Rejection of an Electronic Invoice: Reasons, Statuses and What to Do in 2026

Introduction

Since the progressive entry into force of the mandatory electronic invoicing reform in France, the rejection of an electronic invoice has become a major operational and financial challenge for VAT-registered businesses. In 2026, with the expansion to mid-sized and small businesses, the volume of invoices flowing through Partner Dematerialisation Platforms (PDP) and the public PPF platform has exploded, and with it, the number of rejections. Understanding why an invoice is rejected, identifying the associated status in the lifecycle, and knowing what corrective actions to implement is now essential to preserve your cash flow and tax compliance. This article provides you with a complete and practical overview.

---

The Lifecycle of an Electronic Invoice and Its Key Statuses

Electronic invoicing is based on a standardised lifecycle defined by the General Directorate of Public Finances (DGFiP). Each invoice passes through a succession of statuses that trace its processing, from issue through to settlement.

Official Statuses Recognised by French Regulations

The lifecycle of an electronic B2B invoice includes the following statuses, all of which must be transmitted to the authorities via the e-reporting flow or approved platforms:

• Submitted: the invoice has been submitted on the issuer's platform.

• In transit: the issuer's platform is routing the invoice to the recipient's platform.

• Made available: the recipient can view the invoice on their platform.

• Received: the recipient has acknowledged receipt of the invoice.

• Accepted: the recipient validates the invoice without reservation.

• Refused: the recipient formally refuses the invoice.

• Rejected: the invoice does not meet the expected technical or regulatory criteria.

• Disputed: the invoice is contested, without definitive refusal.

• Partially approved: the buyer accepts part of the invoice.

• Paid: payment has been made.

The distinction between refusal and rejection is fundamental. Rejection is a technical or regulatory decision, generally automatic, issued by the dematerialisation platform. Refusal is a commercial decision by the buyer, who contests the content or legitimacy of the invoice.

Traceability of Statuses: A Legal Obligation

Since ordinance no. 2021-1190 of 15 September 2021 and its implementing decrees, the transmission of invoice lifecycle statuses to the DGFiP is mandatory. Approved PDP platforms must transmit status changes in real time, in particular rejections, to ensure tax traceability. This obligation applies to both the issuer and the recipient. Failure to transmit a status can result in tax penalties.

---

The Main Reasons for Rejection of an Electronic Invoice

Rejections can occur at different stages of the lifecycle and fall into well-defined categories. Precisely identifying the cause of a rejection is the first step in correcting it effectively.

Technical Reasons Related to Format and Structure

The regulatory formats accepted in France are defined by the Factur-X standard (Franco-German hybrid PDF/XML format) and purely structured formats UBL 2.1 and CII (Cross Industry Invoice). To understand the specifics of each format, consult our guide on Factur-X and its different profiles. The most common technical rejections are:

• XML not conforming to XSD schema: the file structure does not match the expected validation schema.

• Unsuitable Factur-X profile: use of the MINIMUM profile instead of EN 16931 or EXTENDED depending on the complexity of the invoice.

• Corrupted PDF or non-conformant PDF/A-3: the PDF file integrating the Factur-X XML must be archivable according to ISO 19005-3 standard.

• Invalid or missing electronic signature: some platforms require a qualified or advanced signature depending on the required security level.

• File size exceeding limits: each platform sets file size limits.

• Incorrect encoding: the XML file must be encoded in UTF-8.

Regulatory and Fiscal Reasons

Beyond format, an invoice can be rejected because it does not meet the mandatory particulars defined by article 289 of the General Tax Code (CGI) and supplemented by decree no. 2022-1299 of 7 October 2022:

• Missing or invalid SIREN/SIRET number: the identifier of the issuer and recipient must correspond to an active business registered in the SIRENE register.

• Incorrect intra-community VAT number: the format must respect the national structure (FR + 2 alphanumeric characters + 9 SIREN digits).

