Just to specify my position:
Although Technically we could make the TaxScheme under Tax Category "optional" I think there is no need for that.This is more of a "Mapping" discussion than a XML structure discussion.
The X12 code list around Tax Type Code has a good fit with the cbc:TaxTypeCode inside of the cac:TaxScheme. It is a "high level code" to describe the various "kinds" of taxes that you might encounter in the US context.
The actuals details for the Tax that is charged can be put inside the cac:TaxCategory.
If you would sell something on this address in the US .. than according to this map :https://taxmaps.state.mn.us/salestax/
.. this would be the tax details:
| Address Returned: 90 Hennepin Ave, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 55401 |
Local General Sales & Use Tax Rates
| State Tax: |
6.875% |
| County Tax: |
0.15%, Hennepin County |
| City Tax: |
0.5%, Minneapolis City |
| Other Tax: |
0.5%, Hennepin County Transit |
| Total Sales Tax Rate: 8.025% |
So based on the X12 code list .. that would be 4 tax category/taxscheme elements
ST (State Sales Tax)
CP (County Sales Tax)
CS (City Sales Tax)
AZ (Transit Tax) (or OH "Other Taxes")
the Percentage and the description of the tax would be in the TaxCategory element . the TaxScheme would contain the X12 TaxTypeCodes (or you can put them in the ID element) .. and you can use the cac:JurisdictionRegionAddress to specify the "location" that makes that tax applicable. (in a high level "address" element with for example only Country and State ... or Country, State en County .. or even down the actual address level.
You can even opt to not do the breakdown in the invoice .. and use the generic "LS" (or even the generic TX) and the sum of all the Sales Tax Rates (8.025% in this case)
But based on all this .. I see no need to change the TaxScheme to optional .. but willing to work with the BPC team for further discussion on this subject
Bug
Major
Just to specify my position:
Although Technically we could make the TaxScheme under Tax Category "optional" I think there is no need for that.This is more of a "Mapping" discussion than a XML structure discussion.
The X12 code list around Tax Type Code has a good fit with the cbc:TaxTypeCode inside of the cac:TaxScheme. It is a "high level code" to describe the various "kinds" of taxes that you might encounter in the US context.
The actuals details for the Tax that is charged can be put inside the cac:TaxCategory.
If you would sell something on this address in the US .. than according to this map :https://taxmaps.state.mn.us/salestax/
.. this would be the tax details:
Local General Sales & Use Tax Rates
So based on the X12 code list .. that would be 4 tax category/taxscheme elements
ST (State Sales Tax)
CP (County Sales Tax)
CS (City Sales Tax)
AZ (Transit Tax) (or OH "Other Taxes")
the Percentage and the description of the tax would be in the TaxCategory element . the TaxScheme would contain the X12 TaxTypeCodes (or you can put them in the ID element) .. and you can use the cac:JurisdictionRegionAddress to specify the "location" that makes that tax applicable. (in a high level "address" element with for example only Country and State ... or Country, State en County .. or even down the actual address level.
You can even opt to not do the breakdown in the invoice .. and use the generic "LS" (or even the generic TX) and the sum of all the Sales Tax Rates (8.025% in this case)
But based on all this .. I see no need to change the TaxScheme to optional .. but willing to work with the BPC team for further discussion on this subject