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

Introduction

Since the progressive implementation of the mandatory electronic invoicing reform in France, the rejection of an electronic invoice has become a major operational and financial issue for VAT-registered companies. In 2026, as the scope expands to include mid-sized enterprises and small-to-medium businesses, the volume of invoices transiting through Partner Dematerialization Platforms (PDP) and the public platform PPF has surged, along with the number of rejections. Understanding why an invoice is rejected, identifying the associated status in the life cycle, and knowing what corrective actions to implement is now essential to preserve your cash flow and tax compliance. This article provides you with a comprehensive and practical overview.

---

The Life Cycle of an Electronic Invoice and Its Key Statuses

Electronic invoicing is based on a standardized life cycle defined by the French Tax Authority (DGFiP). Each invoice passes through a succession of statuses that trace its processing, from issuance to payment.

Official Statuses Recognized by French Regulations

The life cycle of a B2B electronic invoice includes the following statuses, all of which must be transmitted to the administration via the e-reporting flow or authorized platforms:

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

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

• Available for consultation: 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. A rejection is a technical or regulatory decision, usually automatic, issued by the dematerialization platform. A refusal is a commercial decision by the buyer, who contests the content or legitimacy of the invoice.

Traceability of Statuses: A Legal Obligation

Since Order No. 2021-1190 of September 15, 2021, and its implementing decrees, the transmission of life cycle statuses to the DGFiP is mandatory. Authorized PDP platforms must transmit status changes in real time, particularly rejections, to ensure tax traceability. This obligation applies to both issuer and recipient. Failure to transmit a status can result in tax penalties.

---

Main Reasons for Rejection of an Electronic Invoice

Rejections can occur at different stages of the life cycle and fall into distinct categories. Precisely identifying the cause of a rejection is the first step toward correcting it effectively.

Technical Reasons Related to Format and Structure

The regulatory formats accepted in France are defined by the Factur-X standard (hybrid Franco-German 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 frequent technical rejections are:

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

• Inappropriate Factur-X profile: use of the MINIMUM profile instead of EN 16931 or EXTENDED according to invoice complexity.

• Corrupted PDF or non-compliant PDF/A-3: the PDF file embedding 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 Tax-Related Reasons

Beyond format, an invoice can be rejected because it does not comply with the mandatory information defined by Article 289 of the French General Tax Code (CGI) and supplemented by Decree No. 2022-1299 of October 7, 2022:

• Missing or invalid SIREN/SIRET number: the issuer's and recipient's identifier must correspond to an active company registered in the SIRENE directory.

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

• Inconsistent issue date: an invoice that is backdated or postdated by more than a certain period can be automatically rejected.

• Inconsistent amounts: discrepancy between net base, applied VAT rate, and total amount including VAT.

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

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

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

Reasons Related to Platform and Routing

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

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

• Central directory not updated: the Public Invoicing Portal (PPF) centralizes the directory of companies and their routing platforms. If the recipient is not listed there with correct routing information, 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 receiving platform: during peak loads, certain messages can be lost and invoices rejected by default.

---

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

When facing a rejection, responsiveness is crucial. A rejected invoice has no tax value until it is corrected and resubmitted. Here is the recommended procedure.

Analyze the Error Code and Rejection Reason

Each platform generates a structured rejection notice containing a standardized error code and an explanatory message. It is imperative to keep this document, as it constitutes proof of good faith in the event of a tax audit. Error codes generally conform to PEPPOL specifications or national specifications published by the DGFiP in the technical requirements document for PDPs.

Analyze:

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

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

• The platform issuing the rejection: the issuer's PDP, the recipient's PDP, or the PPF.

Correct the Invoice and Issue a Corrected Invoice

A rejected invoice must not be the subject of a credit note followed by a new invoice, unlike an invoice refused by the recipient. The rejected invoice is considered never to have been issued from a tax perspective. Therefore, you simply need to:

• 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 process).

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

To learn more about obligations regarding data transmission to the DGFiP, consult our article on e-reporting and transaction data transmission.

Preventive Measures to Reduce Rejections

Rather than handling rejections on a case-by-case basis, companies benefit from implementing preventive measures:

• Validate invoices before issuance 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 European Commission's VIES service.

• Configure 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 information, particularly after each regulatory change.

---

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 periods at 30 or 60 days depending on sectors, each day of delay attributable to an unhandled rejection directly worsens the company's working capital requirement (WCR). According to data from the Altares 2025 Payment Barometer, B2B payment delays represent an average 14-day excess for invoices that have undergone at least one technical rejection.

Furthermore, late payment penalties under Article L.441-10 of the French Commercial Code (ECB interest rate + 10 percentage points) can generate additional non-reimbursable fees, even if the delay is attributable to a technical rejection on your side.

