Skip to Content

From my experience, there were different demands for Local, Government and Export Sales. The obligation for using e-Factura instead of paper version will also vary according to the Sales channel. Contributors were nominated by AFIP for the new fiscal document issuing according to their market role and segment. A nomination like this can be sent to the company less than 3 months earlier than the deadline. Companies receive a formal “letter” from AFIP, indicating they are a nominated contributor and which RG (Resolución General) is the least mandatory. If the company has no effort guided for being compliant so far, it may not be able to fit this deadline in case it’s got a large integration effort.

Concerning the RGs, whenever a new feature, a correction or enhancement is implemented by AFIP, they release a new RG, usually in relation to previous ones. For example: the RG 2969 is the latest one related to CAE, following the RG 2626 for the same subject.

Companies have to keep up with the RGs release pace, and check if they are affected by the RG scope.

In terms of communication method, you can use the manual connection with AFIP – single upload, manual batch communication (with the need of a 15-day report), webservices method with only the header info (with the need of a 15-day report) and full-webservice where automatic communication with AFIP takes place whenever a new e-Factura is issued.

This latest one is still in progress its development by SAP. Pilot customers have tested and given their feedback. SAP needs now some adjustments and soon it will provide a Standard solution for this communication method.

One important characteristic of Argentina e-Factura is that, one invoice cannot be issued before the previous one has been sent and received back (approved or not). As AFIP does not permit a gap in the invoice numbers, developments in SAP must be done in order to only definitely assign the ODN Number to the billing document, after the CAE number was given by AFIP. SAP will provide all the necessary standard developments through Notes so that, customers can issue invoices with no other Z-development.

But, customers may need extra developments. This is due to the fact that, although this Business scenario regards Compliance, customers may have third parties within the communication landscape with AFIP. Example: a customer may use a third party for its electronic receivables in the banking system. So, it would be convenient having the same partner controlling the invoices issuing.

Such third party participation, during the authentication with the Government, is not allowed in the Brazil’s Nf-e system.

See you all next blogs…!

To report this post you need to login first.

Be the first to leave a comment

You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.

Leave a Reply