Skip to Content
This is a test deployment and is not authoritative. The published site is at unvtd.unece.org.Under developmentThe UNVTD project is in development phase and is not yet ready for production implementation. The final approved and implementable standard is expected to be released before the end of December 2026.
Use CasesPayment & Reconciliation

Payment & Reconciliation

Settling the trade closes the loop: the verifiable invoice created at the start is now matched to payment and reconciled. This is where domestic tax compliance is realised — and where the heavy machinery of network-based e-invoicing turns out to be unnecessary.

The story today

The buyer pays; the seller matches incoming payments to invoices, issues or receives a remittance advice, reconciles its books, and reports for tax.

The work is manual and the assurance is weak:

  • Reconciliation is manual — matching payments to invoices by hand, with mismatches and write-offs.
  • VAT is under-reported — sales can simply be omitted, because the tax authority relies on each party’s self-reported figures.
  • To gain visibility, some authorities mandate network e-invoicing where the tax office sits as a “5th corner” watching every message — heavy infrastructure, transaction fees, and a network both parties must join.

How it works with verifiable documents

The verifiable invoice from the buy-sell flow is matched to a verifiable payment or remittance credential. Because the invoice is authentic and machine-readable, reconciliation is automatic — and a tax authority that wants visibility is simply cc’d on the credential.

The verifiable invoice and a verifiable payment credential are matched automatically, producing reconciled books and VAT compliance, with the tax authority cc'd on the credential
  1. The seller’s invoice (from buy-sell) and the buyer’s payment/remittance arrive as verifiable credentials.
  2. The two are matched automatically — invoice to settlement — with no manual reconciliation.
  3. The books reconcile themselves, and VAT compliance follows from authentic, matched records.
  4. A tax authority that wants oversight is cc’d the verifiable credential — no network membership, no central hub.
  5. The same architecture serves domestic and cross-border settlement identically.

Why this approach wins

Compared with network e-invoicing and the tax-authority-as-5th-corner model:

  • More scalable — the tax authority is cc’d on a credential, not wired into a network, and one architecture covers both domestic and cross-border. Hub models need both parties on the same network and a separate cross-border build.
  • Higher integrity — invoice and payment are matched, authentic, and attributable, so omitting a sale is far harder than under a self-reported return.
  • Cheaper to implement — automated reconciliation rides the accounting systems businesses already run; there are no routing hubs and no per-transaction fees.

See the Implementation Model for why this beats the network approach.

What it’s worth

This flow realises:

  • Revenue integrity — domestic — matched invoice-and-settlement records lift VAT compliance at the point the sale is proven paid.
  • Operational efficiency — automated reconciliation in place of manual matching.
  • Compliance & auditability — every settled trade is attributable and verifiable.

The value is quantified in the business cases — most directly for the Tax authority and the Trader.

Documents & learn more

Last updated on
Border ComplianceOverview