# E_0568 — Check invoice for metering point operation with iMS towards the NB again
check invoice for metering point operation with iMS towards the NB again
| Attribute | Value |
|---|---|
| Designation | Check invoice for metering point operation with iMS towards the NB again |
| Market role | NB |
| Regulatory determination / chapter | WiM electricity |
| Section | 8.14.3: AD: Billing of metering point operation to NB |
| Check identifiers | Response: [33003](/en/schnittstellen/202604/pruefi/REMADV/PI_33003) |
| EBD version | 4.2 |
| As at | 2026-06-23 |
## Decision tree
\nDecision tree E_0568: erneut Rechnung Messtellenbetrieb mit iMS gegenüber dem NB prüfen\n\n\n\nE_0568\nerneut Rechnung\nMesstellenbetrieb mit iMS\ngegenüber dem NB prüfen\nChecking role: NB\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nno\n\n\nyes\n\nno\n\n\nyes\n\nno\n\n\nyes\n\nno\n\n\nyes\n\nno\n\n\nyes\n\nyes\n\n\nno\n\nyes\n\n\nno\n\nno\n\n\nyes\n\nyes\n\n\nno\n\nyes\n\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nno\n\n\nyes\n\nno\n\n\nyes\n\nyes\n\nno\n\nno\n\n\nyes\n\nyes\n\n\nno\n\nyes\n\nno\n\n\n1\nKonnte der MSB alle Einwände des\nRechnungsempfängers\nentkräften?\n\n\nAC1\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nDer Rechnungsempfänger lehnt die\nZahlung der Rechnung weiterhin ab,\nda der MSB nicht alle Einwände des\nRechnungsempfängers entkräften\nkonnte.\nHinweis: Der Einwand ist in der\nAntwort zu beschreiben.\n\n\n10\nErfüllt die Rechnung weitere\nAnforderungen gem. §14 Abs. 4\nUStG?\n\n\nA01\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nRechnung entspricht nicht §14 Abs. 4\nUStG\nHinweis: Die Ablehnung ist zu\nbegründen.\n\n\n20\nIst das Rechnungsdatum ≤ dem\nEingangsdatum?\n\n\nA02\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nRechnungsdatum liegt in der Zukunft\n\n\n30\nIst das Rechnungsdatum < das\nEnde des\nAbrechnungszeitraumes?\n\n\nA03\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nDas Rechnungsdatum liegt vor dem\nEnde des Abrechnungszeitraumes.\n\n\n40\nIst der Empfänger der Rechnung\nfür den genannten\nAbrechnungszeitraum der\ngenannten Marktlokation\nmindestens einen Tag\nzugeordnet?\n\n\nA04\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nDer NB lehnt die Zahlung des\nMessstellenbetriebs ab. Der NB ist\nder Marktlokation nicht einen Tag des\nAbrechnungszeitraumes zugeordnet.\n\n\n50\nIst der Empfänger der Rechnung\nfür den gesamten genannten\nAbrechnungszeitraum der\ngenannten Marktlokation\nzugeordnet?\n\n\nA05\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nDer NB lehnt die Zahlung des\nMessstellenbetriebs ab. Eine\nAblehnung der Zahlung wird durch\nden NB begründet.\nHinweis: Der NB gibt den erwarteten\nAbrechnungszeitraum an.\n\n\n60\nLiegt vom Rechnungssteller, die in\ndieser Rechnung verwendete\nRechnungsnummer, bereits vor?\n\n\nA06\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nRechnungsnummer wurde bereits\nverwendet.\n\n\n70\nIst der Abrechnungszeitraum der\nRechnung bereits in einer\nvorhergehenden, akzeptierten und\nnicht stornierten Rechnung\nenthalten?\n\n\nA07\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nDie Rechnung enthält einen bereits\nabgerechnetes Zeitintervall.\n\n\n75\nIst der Beginn des\nAbrechnungszeitraums ≥\n01.01.2024 00:00 Uhr?\n\n\nAE6\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nDer Beginn des\nAbrechnungszeitraums ist <\n01.01.2024 00:00 Uhr.\n\n\n77\nIst im gesamten\nAbrechnungszeitraum an\nmindestens einer Messlokation\nder Marktlokation ein iMS\neingebaut?\n\n\nAE8\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nIm gesamten Abrechnungszeitraum\nist an keiner Messlokation der\nMarktlokation ein iMS eingebaut.\n\n\n80\nIst der fällige Betrag ≥ Null?\n\n\nA08\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nBei der Abrechnung des MSB kann es\nnicht zu einer Rückerstattung\nkommen.\n\n\n90\nIst die Frist der Fälligkeit\nunterschritten? Hinweis: Fälligkeit\nunterschritten bedeutet:\nZahlungsziel ≤ 10 WT zum\nRechnungseingangsdatum\n\n\nA09\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nDas Zahlungsziel ist unterschritten.