Troubleshoot the VAT Declaration in D365 for Finance

Users of the VAT declarations (both Excel and XML) in the financial department are often shocked by error messages of this kind:

Evaluating binding of format component Excel/Sheet1/I_Turnover/Box_200
Fehler beim Bewerten des Ausdrucks für Pfad ‚Boxes/Box81_Base‘

The exact error message differs by country: the first is produced by the “VAT Declaration Excel (CH)” / “VAT Declaration XML (CH)” for Switzerland, the second one is from Germany. In reality, the error has nothing to do with the “Boxes” i.e. the Excel layout but a clear sign that the Application specific parameters / Setup fail to classify a specific VAT use case. Namely, a VAT code was used in a module / situation not imagined by the FiCo functional consultant who configured the VAT Declaration.

Follow the below algorithm to troubleshoot the VAT Declaration and add additional cases into Application specific parameters:

1. Use division by dichotomy to find the exact date

… when it happened. Most of the European VAT declarations are returned monthly, and it takes on average 7 attempts to narrow down the date. Locate the VAT declaration in the Organisation administration > Workspaces > Electronic reporting, Reporting configurations tree under the Tax declaration model node. Start the report this the Run button above, variate the dates. For example:

01.05.2024 – 15.05.2024: no error

16.05.2024 – 23.05.2024: error

16.05.2024 – 19.05.2024: no error

20.05.2024 – 21.05.2024: error

20.05.2024: no error

21.05.2024: bingo!

2. Find uncommon combinations of VAT code and Direction

Having spotted the date, filter the tax transactions by date and the VAT settlement period using the query Tax > Inquiries and reports > VAT inquiries > Posted VAT (hereafter I refer to the en-gb language of the D365 UI). Export the results into Excel and build a pivot table by VAT code and direction, counting the vouchers (= business cases). Start looking for outliers. Pay attention to the low count i.e. seldom use cases. Often the mistake is obvious:

VAT code	Duty-free purchase	Duty-free sale	Use tax	VAT payable	VAT receivable
euSt	1	7	1
exSt		7
FoodR				15
R				2	5
ServSt				11
St				39

The euSt code (intra-community acquisition with the standard tax rate of 19%) is not supposed to appear in the context of a VAT free purchase, but someone managed to make such a transaction in a general ledger journal when entering a EU supplier invoice.

You cannot fix the tax transactions, but the Application specific parameters may be amended to account for this irregularity. Open this list of Conditions and filter it by the tax code in question to validate the suspicion:

You have to add a new line with this combination of the Tax code and the Transaction classifier to capture this exceptional case. Namely, a pair euSt–PurchaseExempt must be added. Try the VAT declaration one more time to confirm that the problem is gone.

3. Use a fallback condition

Sometimes it is not that easy to spot an unusual pattern. The occurrences are too many even on a single day. Your next attempt may be using the placeholders *Not blank* for the Tax code and *Not blank* for the Transaction classifier. These lines must be placed at the very bottom of the list of conditions (use Move down if needed).

Leverage fallback lines to redirect the total tax amount of the questionable nature into a VAT declaration cell which usually stays empty, for example the cell 61-InputTaxCorrection on the German “UVA” tax declaration. This will give you an idea how much is missing in other cells, and what the tax origin amount may be.

Do not keep the placeholders in your PROD setup for long: by doing so, you are resigning and testifying that you do not really know what is happening in the tax ledger but playing dice with the tax authority, which is a very bad idea.

You may also have some tax transactions that do not need to be reported to the tax authority at all. Capture such a case with a combination of a VAT code and direction, and send it into the Other cell i.e. into oblivion:

4. If nothing helps

…then you may have encountered a true bug in the VAT declaration, a case that does not fit into any of the Transaction classifier categories but an Error one!

Indeed, recently we discovered that the reversal of a customer transaction settlement with a realised cash discount is accompanied by a positive adjustment of the VAT payable (i.e. we again own more VAT to the state, which is correct). But this adjustment is not assigned the VAT direction of Sales, it results in an Error in the VAT declaration.

Add lines with the explicit Transaction classifier = Error to manage this case:

Monthly Archives: December 2024