Tax code XT
This is a read-only copy of the discussions. To view the original, where you can reply, go here. For info on how to log in, please see the instructions.
|
|
Tax code XT
Hi
We know, if IS IDEC contains tax code XT, SIS will not throw it as error. However, since we did not find any note in ISPG on this, we want IATA to reconfirm that if the Tax code is reported in the IS IDEC file as ‘XT’ such invoices will not get rejected at IS END.
Shankar |
 |
Dear Shankar,
XT is not a valid tax code, so transactions reporting XT as tax will fail validation.
Best regards
From:
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 12:14 AM
Subject: Tax code XT
Hi
We know, if IS IDEC contains tax code XT, SIS will not throw it as error. However, since we did not find any note in ISPG on this, we want IATA to reconfirm that if the Tax code is reported in the IS IDEC file as ‘XT’ such invoices will not get rejected at IS END.
Shankar |
|
Dear Ashley
Thank you for your reply.
We have following scenario :
Billing received from a non migrated carrier who does not provide tax break up. Billed carrier who is migrated rejects the complete tax billing. Since billed carrier has migrated it is expected to provide the billed tax code in the IS billing file. What tax code billed carrier should provide.
We believe in the absence of a billed tax code IS should suggest some default billed tax code to handle such transactions which are received from non migrated carriers.
Pls advise default tax code in above scenario.
Rgds
Shankar
From:
Posted: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 9:49 AM
Subject: Tax code XT
Dear Shankar,
XT is not a valid tax code, so transactions reporting XT as tax will fail validation.
Best regards
From:
Posted: Wednesday, May 25, 2011 12:14 AM
Subject: Tax code XT
Hi
We know, if IS IDEC contains tax code XT, SIS will not throw it as error. However, since we did not find any note in ISPG on this, we want IATA to reconfirm that if the Tax code is reported in the IS IDEC file as ‘XT’ such invoices will not get rejected at IS END.
Shankar |
|
Dear Shankar,
This is on the agenda for discussion at the upcoming RAWG meeting. We will inform you of the outcome of the discussion after this meeting.
Best regards
From:
Posted: Saturday, June 04, 2011 9:28 AM
Subject: Tax code XT
Dear Ashley
Thank you for your reply.
We have following scenario :
Billing received from a non migrated carrier who does not provide tax break up. Billed carrier who is migrated rejects the complete tax billing. Since billed carrier has migrated it is expected to provide the billed tax code in the IS billing file. What tax code billed carrier should provide.
We believe in the absence of a billed tax code IS should suggest some default billed tax code to handle such transactions which are received from non migrated carriers.
Pls advise default tax code in above scenario.
Rgds
Shankar |
|
Dear Ashley
Actually before the Pilot test starts we need to fix up this in our system.
Pls advise when is the expected date of RAWG meeting.
Rgds
Shankar
From:
Posted: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 11:22 AM
Subject: Tax code XT
Dear Shankar,
This is on the agenda for discussion at the upcoming RAWG meeting. We will inform you of the outcome of the discussion after this meeting.
Best regards
From:
Posted: Saturday, June 04, 2011 9:28 AM
Subject: Tax code XT
Dear Ashley
Thank you for your reply.
We have following scenario :
Billing received from a non migrated carrier who does not provide tax break up. Billed carrier who is migrated rejects the complete tax billing. Since billed carrier has migrated it is expected to provide the billed tax code in the IS billing file. What tax code billed carrier should provide.
We believe in the absence of a billed tax code IS should suggest some default billed tax code to handle such transactions which are received from non migrated carriers.
Pls advise default tax code in above scenario.
Rgds
Shankar |
|
Dear Ashley
I believe last RAWG meeting was held on 15th June. Did you get chance to discuss this issue. Pls advise.
Rgds
Shankar
From:
Posted: Thursday, June 16, 2011 4:21 AM
Subject: Tax code XT
Dear Ashley
Actually before the Pilot test starts we need to fix up this in our system.
Pls advise when is the expected date of RAWG meeting.
Rgds
Shankar
From:
Posted: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 11:22 AM
Subject: Tax code XT
Dear Shankar,
This is on the agenda for discussion at the upcoming RAWG meeting. We will inform you of the outcome of the discussion after this meeting.