Tax Audit Risks

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

Legal Framework Applicable to Electronic Invoice Rejections

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

Order No. 2021-1190 of September 15, 2021: it constitutes the founding text of the mandatory electronic invoicing obligation in France for domestic B2B transactions and establishes the principle of a standardized life cycle with a requirement to transmit statuses to the DGFiP.

Decree No. 2022-1299 of October 7, 2022: it clarifies the implementation methods, particularly the mandatory information for electronic invoices (including SIREN/SIRET identifiers) and accepted formats (Factur-X, UBL 2.1, CII). Non-compliance with these information items constitutes a legal basis for rejection.

Article 289 of the French General Tax Code (CGI): it defines the mandatory information that must appear on any VAT-registered invoice. The absence of any of this information (intra-community VAT number, transaction date, service description, etc.) can justify rejection or refusal by the recipient, without the latter being contractually liable.

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

ETSI EN 319 132 standard: relating to advanced electronic signatures XAdES, it applies when an electronic signature is affixed to the XML invoice. A signature not conforming to this standard may cause rejection at the cryptographic verification level by the receiving 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). A non-qualified or revoked certificate results in routing rejection.

GDPR Regulation No. 2016/679: personal data contained in invoices (contact name, address) is subject to the GDPR. PDPs and their subcontractors must process this data with appropriate safeguards. If a rejection involves incorrect transmission of personal data, the responsibility of the data controller may be engaged.

Applicable sanctions: breaches of electronic invoicing obligations are subject to a tax penalty of 15 euros per invoice, capped at 15,000 euros per calendar year, without prejudice to late payment interest in case of undeclared VAT within deadline.

Use Cases: How Companies Manage Electronic Invoice Rejections

Scenario 1 — A Small Industrial Subcontractor Handling 500 Invoices Monthly

A small industrial engineering firm with about fifty employees, specializing in precision mechanics and acting as a subcontractor to major industrial clients, issues approximately 500 invoices per month via its PDP. When transitioning to mandatory electronic invoicing in early 2026, it notices a rejection rate of 12% in the first weeks, primarily due to outdated client SIRET numbers in its ERP following group restructurings.

It implements an automatic SIRET verification process before each issuance via the INSEE SIRENE API. In parallel, it configures email alerts on its PDP to be notified within 2 hours of any rejection without waiting for daily batch processing. Within 6 weeks, the rejection rate drops to less than 1%. The impact on cash flow is immediate: the average invoice availability period drops 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 digital transformation consulting firm with about ten consultants addresses invoices to major public sector clients. Its invoices generated by an online accounting tool automatically use the MINIMUM Factur-X profile, while 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 error codes BR-07 (insufficient profile) provided in rejection notices. It contacts its accounting software provider to force the EN 16931 profile in export settings. The correction is deployed within a week. Result: zero rejections over the following 3 months and an average payment period reduced by 8 days thanks to streamlined processing on the public buyer side.

Scenario 3 — A Multi-Site Retail Group With Interoperability Issues Between PDPs

A retail distribution group with approximately 300 employees and several distinct legal entities uses PDP A for its issuing entities and notices that its large retail clients primarily use PDP B. Recurring routing rejections (non-routed status) appear, linked to an interoperability defect between the two platforms regarding handling of acknowledgment receipts.

The group requests both its PDPs to conduct an interoperability audit. It emerges that PDP A's certificates are expired for the AS4 protocol used by PDP B. After certificate renewal and cross-interoperability testing, the routing rejection rate drops from 8% to 0.2%. The group estimates it avoided 45,000 euros 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 dematerialization platform when an invoice does not meet technical or regulatory criteria: invalid XML format, non-existent SIREN, inconsistent amounts. Refusal, on the other hand, 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?

Under article 289 of the French General Tax Code, several data elements are automatically checked: the SIREN or SIRET number of the issuer and recipient, the intra-community VAT number in the regulatory format, the 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 of this information 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 since Ordinance No. 2021-1190 of September 15, 2021. If a rejected invoice is not corrected and reissued within the required timeframes, the issuing company risks non-compliance with invoicing requirements, 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 recognize 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 includes 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 dematerialization 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 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 with a different number, since the original number remains associated with the rejection in the audit logs. A rejected invoice must not simply be resent as-is.

Conclusion

The rejection of an electronic invoice is not inevitable, but it requires responsiveness and precise understanding of the reasons to be handled effectively. Whether it is a format error, an invalid SIRET, a routing issue between platforms, or a missing mandatory information, each type of rejection has a clear corrective procedure. In 2026, as the obligation extends to all VAT-registered companies, investing in rejection prevention is a direct lever for improving working capital and tax compliance.

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