• Incoherent issue date: an invoice backdated or postdated by more than a certain period may be automatically rejected.

• Incoherent amounts: discrepancy between net amount, VAT rate applied and total amount.

• Missing NAF/APE code: some platforms check the consistency of the activity code.

• Unrecognised currency: only certain currencies are accepted depending on platform configuration.

• Duplicate invoice number: any invoice bearing an identifier already processed is automatically rejected to prevent duplicate payments.

Reasons Related to the Platform and Routing

Some rejections are independent of the invoice content but result from interoperability or configuration issues:

• Recipient not connected: if the buyer is not yet registered on an approved platform, the invoice cannot be routed.

• Central directory not updated: the Public Invoicing Portal (PPF) centralises the directory of businesses and their routing platforms. If the recipient does not appear there with the correct routing coordinates, the invoice is rejected in transit.

• Issuer platform certificate expired: PDPs communicate via qualified SSL/TLS certificates whose expiration interrupts exchanges.

• Timeout or unavailability of the recipient platform: during peak loads, some messages may be lost and invoices rejected by default.

---

How to Manage a Rejection: Step-by-Step Procedure

Faced with a rejection, responsiveness is crucial. The rejected invoice has no tax value until it is corrected and re-issued. Here is the recommended procedure.

Analyse the Error Code and Rejection Reason

Each platform generates a structured rejection acknowledgement containing a standardised error code and explanatory message. It is essential to keep this document, as it constitutes proof of good faith in the event of a tax audit. Error codes are generally in line with PEPPOL specifications or national specifications published by the DGFiP in the technical specification of PDPs.

Analyse:

• The error code (e.g. BR-01 for missing issuer identifier, BR-CO-09 for VAT inconsistency).

• The rejection level: syntax validation (XSD schema), semantic validation (business rules), or routing rejection.

• The platform that issued the rejection: the issuer PDP, the recipient PDP or the PPF.

Correct the Invoice and Issue a Corrected Invoice

A rejected invoice must not be subject to a credit note followed by a new invoice, unlike an invoice refused by the recipient. The rejected invoice is considered as never having been issued for tax purposes. Therefore, simply:

• Correct the erroneous data in your invoicing tool or ERP.

• Regenerate the file in the correct format (Factur-X, UBL or CII depending on your flow).

• Re-submit the corrected invoice with the same invoice number if the rejection is purely technical and the platform has not recorded a sequence, or a new invoice number if the sequence has been consumed.

• Verify the status transmission via your PDP dashboard to confirm that the corrected invoice has been made available to the recipient.

For further information on obligations to transmit data to the DGFiP, consult our article on e-reporting and the transmission of transaction data.

Preventive Measures to Reduce Rejections

Rather than dealing with rejections on a case-by-case basis, businesses benefit from implementing preventive measures:

• Validate invoices before issue using a technical validation tool. Our free Factur-X validator allows you to detect format errors before submission.

• Keep your customer database up to date with verified SIREN, SIRET and VAT numbers via the SIRENE directory and the VIES service of the European Commission.

• Set up real-time alerts on your PDP to be notified immediately in case of rejection, without waiting for daily batch processing.

• Train accounting teams on common error codes and the correction procedure, to reduce average processing time.

• Regularly audit your invoice templates to ensure they include all current mandatory particulars, particularly after any regulatory changes.

---

Impact of Rejections on Cash Flow and Tax Compliance

Direct Financial Consequences

A rejected invoice is an unpaid invoice. In a context where the LME law sets payment deadlines at 30 or 60 days depending on the sector, each day of delay attributable to an unresolved rejection directly degrades the company's working capital requirement (WCR). According to data from the 2025 Altares Payment Barometer, B2B payment delays represent on average 14 days of additional overrun for invoices that have suffered at least one technical rejection.

Furthermore, late payment penalties provided for by article L.441-10 of the Commercial Code (ECB interest rate + 10 percentage points) can generate ancillary costs, non-reimbursable even if the delay is attributable to a technical rejection on your side.

