What causes the BR-CO-23 error?

BR-CO-23 occurs when an invoice line has an allowance (discount) in BG-27 but neither the reason text (BT-139) nor reason code (BT-140) is provided. EN16931 requires at least one of these fields.

How do I fix BR-CO-23?

Add either an AllowanceChargeReasonCode (BT-140) like 95 for Discount, or an AllowanceChargeReason (BT-139) text description, or both. Invoice Navigator can auto-fix this by adding the default code 95.

Is BR-CO-23 a critical error?

Yes, BR-CO-23 is an error that will cause invoice rejection. EN16931 requires every line allowance to have either a reason code or reason text to explain the discount.

Can BR-CO-23 be automatically fixed?

Yes. Invoice Navigator can automatically add the default reason code 95 (Discount) to line allowances missing a reason. This is a safe, non-financial fix that simply adds explanatory metadata.

Error codes · EN 16931

BR-CO-23In your invoicing software

Invoice Line Allowance Reason Required

This is the rejection, word for word: „[BR-CO-23] Each Invoice line allowance (BG-27) shall contain an Invoice line allowance reason (BT-139) or an Invoice line allowance reason code (BT-140), or both.“

XPath: /Invoice/cac:InvoiceLine/cac:AllowanceCharge[cbc:ChargeIndicator='false']/cbc:AllowanceChargeReason or cbc:AllowanceChargeReasonCode

What to have readyNothing. The file has to be re-exported from your invoicing software; we check it again afterwards.

What we doInvoice Navigator automatically fixes this issue by correcting the `cac:AllowanceCharge` element in your Invoice (BR-CO-23).

Choose the rejected invoiceor drop it here

XRechnung XML or ZUGFeRD PDF. Checking is free · corrected file €1.90 · the first every 30 days is free · no sign-up.

If you enter it yourself in your invoicing software

Before

<cac:InvoiceLine>
  <cac:AllowanceCharge>INVALID_CODE</cac:AllowanceCharge>
</cac:InvoiceLine>

After

<cac:InvoiceLine>
  <cac:AllowanceCharge>VALID_CODE</cac:AllowanceCharge>
</cac:InvoiceLine>

Element order is part of the rule: if the element sits in the wrong place, the validator rejects with BR-CO-23.

What the finding looks likeExample

FindingStructure invalid · BR-CO-23

Location//cac:InvoiceLine/cac:AllowanceCharge[cbc:ChargeIndicator='false' and not(cbc:AllowanceChargeReason) and not(cbc:AllowanceChargeReasonCode)]/cbc:AllowanceChargeReasonCode

From youA re-exported file

ThenRe-export

ProofSHA-256 and /verify link after the check

Often appears together with

BR-CO-24Invoice Line Charge Reason Required