Best regards
From:
Posted: Saturday, June 04, 2011 9:28 AM
Subject: Tax code XT
Dear Ashley
Thank you for your reply.
We have following scenario :
Billing received from a non migrated carrier who does not provide tax break up. Billed carrier who is migrated rejects the complete tax billing. Since billed carrier has migrated it is expected to provide the billed tax code in the IS billing file. What tax code billed carrier should provide.
We believe in the absence of a billed tax code IS should suggest some default billed tax code to handle such transactions which are received from non migrated carriers.
Pls advise default tax code in above scenario.
Rgds
Shankar |
|
Dear Shankar,
Please find the following the outcome of the 15 June RAWG meeting:
The ticketing committee has removed XT as a valid tax code. Hence, XT it is not a valid tax code in SIS. Carriers – as per RAM rule today – have to base the rejection on RATD and the correct tax codes.
Example:
Assumption: billing outside SIS was made with Tax XT 100(let’s assume only 1 coupon in 1 RM)
RM Record:
Total Tax Amount Billed = 100
Total Tax Amount Accepted = 75
Total Tax Difference = 25
Coupon Breakdown Record
Tax Amount Billed = 100
Tax Amount Accepted = 75
Tax Difference = 25
Tax Breakdown Record
|
Tax Code (1) |
- 1st valid code as per rejecting carrier |
|
Tax Amount Billed (1) |
|
|
Tax Amount Accepted (1) |
= 45 |
|
Tax Amount Difference (1) |
= 55 |
|
Tax Code (2) |
- 2nd valid code as per rejecting carrier |
|
Tax Amount Billed (2) |
= 0 |
|
Tax Amount Accepted (2) |
= 30 |
| Tax Amount Difference (2) |
= -30 |
Best regards |
|
Dear Ashley
Thank you for your clarification.
As mentioned in my query, if billed carrier rejects entire tax amount and does not accept any tax, what tax code should he use for rejecting.
In your example you have mentioned that part of the tax amount is accepted by billed carrier and in that case, billed carrier can use 1st or 2nd valid tax code for rejecting the difference. Our understanding for part acceptance was also same that you have explained here.
We like to know what default tax code should we use if we are not accepting any tax but rejecting entire billed tax.
Rgds
Shankar
From:
Posted: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:11 PM
Subject: Tax code XT
Dear Shankar,
Please find the following the outcome of the 15 June RAWG meeting:
The ticketing committee has removed XT as a valid tax code. Hence, XT it is not a valid tax code in SIS. Carriers – as per RAM rule today – have to base the rejection on RATD and the correct tax codes.
Example:
Assumption: billing outside SIS was made with Tax XT 100(let’s assume only 1 coupon in 1 RM)
RM Record:
Total Tax Amount Billed = 100
Total Tax Amount Accepted = 75
Total Tax Difference = 25
Coupon Breakdown Record
Tax Amount Billed = 100
Tax Amount Accepted = 75
Tax Difference = 25
Tax Breakdown Record
|
Tax Code (1) |
- 1st valid code as per rejecting carrier |
|
Tax Amount Billed (1) |
|
|
Tax Amount Accepted (1) |
= 45 |
|
Tax Amount Difference (1) |
= 55 |
|
Tax Code (2) |
- 2nd valid code as per rejecting carrier |
|
Tax Amount Billed (2) |
= 0 |
|
Tax Amount Accepted (2) |
= 30 |
| Tax Amount Difference (2) |
= -30 |
Best regards |
|
Dear Shankar,
In this case you can use any valid tax code and accept '0'.
Best regards
From:
Posted: Thursday, June 23, 2011 5:38 AM
Subject: Tax code XT
Dear Ashley
Thank you for your clarification.
As mentioned in my query, if billed carrier rejects entire tax amount and does not accept any tax, what tax code should he use for rejecting.
In your example you have mentioned that part of the tax amount is accepted by billed carrier and in that case, billed carrier can use 1st or 2nd valid tax code for rejecting the difference. Our understanding for part acceptance was also same that you have explained here.
