{"id":28924,"date":"2026-07-23T11:00:25","date_gmt":"2026-07-23T11:00:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/bilnex.io\/en\/peppol-compliant-invoicing-software\/"},"modified":"2026-07-23T11:00:25","modified_gmt":"2026-07-23T11:00:25","slug":"peppol-atbilstosa-rekinu-izrakstisanas-programmatura","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/bilnex.io\/lv\/peppol-atbilstosa-rekinu-izrakstisanas-programmatura\/","title":{"rendered":"K\u0101 p\u0101rbaud\u012bt, vai j\u016bsu r\u0113\u0137inu izrakst\u012b\u0161anas programmat\u016bra atbilst Peppol standartam"},"content":{"rendered":"<article class=\"article-content-section article-content article-single\">\n<div class=\"container content-area\">\n<div class=\"text-content ce-answer\">\n<p>&#8220;Peppol-compliant&#8221; hides three different things, and software vendors often fold all three into one sales line even though they&#8217;re separate matters. The first is content compliance with the European standard EN 16931, the shared data model that sets out which fields an invoice has to carry. The second is compliance with the <a href=\"https:\/\/docs.peppol.eu\/poacc\/billing\/3.0\/rules\/ubl-peppol\/\">Peppol BIS Billing 3.0 rules<\/a> (Business Interoperability Specifications), a tighter rulebook that checks mandatory identifiers and whether the totals actually add up. The third, and the one vendors most often skip past, is real network delivery: does the software have an Access Point through which the XML file, the machine-readable structured invoice, actually reaches the buyer, and is the buyer registered on the Peppol network to receive it? A PDF invoice you email to a client proves none of the three, because it&#8217;s just a file, not a Peppol invoice.<\/p>\n<p>From <a href=\"https:\/\/docs.peppol.eu\/poacc\/billing\/3.0\/upcoming\/release-notes\/\">17 August 2026<\/a>, Peppol BIS Billing version 3.0.21 becomes mandatory, so ask your provider directly when and how that update lands in your account.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"what-should-you-check-before-trusting-a-vendor\">What should you check before trusting a vendor?<\/h2>\n<p>Before you accept that your software &#8220;does Peppol,&#8221; work through these five points:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>BIS Billing version.<\/strong> Ask for the exact number, not &#8220;we support Peppol.&#8221; Version 3.0.20 is current, but from <a href=\"https:\/\/docs.peppol.eu\/poacc\/billing\/3.0\/upcoming\/release-notes\/\">17 August 2026<\/a> version 3.0.21 becomes mandatory.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Exportable structured XML.<\/strong> The software has to be able to show you an actual XML file, not only a PDF.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Mandatory identifiers and references.<\/strong> The invoice needs both the buyer&#8217;s and the seller&#8217;s electronic address; <a href=\"https:\/\/docs.peppol.eu\/poacc\/billing\/3.0\/rules\/ubl-peppol\/\">leaving either one out is a fatal error<\/a>. It also needs the buyer&#8217;s reference or purchase order number \u2014 company name, VAT number and a total alone aren&#8217;t enough.<\/li>\n<li><strong>Validation with no fatal errors.<\/strong> Ask for a validation report, not a promise.<\/li>\n<li><strong>A documented sending and receiving path.<\/strong> Who the operator is, which Access Point the invoice actually travels through, and how the buyer receives it on the other end.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 id=\"what-proof-should-you-ask-the-vendor-for\">What proof should you ask the vendor for?<\/h2>\n<p>Send the vendor a direct checklist and hold them to it:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>A sample invoice built with real (or test-account) customer data, delivered as an XML file.<\/li>\n<li>A validation report showing that <a href=\"https:\/\/docs.peppol.eu\/poacc\/billing\/3.0\/rules\/ubl-peppol\/\">PEPPOL-EN16931-R010 and R020<\/a> (buyer and seller electronic address) and <a href=\"https:\/\/docs.peppol.eu\/poacc\/billing\/3.0\/rules\/ubl-peppol\/\">R003<\/a> (buyer reference or purchase order number) pass with no fatal error.<\/li>\n<li>The name of the Access Point that actually pushes the invoice onto the network.<\/li>\n<li>Which document types the software handles, invoice, credit note, and whether they match profile 01 (a standard commercial invoice).<\/li>\n<li>Written confirmation of when the <a href=\"https:\/\/docs.peppol.eu\/poacc\/billing\/3.0\/upcoming\/release-notes\/\">3.0.21 update<\/a> goes live. It has to be in place before 17 August 2026.