Risks Regarding Tax Audit

The DGFiP has access to invoice lifecycle statuses transmitted by PDPs. An invoice whose status remains in rejection without correction within a reasonable time may raise questions during a tax audit, particularly as to the reality of the transaction or the accuracy of VAT declarations. It is therefore imperative to document each rejection, its cause, and the corrective actions taken, in an internal traceability register. Our guide to the electronic invoicing calendar 2026-2027 details the regulatory deadlines to meet to remain compliant.

Legal Framework Applicable to Electronic Invoice Rejections

The treatment of electronic invoice rejections is governed by a dense legal framework, combining national tax law, European law and technical standards.

Ordinance no. 2021-1190 of 15 September 2021: it is the founding text for the obligation of electronic invoicing in France for domestic B2B transactions, and establishes the principle of the standardised lifecycle with obligation to transmit statuses to the DGFiP.

Decree no. 2022-1299 of 7 October 2022: it clarifies the terms of application, in particular the mandatory particulars of electronic invoices (including SIREN/SIRET identifiers) and accepted formats (Factur-X, UBL 2.1, CII). Non-compliance with these particulars constitutes a legal ground for rejection.

Article 289 of the General Tax Code (CGI): it defines the mandatory particulars that must appear on any invoice subject to VAT. The absence of any of these particulars (intra-community VAT number, transaction date, description of services, etc.) may justify rejection or refusal by the recipient, without the latter being liable contractually.

Directive 2014/55/EU on Electronic Invoicing in Public Procurement: transposed into French law, it requires the use of the European EN 16931 standard for invoices addressed to public entities. Factur-X EN 16931 and EXTENDED profiles are compliant with this standard. A lower profile (MINIMUM, BASIC WL) can result in automatic rejection by public sector financial management systems.

Standard ETSI EN 319 132: relating to advanced electronic signatures XAdES, it applies when an electronic signature is affixed to the XML invoice. A signature not compliant with this standard may cause rejection at the cryptographic verification level by the recipient PDP.

eIDAS Regulation no. 910/2014: certificates used to sign invoices or authenticate exchanges between platforms must be issued by qualified trust service providers (QTSP) listed on the national trust list (TSL list). A non-qualified or revoked certificate results in routing rejection.

GDPR no. 2016/679: personal data contained in invoices (contact name, address) is subject to GDPR. PDPs and their subcontractors must process this data with adequate safeguards. In the event of rejection involving incorrect transmission of personal data, the data controller's liability may be engaged.

Applicable sanctions: breaches of electronic invoicing obligations are subject to a tax penalty of €15 per invoice, capped at €15,000 per calendar year, without prejudice to late payment interest in the event of VAT not declared within the deadlines.

Usage Scenarios: How Businesses Manage Electronic Invoice Rejections

Scenario 1 — A Small Industrial Subcontractor Managing 500 Invoices per Month

A small industrial business with around 50 employees, specialising in precision engineering and subcontracting to large businesses, issues approximately 500 invoices per month via its PDP. When it transitions to mandatory electronic invoicing in early 2026, it notices a rejection rate of 12% in the first few weeks, mainly due to customer SIRET numbers not updated in its ERP following group restructurings.

It implements an automatic SIREN verification process for all customer SIRET numbers before each issue via the INSEE SIRENE API. At the same time, it configures email alerts on its PDP to be notified within less than 2 hours in case of rejection, without waiting for daily batch processing. Within 6 weeks, the rejection rate drops to below 1%. The impact on cash flow is immediate: the average invoice availability period falls from 4.2 days to 0.8 days, mechanically reducing DSO (Days Sales Outstanding) by 3.4 days.

Scenario 2 — An Independent Consulting Firm Issuing Invoices in Incorrect Factur-X Profile

A consulting firm specialising in digital transformation with around 10 consultants addresses its invoices to major public sector clients. Its invoices generated by an online accounting tool automatically use the MINIMUM Factur-X profile, whereas public entities require the EN 16931 profile to comply with Directive 2014/55/EU.