\n\n\n100\nLiegt für jeden Zeitpunkt des\nabgerechneten Zeitraums ein\ngültiges Preisblatt „Preisblatt\nMSB-Leistungen“ vor? Hinweis: Es\nkönnen mehrere\naufeinanderfolgende Preisblätter\nfür einen Abrechnungszeitraum\nvorliegen.\n\n\nA10\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nDem NB liegt kein gültiges Preisblatt\nMSB-Leistungen vor.\n\n\n115\nIst der MSB für den genannten\nAbrechnungszeitraum der\ngenannten Marktlokation\nmindestens einen Tag\nzugeordnet?\n\n\nAE9\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nDer MSB ist der Marktlokation nicht\neinen Tag des\nAbrechnungszeitraumes zugeordnet.\n\n\n125\nIst der MSB für den gesamten\ngenannten Abrechnungszeitraum\nder genannten Marktlokation\nzugeordnet?\n\n\nAF0\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nDer MSB ist im gesamten\nAbrechnungszeitraum nicht der\nMarktlokation zugeordnet.\n\n\n130\nIst die Abrechnung des\nMessstellenbetriebs zwischen NB\nund MSB für diese Marktlokation\nfür den abgerechneten Zeitraum\nvorgegeben? Hinweis: Die\nAbrechnung für diesen Zeitraum\nist dann vorgegeben, wenn für\njeden Zeitpunkt dieses Zeitraums\nmindestens eine Artikel-ID in den\nStammdaten ausgetauscht wurde.\n\n\nA13\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nDie Abrechnung des\nMessstellenbetriebs ist nicht mit\ndem NB für diese Marktlokation für\nden abgerechneten Zeitraum\nvorgegeben.\n\n\n140\nIst ein zuvor nicht spezifizierter\nFehler im Kopfteil der Rechnung\naufgetreten?\n\n\nA90\nCluster: Rejection at header level\nSonstiger Fehler auf Kopfebene.\nHinweis: Das identifizierte Problem\nist in der Antwort zu\nbeschreiben/benennen.\nNutzungsmöglichkeit Ende:\n01.10.2026 00:00 Uhr\n\n\n301\nWurde die in der\nRechnungsposition genutzte\nArtikel-ID für den gesamten\nPositionszeitraum dieser Position\nin den Stammdaten\nausgetauscht?\n\n\nAF1\nCluster: Rejection at line item level\nDie in der angegebenen Position\nverwendete Artikel-ID hätte nicht für\nden gesamten Positionszeitraum\naufgeführt werden dürfen.\nHinweis: Der Netzbetreiber gibt\ninnerhalb des Positionszeitraums den\nZeitraum an, in dem diese Artikel-ID\nnicht gültig ist.\ncontinue with step 302\n\n\n302\nDarf aus Sicht des NB die\nArtikel-ID in dieser Rechnung\nangegeben werden, da diese aus\nSicht des NB für diese\nMarktlokation passt? Hinweis:\nGgf. ist zu prüfen: der Mittelwert\ndes Jahresstromverbrauchs der\nvorherigen drei Kalenderjahre die\nJahresverbrauchsprognose für die\nMarktlokation die installierte\nLeistung\n\n\nAF2\nCluster: Rejection at line item level\nDiese Artikel-ID ist für diesen\nRechnungstyp in dem besagten\nPositionszeitraum nicht zulässig.\ncontinue with step 303\n\n\n303\nIst der Zeitraum der\nRechnungsposition vollständig im\nGültigkeitszeitraum eines oder\nmehrerer Preisblätter enthalten?\n\n\nA27\nCluster: Rejection at line item level\nDer Zeitraum der Rechnungsposition\nist nicht vollständig im\nGültigkeitszeitraum eines oder\nmehrerer Preisblätter enthalten.\ncontinue with step 310\n\n\n304\nEntspricht der Preis in der\nRechnungsposition dem Preis aus\ndem Preisblatt oder den\nPreisblättern, die im Zeitraum der\nRechnungsposition gültig sind?\n\n\nA28\nCluster: Rejection at line item level\nDer Preis in der Rechnungsposition\nentspricht nicht dem Preis aus dem\nPreisblatt bzw. den Preisblättern des\nMSB.\ncontinue with step 310\n\n\n310\nWird für die Rechnungsposition\nder für diesen Zeitraum korrekte\ngültige Umsatzsteuersatz\nangegeben?\n\n\nA15\nCluster: Rejection at line item level\nDer gültige Umsatzsteuersatz für die\nRechnungsposition für diesen\nZeitraum wurde nicht korrekt\nangegeben.\ncontinue with step 330\n\n\n330\nIst das Enddatum der\nRechnungsposition > das\nEnddatum des\nAbrechnungszeitraums?\n\n\nA17\nCluster: Rejection at line item level\nDas Enddatum der\nRechnungsposition liegt nach dem\nEnddatum des\nAbrechnungszeitraums.\ncontinue with step 340\n\n\n340\nIst das Beginndatum der\nRechnungsposition < das\nBeginndatum des\nAbrechnungszeitraums?\n\n\nA18\nCluster: Rejection at line item level\nDas Beginndatum der\nRechnungsposition liegt vor dem\nBeginndatum des\nAbrechnungszeitraums.\ncontinue with step 345\n\n\n345\nWird mit der Rechnungsposition\nder erwartete\nAbrechnungszeitraum\nabgerechnet?