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>If what comes back is &#8220;we&#8217;re Peppol-certified&#8221; with none of these five attached, that&#8217;s marketing copy, not proof. A certificate confirms the software&#8217;s general capability. It doesn&#8217;t confirm that your specific account is configured, registered, and actually able to exchange invoices with your buyer.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"how-do-you-run-a-real-test-invoice\">How do you run a real test invoice?<\/h2>\n<p>The surest way to know is to send one genuine, low-risk invoice, say \u20ac1,200, to a buyer you already know is live on Peppol. Start by finding out that buyer&#8217;s Peppol identifier, meaning their electronic address, or their approved receiving channel. Send the XML through your own software and log the delivery status: arrived, accepted, or bounced back. Then ask the buyer to confirm the invoice landed in their system as a readable document, not just that &#8220;something came through.&#8221; Only that confirms the invoice actually moves across the network, rather than merely exporting as a file on your end.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"what-s-different-in-estonia-latvia-and-lithuania\">What&#8217;s different in Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania?<\/h2>\n<p>The rules diverge across all three countries, and nowhere is Peppol the only channel available.<\/p>\n<p>In Estonia, a buyer registered as an accounting entity can require sellers to send an e-invoice from <a href=\"https:\/\/www.riigiteataja.ee\/en\/akt\/522012025001\">1 July 2025<\/a> onward. Unless the parties agree otherwise, that invoice has to meet the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.riigiteataja.ee\/en\/akt\/522012025001\">EN 16931-1 standard<\/a>. That&#8217;s a content standard, not a mandate to route the invoice through Peppol specifically. A compliant XML doesn&#8217;t automatically prove your software can also send that same invoice over the Peppol network.<\/p>\n<p>In Latvia, from <a href=\"https:\/\/www.vid.gov.lv\/lv\/biezak-uzdotie-jautajumi-katalogs\/e-rekini\">1 January 2025<\/a>, a company registered in Latvia has to issue a structured e-invoice for anything billed to a government body. From <a href=\"https:\/\/www.vid.gov.lv\/lv\/biezak-uzdotie-jautajumi-katalogs\/e-rekini\">1 January 2026<\/a>, e-invoice data for G2G, B2G and G2B transactions also has to be sent to the State Revenue Service (Valsts ie\u0146\u0113mumu dienests, SRS). The file has to be an XML that <a href=\"https:\/\/www.vid.gov.lv\/lv\/biezak-uzdotie-jautajumi-katalogs\/e-rekini\">meets both the Latvian national standard and Peppol BIS Billing 3.0<\/a>, but having a Peppol operator doesn&#8217;t by itself satisfy the SRS reporting duty if that operator has no interface for submitting data to SRS.<\/p>\n<p>In Lithuania, the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.e-tar.lt\/rs\/actualedition\/7bf8bf4035bb11ee9de9e7e0fd363afc\/IvHrbntODN\/\">SABIS rules<\/a> require, from 4 February 2025, that a supplier&#8217;s invoice to a contracting authority follow the EN 16931-1:2017 format. The invoice can go through the Peppol network, through SABIS&#8217;s own universal data interface, or be entered manually. Peppol is one route among several here, not the only one.<\/p>\n<h2 id=\"how-do-you-stay-compliant-after-go-live\">How do you stay compliant after go-live?<\/h2>\n<p>Code lists and validation rules keep changing on their own schedule. <a href=\"https:\/\/docs.peppol.eu\/poacc\/billing\/3.0\/upcoming\/release-notes\/\">Version 3.0.21<\/a> brings new electronic address schemes and tightens the specification identifier, which now has to read exactly `urn:cen.eu:en16931:2017#compliant#urn:fdc:peppol.eu:2017:poacc:billing:3.0`. If your software plans to add the new optional profile 02, where an invoice gets answered with a separate response document, that needs its own registration. A standard profile 01 registration doesn&#8217;t cover it automatically.<\/p>\n<p>Keep the following on hand so you can prove compliance whenever it&#8217;s asked for: validation reports after every version update, written confirmation from your vendor on when 3.0.21 actually went live, a sample XML paired with a real delivery log, and correspondence from a buyer confirming receipt. That way, on 17 August 2026, you&#8217;re not hoping your provider made the update in time. You&#8217;ve got paper proof that they did.<\/p>\n<h2>FAQ<\/h2>\n<h3>Millised kolm asja peidab endas m\u00f5iste \u201ePeppol-vastav\u201d?<\/h3>\n<p>Esimene on arve sisu vastavus Euroopa standardile EN 16931. Teine on vastavus Peppol BIS Billing 3.0 reeglitele. Kolmas on tegelik v\u00f5rgusaatmine: kas tarkvaral on ligip\u00e4\u00e4supunkt, mille kaudu XML-fail ostjani liigub.<\/p>\n<h3>Mida pean enne 17. augustit 2026 tarkvarapakkujalt k\u00fcsima?