After several automatic rejections by its clients' Chorus Pro systems, the firm identifies the issue thanks to the error codes BR-07 (insufficient profile) provided in the rejection acknowledgements. It contacts its accounting software provider to force the EN 16931 profile in the export parameters. The fix is deployed within a week. Result: zero rejections over the next 3 months and an average payment deadline reduced by 8 days thanks to streamlined processing on the buyer side.

Scenario 3 — A Multi-Site Distribution Group with Interoperability Issues Between PDPs

A distribution group with around 300 employees and several separate legal entities uses PDP A for its issuing entities and discovers that its major retail clients predominantly use PDP B. Recurring routing rejections (status "not routed") appear, linked to an interoperability issue between the two platforms in managing acknowledgements of receipt.

The group asks both PDPs for an interoperability audit. It transpires that PDP A's certificates are expired for the AS4 protocol used by PDP B. After certificate renewal and cross-interoperability tests, the routing rejection rate falls from 8% to 0.2%. The group estimates it avoided €45,000 in payment delays over the following quarter, based on avoided LME penalties and accounting department productivity gains.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between rejection and refusal of an electronic invoice?

Rejection is an automatic decision issued by a dematerialisation platform when an invoice does not meet technical or regulatory criteria: invalid XML format, non-existent SIREN, inconsistent amounts. Refusal, by contrast, is a commercial decision made by the buyer themselves, who contests the content or legitimacy of the invoice. These two statuses have different consequences and require distinct corrective actions.

What mandatory information can trigger automatic rejection of an electronic invoice in France?

In accordance with Article 289 of the French General Tax Code, several data items are checked automatically: the SIREN or SIRET number of the issuer and recipient, the intra-Community VAT number in the prescribed format, consistency between the amount excluding tax, the VAT rate and the total amount including tax, as well as the uniqueness of the invoice number. The absence or inaccuracy of any one of these items is sufficient to trigger a rejection.

Can rejection of an electronic invoice result in tax penalties?

Yes. The transmission of lifecycle statuses, including rejections, has been mandatory to the DGFiP (French Tax Authority) since Ordinance No. 2021-1190 of 15 September 2021. If a rejected invoice is not corrected and re-issued within the prescribed timeframe, the issuing company faces the risk of a non-compliant invoicing failure, which may result in VAT assessments and tax penalties, regardless of whether the delivery or service actually took place.

What file formats are accepted for B2B electronic invoicing in France in 2026?

French regulations recognise three formats: Factur-X, a hybrid format combining a readable PDF and a structured XML file compliant with the EN 16931 standard; UBL 2.1; and CII (Cross Industry Invoice). Each format comprises profiles of increasing complexity. The use of a profile that is insufficient for the data to be transmitted is one of the most common technical rejection reasons reported by partner dematerialisation platforms.

What should be done concretely when an electronic invoice is rejected by the platform?

You must first consult the error message associated with the "Rejected" status on the platform in question in order to identify the precise cause. Depending on the reason, you should correct the erroneous or missing data, regenerate the file in the correct format and submit a new invoice bearing a different number, as the original number remains associated with the rejection in the audit logs. The rejected invoice must not simply be resent as it was.

Conclusion

The rejection of an electronic invoice is not inevitable, but it requires responsiveness and a precise understanding of the grounds to be dealt with effectively. Whether it is a format error, an invalid SIRET, a platform routing problem or missing mandatory particulars, each type of rejection has a clear corrective procedure. In 2026, as the obligation extends to all VAT-registered businesses, investing in rejection prevention is a direct lever for improving WCR and tax compliance.

Certyneo supports you in your transition to electronic invoicing with tools adapted to your volume and sector. Discover how our solution can reduce your rejection rate from the first few weeks: start your electronic invoice diagnosis or contact our team for personalised support.