\n\n\nA25\nCluster: Rejection at line item level\nUnerwarteter Abrechnungszeitraum\nwird abgerechnet.\nHinweis: Der NB gibt den erwarteten\nAbrechnungszeitraum an.\ncontinue with step 360\n\n\n360\nLiegt ein Rechenfehler in der\nRechnungsposition vor?\n\n\nA20\nCluster: Rejection at line item level\nRechenfehler liegt vor\ncontinue with step 370\n\n\n370\nIst in der Rechnungsposition ein\nzuvor nicht spezifizierter Fehler\naufgetreten?\n\n\nA99\nCluster: Rejection at line item level\nSonstiger Fehler auf Positionsebene.\nHinweis: Das identifizierte Problem\nist in der Antwort zu\nbeschreiben/benennen.\nNutzungsmöglichkeit Ende:\n01.10.2026 00:00 Uhr\ncontinue with step 380\n\n\n380\nSind noch weitere\nRechnungspositionen zu prüfen?\n\n\n390\nIst in mindestens einer\nRechnungspositionen ein Fehler\naufgetreten?\n\nHinweis: Alle erkannten\nAntwortcodes aus der\nPositionsebene sind für jeden\nfehlerhaft identifizierten Positionsteil\nunter Angabe der Positionsnummer\nzu übermitteln.\n\n\n501\nFehlen noch Positionen, die über\ndie ausgetauschten Artikel-ID\nvereinbart sind und somit in der\nRechnung erwartet werden?\n\n\nAE7\nCluster: Rejection at summary level\nErwartete Position nicht vorhanden\nHinweis: Die nicht in der Rechnung\nenthaltenen ausgetauschten\nArtikel-ID sind zu nennen.\n\n\n510\nEntspricht für den genannten\nSteuersatz die\nBesteuerungsgrundlage der\nSummen der Einzelpositionen\ndieser Rechnung mit diesem\nSteuersatz?\n\n\nA22\nCluster: Rejection at summary level\nGenannte Besteuerungsgrundlage\npasst nicht zu der Summe der\nEinzelpositionen des Steuersatzes.\nHinweis: Es ist der Steuersatz (aus\nDE5278) und die Steuerkategorie\n(aus DE5305) des SG52 TAX zu\nnennen.\ncontinue with step 520\n\n\n520\nEntspricht für diesen Steuersatz\ndie Angabe des Steuerbetrages\nder Summe aller\nRechnungspositionen (Netto)\ndieser Rechnung, denen dieser\nSteuersatz zugeordnet ist,\nmultipliziert mit diesem\nSteuersatz?\n\n\nA23\nCluster: Rejection at summary level\nSumme aller Rechnungspositionen\n(Netto) dieser Rechnung, denen\ndieser Steuersatz zugeordnet ist,\nmultipliziert mit diesem Steuersatz\nentspricht nicht der Angabe des\nSteuerbetrages für diesen\nSteuersatz.\nHinweis: Es ist der Steuersatz (aus\nDE5278) und die Steuerkategorie\n(aus DE5305) des SG52 TAX zu\nnennen.\ncontinue with step 530\n\n\n530\nSind noch weitere Steuersätze zu\nprüfen?\n\n\n540\nEntspricht der Rechnungsbetrag\nder Summe aller\nRechnungspositionen\n(Besteuerungsgrundlage) zzgl.\ndem jeweiligen Steuerbetrag?\n\n\nA24\nCluster: Rejection at summary level\nRechnungsbetrag\n(Besteuerungsgrundlage inklusive\nSteuerbetrag) der Summe ist nicht\nkorrekt.\ncontinue with step 550\n\n\n550\nIst ein zuvor nicht spezifizierter\nFehler im Summenteil\naufgetreten?\n\n\nA96\nCluster: Rejection at summary level\nSonstiges\nHinweis: Das identifizierte Problem\nist in der Antwort zu\nbeschreiben/benennen.\nNutzungsmöglichkeit Ende:\n01.10.2026 00:00 Uhr\ncontinue with step 560\n\n\n560\nIst mindestens ein Fehler in der\nSummenebene aufgetreten?\n\nCluster: Rejection at summary level\nHinweis: Alle erkannten\nAntwortcodes aus der Summenebene\nsind zu übermitteln.\n\nCluster: Consent\nZahlung der Rechnung avisieren und\nim Zahlungslauf berücksichtigen.\n"} kapitel={"WiM Strom · 8.14.3: AD: Abrechnung Messstellenbetrieb gegenüber dem NB"} name={"erneut Rechnung Messtellenbetrieb mit iMS gegenüber dem NB prüfen"} bpmnFv="202604" bpmnCode="E_0568">
| Step | Check | Result | Code | Note |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Was the MSB able to refute all objections of the invoice recipient? | no | AC1 | Cluster: Rejection at header level The invoice recipient continues to refuse payment of the invoice because the MSB was unable to refute all objections of the invoice recipient. Note: The objection must be described in the response. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 10 | — |
| 10 | Does the invoice meet further requirements pursuant to §14 Abs. 4 UStG? | no | A01 | Cluster: Rejection at header level Invoice does not comply with §14 Abs. 4 UStG Note: The rejection must be substantiated. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 20 | — |