<\/h3>\n<p>K\u00fcsi konkreetset BIS Billing versioon (praegu 3.0.20, alates 17.08.2026 kohustuslik 3.0.21), eksporditavat XML-faili, kohustuslike identifikaatorite valideerimisraportit, ligip\u00e4\u00e4supunkti nime ning kirjalikku kinnitust 3.0.21 uuenduse rakendamise kohta.<\/p>\n<h3>Kuidas teha p\u00e4ris testarve, et veenduda Peppol-saatmises?<\/h3>\n<p>Saada v\u00e4ikese riskiga arve (nt 1200 EUR) tuttavale ostjale, kes juba kasutab Peppolit. Uuri ostja Peppol-identifikaatorit, saada XML l\u00e4bi oma tarkvara, salvesta saatmise staatus ja k\u00fcsi ostjalt kinnitust, et arve j\u00f5udis loetavana tema s\u00fcsteemi.<\/p>\n<h3>Kuidas erinevad Peppol-n\u00f5uded Eestis, L\u00e4tis ja Leedus?<\/h3>\n<p>Eestis v\u00f5ib e-arve saaja alates 01.07.2025 n\u00f5uda EN 16931-1 standardile vastavat e-arvet, kuid Peppol pole kohustuslik. L\u00e4tis on alates 01.01.2025 riigiasutustele suunatud arvetes kohustuslik struktureeritud e-arve, alates 01.01.2026 tuleb andmed saata ka SRS-ile. Leedus n\u00f5uavad SABIS reeglid alates 04.02.2025 EN 16931-1 vormingut, kuid Peppol on \u00fcks v\u00f5imalus, mitte ainus.<\/p>\n<p><script type=\"application\/ld+json\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@type\":\"FAQPage\",\"mainEntity\":[{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"Millised kolm asja peidab endas m\u00f5iste \u201ePeppol-vastav\u201d?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Esimene on arve sisu vastavus Euroopa standardile EN 16931. Teine on vastavus Peppol BIS Billing 3.0 reeglitele. Kolmas on tegelik v\u00f5rgusaatmine: kas tarkvaral on ligip\u00e4\u00e4supunkt, mille kaudu XML-fail ostjani liigub.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"Mida pean enne 17. augustit 2026 tarkvarapakkujalt k\u00fcsima?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"K\u00fcsi konkreetset BIS Billing versioon (praegu 3.0.20, alates 17.08.2026 kohustuslik 3.0.21), eksporditavat XML-faili, kohustuslike identifikaatorite valideerimisraportit, ligip\u00e4\u00e4supunkti nime ning kirjalikku kinnitust 3.0.21 uuenduse rakendamise kohta.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"Kuidas teha p\u00e4ris testarve, et veenduda Peppol-saatmises?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Saada v\u00e4ikese riskiga arve (nt 1200 EUR) tuttavale ostjale, kes juba kasutab Peppolit. Uuri ostja Peppol-identifikaatorit, saada XML l\u00e4bi oma tarkvara, salvesta saatmise staatus ja k\u00fcsi ostjalt kinnitust, et arve j\u00f5udis loetavana tema s\u00fcsteemi.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"Kuidas erinevad Peppol-n\u00f5uded Eestis, L\u00e4tis ja Leedus?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Eestis v\u00f5ib e-arve saaja alates 01.07.2025 n\u00f5uda EN 16931-1 standardile vastavat e-arvet, kuid Peppol pole kohustuslik. L\u00e4tis on alates 01.01.2025 riigiasutustele suunatud arvetes kohustuslik struktureeritud e-arve, alates 01.01.2026 tuleb andmed saata ka SRS-ile. Leedus n\u00f5uavad SABIS reeglid alates 04.02.2025 EN 16931-1 vormingut, kuid Peppol on \u00fcks v\u00f5imalus, mitte ainus.\"}}]}<\/script><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/article>\n<style>.ce-answer{max-width:760px;margin:0 auto;padding:8px 20px 48px;line-height:1.65}.ce-answer h2{margin:1.5em 0 .55em;line-height:1.3}.ce-answer h3{margin:1.1em 0 .45em}.ce-answer p{margin:0 0 1em}.ce-answer ul,.ce-answer ol{margin:0 0 1em;padding-left:1.4em}.ce-answer li{margin:.25em 0}.ce-answer table{border-collapse:collapse;width:100%;margin:0 0 1.2em}.ce-answer th,.ce-answer td{border:1px solid #ddd;padding:8px 10px;text-align:left}.ce-answer blockquote{border-left:3px solid #ccc;margin:1em 0;padding:6px 14px}.ce-answer sup a{text-decoration:none}.ce-answer-title{margin:.6em 0 .4em}<\/style>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Pieci pier\u0101d\u012bjumi, kas j\u0101pieprasa no p\u0101rdev\u0113ja l\u012bdz Peppol pieteikuma iesnieg\u0161anas termi\u0146am 2026. gada 17. august\u0101.<\/p>","protected":false},"author":8,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-28924","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/bilnex.io\/lv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/28924","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/bilnex.io\/lv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/bilnex.io\/lv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bilnex.io\/lv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/bilnex.io\/lv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=28924"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/bilnex.io\/lv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/28924\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/bilnex.io\/lv\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=28924"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}