BR-O-09Out-of-scope VAT breakdown states no VAT amount
Mutabiq checks Saudi ZATCA Phase 2 e-invoice XML before you submit it: pre-validation against published ZATCA requirements, not an approval by the authority. This page explains one rule, BR-O-09.
Five checks a month on the Free plan. The file is checked in memory and is never stored.
The message ZATCA prints
[BR-O-09]-The VAT category tax amount (BT-117) in a VAT breakdown (BG-23) where the VAT category code (BT-118) is "Not subject to VAT" shall be 0 (zero).
What Mutabiq reports
One entry for each way this rule can be reported.
Reported as
What kind of value was found — empty, not_15_digits and the like — never the value itself.
Out-of-scope VAT breakdown states no VAT amount
Reported astax_amount_missingthe VAT amount is missing
What is wrong
A cac:TaxSubtotal directly under the invoice's own cac:TaxTotal is coded O - out of scope - under the VAT tax scheme and carries no cbc:TaxAmount. EN 16931 rule BR-O-09, which ZATCA runs, requires the VAT category tax amount (BT-117) of an out-of-scope breakdown to be zero, and it tests that by comparing the element's value against nought. An absent element is an empty sequence and the comparison is false, so the amount has to be written out as zero. Note the asymmetry with the rate: the breakdown's VAT amount must be present and zero, while the line's rate must be absent entirely.
What to check in your ERP
Write cbc:TaxAmount with a value of zero in the out-of-scope breakdown, formatted to two decimals and carrying the same currencyID attribute as the other amounts. The usual cause is an export that suppresses amount elements whose value is nought, which will be affecting your zero-rated and exempt breakdowns in the same way, so fix it once at the template.
Out-of-scope VAT breakdown states a VAT amount that is not zero
Reported astax_amount_not_zerothe VAT amount is not zero
What is wrong
A cac:TaxSubtotal directly under the invoice's own cac:TaxTotal is coded O - out of scope - under the VAT tax scheme and its cbc:TaxAmount is not zero. EN 16931 rule BR-O-09, which ZATCA runs, requires an out-of-scope breakdown to carry no VAT at all. Earlier SDK releases (3.0.8) also judged such a document by BR-O-11, BR-O-12 and BR-O-13, which required every other breakdown, every invoice line and every document allowance to be out of scope as well; SDK 3.4.8 removed all three.
What to check in your ERP
Either the amount belongs to another category or the category letter is wrong. The frequent cause is a breakdown grouped by tax code where a taxed code was mapped to the letter O, so a taxed group has been folded into the out-of-scope one. Another is the document VAT total copied into each breakdown block instead of the per-category figure. Given how restrictive this category is, check first whether the supply is genuinely outside VAT rather than zero-rated or exempt.
The clause that runs
Quoted from the validation-rule stylesheet ZATCA publishes, at the file and line named below. The executed guard is what the check runs; the reported test is what it prints when it fails, and the two are not always the same.
As shipped in ZATCA SDK 3.4.8: the copy quoted here is, byte for byte, the file that release ships. The date in the file name is the name ZATCA gives the file; the rules in it are those of SDK 3.4.8.
A worked example
A synthetic document from the measured test corpus that trips this rule, shown where it differs from one that passed. Mutabiq's report names the class of the value, never the value itself.