| 20 | Is the invoice date ≤ the receipt date? | no | A02 | Cluster: Rejection at header level Invoice date is in the future |
| — | — | yes | → Step 30 | — |
| 30 | Is the invoice date < the end of the billing period? | yes | A03 | Cluster: Rejection at header level The invoice date is before the end of the billing period. |
| — | — | no | → Step 40 | — |
| 40 | Is the recipient of the invoice assigned to the stated market location for at least one day of the stated billing period? | no | A04 | Cluster: Rejection at header level The NB refuses payment for the metering point operation. The NB is not assigned to the market location for a single day of the billing period. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 50 | — |
| 50 | Is the recipient of the invoice assigned to the stated market location for the entire stated billing period? | no | A05 | Cluster: Rejection at header level The NB refuses payment for the metering point operation. A rejection of the payment is substantiated by the NB. Note: The NB states the expected billing period. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 60 | — |
| 60 | Does the invoice number used in this invoice already exist from the invoice issuer? | yes | A06 | Cluster: Rejection at header level Invoice number has already been used. |
| — | — | no | → Step 70 | — |
| 70 | Is the billing period of the invoice already contained in a previous, accepted and not cancelled invoice? | yes | A07 | Cluster: Rejection at header level The invoice contains a time interval already billed. |
| — | — | no | → Step 75 | — |
| 75 | Is the start of the billing period ≥ 01.01.2024 00:00? | no | AE6 | Cluster: Rejection at header level The start of the billing period is < 01.01.2024 00:00. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 77 | — |
| 77 | Is a iMS installed at at least one metering location of the market location throughout the entire billing period? | no | AE8 | Cluster: Rejection at header level Throughout the entire billing period, no iMS is installed at any metering location of the market location. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 80 | — |
| 80 | Is the amount due ≥ zero? | no | A08 | Cluster: Rejection at header level No refund can arise in the billing of the MSB. |
| — | — | yes | → step 90 | — |
| 90 | Is the due date deadline undercut? Note: undercut due date means: payment term ≤ 10 WT from the invoice receipt date | yes | A09 | Cluster: Rejection at header level The payment term has been undercut. |
| — | — | no | → Step 100 | — |
| 100 | Is a valid price sheet “price sheet MSB services” available for every point in time of the billed time period? Note: Several consecutive price sheets may exist for one billing period. | no | A10 | Cluster: Rejection at header level The NB does not have a valid price sheet for MSB services. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 115 | — |
| 115 | Is the MSB assigned to the specified market location for at least one day of the specified billing period? | no | AE9 | Cluster: Rejection at header level The MSB is not assigned to the market location for a single day of the billing period. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 125 | — |
| 125 | Is the MSB assigned to the specified market location for the entire specified billing period? | no | AF0 | Cluster: Rejection at header level The MSB is not assigned to the market location for the entire billing period. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 130 | — |
| 130 | Is the billing of metering point operation between NB and MSB specified for this market location for the billed time period? Note: Billing is specified for this time period if at least one article ID has been exchanged in the master data for every point in time of this time period. | no | A13 | Cluster: Rejection at header level Billing of the metering point operation is not stipulated with the NB for this market location for the billed period. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 140 | — |
