Italy eInvoicing: What You Need to Know

Brendan Magauran
June 1, 2018

Italy will soon join Hungary in requiring real-time, transaction-level reporting. With the launch of the first phase imminent (1 July 2018), Italy’s tax authority recently released new information on its eInvoicing requirement.

In February, the European Commission backed Italy’s request to implement mandatory eInvoicing. This clearance is a game-changer for businesses operating in the European Union, as Italy is set to go one step further than Hungary in eInvoicing. With a broader scope of transactions and companies covered, it is likely to pave the way for rapid adoption by other countries.

Recently Agenzia delle Entrate released new updates. Here is the summary of the mandate based on this new information:

All B2B and B2C Taxpayers with Electronic Invoices Are Affected Starting 1 January, 2019.

Italy has progressed towards this full eInvoicing requirement since 2014, when it announced mandatory eInvoicing for certain business-to-government transactions. It then began testing an optional eInvoicing program in 2017, incentivising businesses that sent electronic invoices with reduced tax reporting burdens and faster reimbursements. With these trials underway to ensure a smoother transition, Italy is now rolling out eInvoicing to all taxpayers:

  • 1 July, 2018 – B2B eInvoicing becomes mandatory for petrol or diesel fuel for engines suppliers and subcontractors, under public service contracts.
  • 1 January, 2019 – B2B eInvoicing becomes mandatory for all private companies
  • The requirement also applies to B2C transactions when the buyer requests an electronic invoice. That is, if an invoice is provided electronically, it must be in the government-mandated format and follow the approval and submission process as outlined by the tax authority.

All Transactions Must Be Submitted to the Government.

Businesses must plan now to ensure the following processes are in place for compliance.

  • Creating transactions – Supplier invoices (TD01), deposit/down payment on invoice (TD02), deposit/down payment for fee (TD03), credit notes (TD04) and debit notes (TD05) must be created in the XML format defined by the Italian tax authority (FatturaPA XML).
  • Signings – Each transaction must contain a certified digital signature.
  • Sending – Transactions must be submitted when issued via the government exchange system (SDI – Sistema di Interscambio).
  • Receiving – Buyers have the responsibility of ensuring that transactions are received in the right format, or risk fines and penalties.
  • Accepting/rejecting – Business-to-government buyers must explicitly approve or reject transactions. If they have not done so within 15 days, the invoice is automatically approved.
  • Archiving – Companies must maintain transactions archived for 10 years.

eInvoicing implementation is not a simple on/off switch. It requires integration with your POS, billing, ERP,  AP, P2P and/or EDI systems, technical updates and changes to standard business processes, so companies must start now to ensure compliance in Italy.

Take Action

Learn more about the Italian mandate requirements and what you need to do to ensure compliance; watch our 30-minute on-demand webinar: Italy eInvoicing Q&A.

Sign up for Email Updates

Stay up to date with the latest tax and compliance updates that may impact your business.

Author

Brendan Magauran

Brendan Magauran is a Junior Regulatory Counsel at Sovos Compliance specializing in international taxation, with a focus on Value Added Tax Systems in the European Union. Brendan received his B.A. and J.D. from Washington University in St. Louis and is licensed to practice in New Hampshire and Massachusetts.
Share this post

North America
June 6, 2024
Observations and Predictions: The Future of Tax and Compliance

When I became the CEO of Sovos one year ago, I knew that I was stepping into an innovative company in an industry primed for a seismic transformation. However, even with this knowledge in place, I must admit that the speed and scope of change over the past year has been extraordinary to witness. Here […]

EMEA IPT
July 8, 2024
Hungary Insurance Premium Tax (IPT): An Overview

Regarding calculating Insurance Premium Tax (IPT), Hungary is the only country in the EU where the regime uses the so-called sliding scale rate model.

North America ShipCompliant
July 3, 2024
The Prospects and Perils of AI in Beverage Alcohol

I recently had the privilege of speaking on a panel at the National Conference of State Liquor Administrators (NCSLA) Annual Conference, a regular meeting of regulators, attorneys and other members of the beverage alcohol industry to discuss important issues affecting our trade. Alongside Claire Mitchell, of Stoel Rives, and Erlinda Doherty, of Vinicola Consulting, and […]

North America ShipCompliant
June 27, 2024
Shifting Focus: How to Make Wine Country Interesting to Millennials

Guest blog written by Susan DeMatei, President, WineGlass Marketing WineGlass Marketing recently conducted a study to explore how Millennials and Gen X feel about wine, wine culture and wine country. The goal was to gain insight into how we can make wine, wine club and wine country appealing to these new audiences. We’ll showcase in-depth […]

North America Sales & Use Tax
June 24, 2024
Illinois to Adjust Sales Tax Nexus Rules in Light of PetMeds Threat

Illinois is poised to change their sourcing rules again, trying to find their way in a world where states apply their sales tax compliance requirements equally to both in-state and remote sellers. With this tweak, they will effectively equalize the responsibilities of remote sellers with no in-state presence, to those that have an Illinois location. […]

EMEA VAT & Fiscal Reporting
June 21, 2024
ViDA Rejected Again – Europe Misses Another Chance to Harmonize e-Invoicing

During the latest ECOFIN meeting on 21 June, Member States met to discuss if they could come to an agreement to implement the VAT in the Digital Age (ViDA) proposals. At the ECOFIN meeting in May, Estonia objected to the platform rules being proposed, instead requesting to make the new deemed supplier rules optional (an […]