We like to know what default tax code should we use if we are not accepting any tax but rejecting entire billed tax.
Rgds
Shankar
From:
Posted: Wednesday, June 22, 2011 2:11 PM
Subject: Tax code XT
Dear Shankar,
Please find the following the outcome of the 15 June RAWG meeting:
The ticketing committee has removed XT as a valid tax code. Hence, XT it is not a valid tax code in SIS. Carriers – as per RAM rule today – have to base the rejection on RATD and the correct tax codes.
Example:
Assumption: billing outside SIS was made with Tax XT 100(let’s assume only 1 coupon in 1 RM)
RM Record:
Total Tax Amount Billed = 100
Total Tax Amount Accepted = 75
Total Tax Difference = 25
Coupon Breakdown Record
Tax Amount Billed = 100
Tax Amount Accepted = 75
Tax Difference = 25
Tax Breakdown Record
|
Tax Code (1) |
- 1st valid code as per rejecting carrier |
|
Tax Amount Billed (1) |
|
|
Tax Amount Accepted (1) |
= 45 |
|
Tax Amount Difference (1) |
= 55 |
|
Tax Code (2) |
- 2nd valid code as per rejecting carrier |
|
Tax Amount Billed (2) |
= 0 |
|
Tax Amount Accepted (2) |
= 30 |
| Tax Amount Difference (2) |
= -30 |
Best regards |
|
Hi Ashley,
We would like to ask for some clarification about the scenario where a migrated carrier wishes to bring a rejection into SIS at stage 2 but the billing carrier is non-migrated (i.e. 1st stage outside SIS) and hasn't provided the breakdown of taxes billed by tax code, or the breakdown is unavailable.
We are aware that some carriers are planning to show the entire billed tax under a 'generic' valid IATA tax code (such as 'YR' or 'YQ' for example) with zero tax accepted against this code and all accepted taxes shown against the respective 'actual' codes. I have seen from other forum discussions that this is one of the recommendations from IATA for handling the taxes in rejections.
However, is it not possible that such billings will be rejected by receiving carriers who won't necessarily know what protocol is being followed by using the generic code? Have there been any such instances in the live SIS production?
We received a circular from the IATA Ticket Tax Box Service on 17th February listing the 29 codes that are currently available for generic industry assignment. (e.g. AD, AH, AV etc). Could not one of these codes be used to handle the above scenario in SIS during migration to ensure a standard?
Thanks in advance,
Michael. (ASI)
|
|
Hi Michael, Actually we do not recommend the use of a generic tax code. Rather, a billing member should be able to split the taxes amongst the taxes applicable for that sector. For example, carrier XX bills carrier YY outside SIS for tax GBP 200 for sector LHR-JFK. While evaluating YY finds that the applicable taxes are GB – GBP 11.00 and UB – GBP 30.00 When rejecting carrier YY can split the billed taxes between GB & UB as GBP100 each or put the entire amount of GBP 200 on a single tax code (either GB and UB). Hope this clarifies. Regards,
Ashley From: CONNOLLY Michael
Posted At: February-21-12 5:00 AM
Posted To: SIS Forums - Requirements & Functionality
Conversation: Tax code XT
Subject: Tax code XT We would like to ask for some clarification about the scenario where a migrated carrier wishes to bring a rejection into SIS at stage 2 but the billing carrier is non-migrated (i.e. 1st stage outside SIS) and hasn't provided the breakdown of taxes billed by tax code, or the breakdown is unavailable. We are aware that some carriers are planning to show the entire billed tax under a 'generic' valid IATA tax code (such as 'YR' or 'YQ' for example) with zero tax accepted against this code and all accepted taxes shown against the respective 'actual' codes. I have seen from other forum discussions that this is one of the recommendations from IATA for handling the taxes in rejections. However, is it not possible that such billings will be rejected by receiving carriers who won't necessarily know what protocol is being followed by using the generic code? Have there been any such instances in the live SIS production? We received a circular from the IATA Ticket Tax Box Service on 17th February listing the 29 codes that are currently available for generic industry assignment. (e.g. AD, AH, AV etc). Could not one of these codes be used to handle the above scenario in SIS during migration to ensure a standard?
|
|
|