| 140 | Has a previously unspecified error occurred in the header section of the invoice? | yes | A90 | Cluster: Rejection at header level Other error at header level. Note: The identified problem must be described/named in the response. End of usability: 01.10.2026 00:00 |
| — | — | no | → Step 301 | — |
| from 301 | *Starting with the first line item, the following checks are performed for each line item. If the first error occurs in a line item, the further checks are to be performed as well, as far as this is still possible. All errors found in the detail section are to be reported, naming the respective line item.* | — | — | — |
| 301 | Was the article ID used in the invoice line item exchanged in the master data for the entire line item period of this line item? | no | AF1 | Cluster: Rejection at line item level The article ID used in the specified line item should not have been listed for the entire line item period. Note: Within the line item period the grid operator states the time period in which this article ID is not valid. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 302 | — |
| 302 | From the point of view of the NB, may the article ID be stated in this invoice because, from the point of view of the NB, it fits this market location? Note: Where applicable, the following must be checked: the average annual electricity consumption of the previous three calendar years the annual consumption forecast for the market location the installed capacity | no | AF2 | Cluster: Rejection at line item level This article ID is not permitted for this invoice type in the specified line item period. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 303 | — |
| 303 | Is the time period of the invoice line item fully contained in the validity period of one or more price sheets? | no | A27 | Cluster: Rejection at line item level The time period of the invoice line item is not fully contained in the validity period of one or more price sheets. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 304 | — |
| 304 | Does the price in the invoice line item match the price from the price sheet or price sheets valid in the time period of the invoice line item? | no | A28 | Cluster: Rejection at line item level The price in the invoice line item does not correspond to the price from the price sheet or price sheets of the MSB. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 310 | — |
| 310 | Is the correct VAT rate valid for this time period stated for the invoice line item? | no | A15 | Cluster: Rejection at line item level The valid VAT rate for the invoice line item for this time period was not stated correctly. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 330 | — |
| 330 | Is the end date of the invoice line item > the end date of the billing period? | yes | A17 | Cluster: Rejection at line item level The end date of the invoice line item is after the end date of the billing period. |
| — | — | no | → Step 340 | — |
| 340 | Is the start date of the invoice line item < the start date of the billing period? | yes | A18 | Cluster: Rejection at line item level The start date of the invoice line item is before the start date of the billing period. |
| — | — | no | → Step 345 | — |
| 345 | Does the invoice line item bill the expected billing period? | no | A25 | Cluster: Rejection at line item level An unexpected billing period is billed. Note: The NB states the expected billing period. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 360 | — |
| 360 | Is there a calculation error in the invoice line item? | yes | A20 | Cluster: Rejection at line item level There is a calculation error |
| — | — | no | → Step 370 | — |
| 370 | Has a previously unspecified error occurred in the invoice line item? | yes | A99 | Cluster: Rejection at line item level Other error at line item level. Note: The identified problem must be described/named in the response. End of usability: 01.10.2026 00:00 |
| — | — | no | → Step 380 | — |
| 380 | Are there further invoice line items to be checked? | yes | → Step 301 | — |
| — | — | no | → Step 390 | — |
