What it means
The UBL test flags the presence of cac:AllowanceCharge/cbc:AllowanceChargeReasonCode, even if the element is empty. At document level, this is the reason code for a discount (BG-20, BT-98) or a charge (BG-21, BT-105). Both the discount and charge variants use this element.
Why it matters
NLCIUS discourages coded reasons for these discounts and charges. A written reason preserves your explanation when you omit the code; the warning does not establish how the recipient's software handles either field.
How to fix it
For each affected cac:AllowanceCharge, add or keep an accurate reason in cbc:AllowanceChargeReason, then remove cbc:AllowanceChargeReasonCode entirely. At document level, the written reason is BT-97 for a discount or BT-104 for a charge. Keep the amounts and other details unchanged, then export and recheck your file.
Once the file is corrected, check it again for free: Check an e-invoice
The rule as published
The use of an allowance reason code (cac:AllowanceCharge/cbc:AllowanceChargeReasonCode) is not recommended Where SI-UBL 2.0 / NLCIUS (invoice), SI-UBL 2.0 / NLCIUS (credit note) run it, the rule reads:
The use of a charge reason code (cac:AllowanceCharge/cbc:AllowanceChargeReasonCode) is not recommended Where this rule applies
| Rule set | Version |
|---|---|
| SI-UBL 2.0 / NLCIUS (invoice) | 2.0.3.13 |
| SI-UBL 2.0 / NLCIUS (credit note) | 2.0.3.13 |
Check your file
Drop your e-invoice to see whether BR-NL-32-1 still fails, and which other rules do.