewed in order to improve supply chain financing, she said.

However, corporates have to be wary of pushing suppliers to pay too fast if they are financially weak – this would raise their cost of borrowing and reduce their ability to access working capital.

Source: Bankingtech

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: Beyond business as usual.

The Expert Group on e-Invoicing started its work at the end of February 2008. The Expert Group consists of 30 specialists representing all stakeholders: consumers, SMEs, large enterprises, service providers and public authorities.

The tasks of the Expert Group are to identify business requirements and responsibilities for the execution of specific work, as well as to steer the creation – by the end of 2009 – of a European e-Invoicing Framework.

The purpose of the European e-Invoicing Framework is to establish a common conceptual structure to support the provision of e-Invoicing services in an open and interoperable manner across Europe.

The Expert Group has issued a short status report which provides stakeholders with information about the progress of the Group’s work since its formation. Until now, the Group has held several meetings and established a series of initiatives to address a key opportunity for enhancing efficiency and productivity in the digital environment. A mid-term report will be issued before the end of 2008.

Source: epractice

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: Expert Group on e-Invoicing: “There is no future for paper invoices!”.

Source: Sibos Online

This article is from E-invoicing Platform. Read the original post at: e-Invoicing in Europe.