| 390 | Has an error occurred in at least one invoice line item? | yes | End | Note: All response codes detected at line item level must be transmitted for each detail section identified as faulty, stating the line item number. |
| — | — | no | → Step 501 | The check of the EBD is continued in the summary section. |
| from 501 | *The following check takes place at the summary level of the EBD, although it is a summary check of the line item level: since no line item number can be given when the line item number from the confirmed offer is missing, the REMADV structure for transmitting errors at summary level must be used to transmit the error.* | — | — | — |
| 501 | Are line items still missing that are agreed via the exchanged article IDs and are therefore expected in the invoice? | yes | AE7 | Cluster: Rejection at summary level Expected line item not present Note: The exchanged article IDs not contained in the invoice must be named. |
| — | — | no | → Step 510 | — |
| 510 | For the stated tax rate, does the taxable amount match the sums of the individual line items of this invoice with this tax rate? | no | A22 | Cluster: Rejection at summary level The taxable amount named does not match the sum of the individual line items of the tax rate. Note: The tax rate (from DE5278) and the control category (from DE5305) of the SG52 TAX must be named. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 520 | — |
| 520 | For this tax rate, does the stated tax amount match the sum of all invoice line items (net) of this invoice to which this tax rate is assigned, multiplied by this tax rate? | no | A23 | Cluster: Rejection at summary level The sum of all invoice line items (net) of this invoice to which this tax rate is assigned, multiplied by this tax rate, does not correspond to the tax amount stated for this tax rate. Note: The tax rate (from DE5278) and the control category (from DE5305) of the SG52 TAX must be named. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 530 | — |
| 530 | Are there further tax rates to be checked? | yes | → Step 510 | — |
| — | — | no | → Step 540 | — |
| 540 | Does the invoice amount match the sum of all invoice line items (taxable amount) plus the respective tax amount? | no | A24 | Cluster: Rejection at summary level The invoice amount (taxable amount including tax amount) of the total is not correct. |
| — | — | yes | → Step 550 | — |
| 550 | Has a previously unspecified error occurred in the summary section? | yes | A96 | Cluster: Rejection at summary level Other Note: The identified problem must be described/named in the response. End of usability: 01.10.2026 00:00 |
| — | — | no | → Step 560 | — |
| 560 | Has at least one error occurred in the summary level? | yes | End | Cluster: Rejection at summary level Note: All response codes identified at summary level must be transmitted. |
| — | — | no | End | Cluster: Consent Announce payment of the invoice and take it into account in the payment run. |
## Result codes
| Result code | Cluster | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| `AC1` | Rejection at header level | The invoice recipient continues to refuse payment of the invoice because the MSB was unable to refute all of the invoice recipient's objections. Note: the objection is to be described in the response. |
| `A01` | Rejection at header level | Invoice does not comply with §14 Abs. 4 UStG Note: The rejection must be justified. |
| `A02` | Rejection at header level | Invoice date is in the future |
| `A03` | Rejection at header level | The invoice date is before the end of the billing period. |
| `A04` | Rejection at header level | The NB rejects payment for metering point operation. The NB is not assigned to the market location for a single day of the billing period. |
| `A05` | Rejection at header level | The NB rejects payment for metering point operation. A rejection of the payment is justified by the NB. Note: The NB states the expected billing period. |
| `A06` | Rejection at header level | Invoice number has already been used. |
| `A07` | Rejection at header level | The invoice contains a time interval that has already been billed. |
| `AE6` | Rejection at header level | The start of the billing period is < 01.01.2024 00:00. |
