Assessing EDI Interoperability: Analysis of Your EDI Invoices for Compliance with EN 16931
historically evolved EDI structures without uniform standardisation, based on different EDI standards such as UN/EDIFACT, EANCOM or VDA, each requiring separate assessment,
individual configurations at the level of specific supplier-customer relationships, preventing a generalised assessment,
lack of transparency as to whether all VAT-relevant mandatory data is correctly structured, requiring a targeted gap analysis,
uncertainty as to whether existing EDI processes actually meet the EN 16931 interoperability requirements.
Analysis of the existing EDI setup: We analyse your current EDI setup, taking into account the requirements of the underlying EDI standard, focusing on relevant invoice types and billing-related transactions.
Assessment of specific business relationships: Interoperability is evaluated based on individual supplier-customer relationships, allowing identification of deviations in invoicing logic and data exchange.
Gap analysis: We identify missing or incorrectly structured mandatory data and assess the interoperability of your current EDI invoice structure with EN 16931.
Concrete recommendations for action: You receive clear recommendations for supplementing and structuring your EDI data. Measures are prioritised transparently so you can address risks efficiently. The underlying documentation explicitly outlines recommendations for enriching EDI invoices where interoperability is lacking.
Documentation and audit trail: Results and recommendations are documented in a control matrix, providing a transparent and verifiable basis for internal purposes, audits and further implementation.
Optional certification: Compliance of your EDI process can also be certified in accordance with the recognised auditing standard IDW PS 860 (“IT audits outside financial statement audits”).
Sound basis for decision-making: The EDI interoperability analysis provides a reliable foundation for the future of your EDI processes. You receive a structured evaluation based on your actual data structures, formats and business relationships – in line with the KMLZ approach of individual analysis, gap analysis and documented recommendations.
Precise assessment instead of general assumptions: Analysis based on specific business relationships, invoice types and data structures
Systematic identification of required actions: Missing or incorrectly structured mandatory data is identified in a targeted manner
Transparent documentation: Results are prepared and documented in a control matrix
Alignment with EN 16931: Your EDI processes are specifically assessed in light of interoperability requirements
FAQ
Are EDI invoices still permitted from 2028 onwards?
Yes, but only if these are interoperable with EN 16931. Without interoperability, EDI invoices may only be used until the end of 2027. For transactions after 31 December 2027, only interoperable EDI invoices may be exchanged.
What does interoperability mean in EDI?
Interoperability means that VAT-relevant mandatory invoice data from the electronic format used can be further processed without any loss of information and in the same way as with an EN 16931-compliant e-invoice.
Is it sufficient that EDI works technically?
No. The decisive factor is not merely the technical exchange between sender and recipient, but whether the tax-relevant data can be processed fully, correctly and in compliance with the standard.
How does KMLZ assess EDI interoperability?
KMLZ analyses the existing EDI setup taking into account the respective EDI standard, evaluates specific business transactions and relationships, performs a gap analysis and documents the results in a control matrix.
What results do companies receive?
Companies receive a structured assessment of interoperability, identification of missing or incorrectly structured mandatory data, and clear recommendations for improving and structuring their EDI data.
Does KMLZ certify EDI processes?
Yes. KMLZ can carry out a potential certification of the EDI process, for example in accordance with IDW PS 860.