| `AE8` | Rejection at header level | Throughout the entire billing period, no iMS is installed at any metering location of the market location. |
| `A08` | Rejection at header level | The billing of the MSB cannot result in a refund. |
| `A09` | Rejection at header level | The payment term is undercut. |
| `A10` | Rejection at header level | The NB does not have a valid price sheet for MSB services. |
| `AE9` | Rejection at header level | The MSB is not assigned to the market location for a single day of the billing period. |
| `AF0` | Rejection at header level | The MSB is not assigned to the market location during the entire billing period. |
| `A13` | Rejection at header level | The billing of metering point operation is not specified with the NB for this market location for the billed time period. |
| `A90` | Rejection at header level | Other error at header level. Note: The identified problem is to be described/named in the response. End of usability: 01.10.2026 00:00 |
| `AF1` | Rejection at line item level | The article ID used in the stated item should not have been listed for the entire item period. Note: Within the item period, the grid operator states the time period in which this article ID is not valid. |
| `AF2` | Rejection at line item level | This article ID is not permitted for this invoice type in the item period concerned. |
| `A27` | Rejection at line item level | The time period of the invoice line item is not fully contained in the validity period of one or more price sheets. |
| `A28` | Rejection at line item level | The price in the invoice line item does not match the price from the price sheet or price sheets of the MSB. |
| `A15` | Rejection at line item level | The valid VAT rate for the invoice line item for this time period was not specified correctly. |
| `A17` | Rejection at line item level | The end date of the invoice line item is after the end date of the billing period. |
| `A18` | Rejection at line item level | The start date of the invoice line item is before the start date of the billing period. |
| `A25` | Rejection at line item level | An unexpected billing period is being billed. Note: The NB states the expected billing period. |
| `A20` | Rejection at line item level | There is a calculation error |
| `A99` | Rejection at line item level | Other error at line item level. Note: The identified problem is to be described/named in the response. End of usability: 01.10.2026 00:00 |
| `AE7` | Rejection at summary level | Expected line item not present Note: The exchanged article IDs not included in the invoice must be stated. |
| `A22` | Rejection at summary level | Stated taxable amount does not match the sum of the individual items of the tax rate. Note: The tax rate (from DE5278) and the control category (from DE5305) of the SG52 TAX must be stated. |
| `A23` | Rejection at summary level | The total of all invoice line items (net) of this invoice to which this tax rate is assigned, multiplied by this tax rate, does not match the stated tax amount for this tax rate. Note: The tax rate (from DE5278) and the control category (from DE5305) of the SG52 TAX are to be stated. |
| `A24` | Rejection at summary level | Invoice amount (taxable amount including tax amount) of the total is not correct. |
| `A96` | Rejection at summary level | Other Note: The identified problem is to be described/named in the response. End of usability: 01.10.2026 00:00 |
*Role of the numbers: »response« are the check identifiers that list this tree in the ebd_code column of the check identifier table (knowledge-collection · FV 202604); »checked« is the difference set to it from the return path of the process steps.*
:::warning{title="Deviation from the generated process"}
The following result codes are in the decision tree but are **not contained in the generated BPMN**: `AF1`, `AF2`, `A27`, `A28`, `A15`, `A17`, `A18`, `A25`, `A20`, `A99`, `AE7`, `A22`, `A23`, `A24`, `A96`.
Checked against `E_0568.bpmn`. This is a known behavior of the process generation (review of 06.07.2026: pass-through result codes are discarded). The note is here so that the deviation is visible and does not surface only in operation.
:::