0
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
Working Group 3
Service Provider Questionnaire
Results
Heli Salmi / Joh...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
About Service Provider
Questionnaire
About Service Provider
Questionnai...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
Business areas of
respondents
Business areas of
respondents
0
5
10
15
2...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
What kind of invoicing do
you offer?
What kind of invoicing do
you offe...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
XML invoice transactions
volume / year
XML invoice transactions
volume ...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
EDI invoice transactions
volume / year
EDI invoice transactions
volume ...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
Background information of
respondents
Background information of
respond...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
Main topics raised by
respondents
Main topics raised by
respondents
Int...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
Service Provider co-
operation
Service Provider co-
operation
Challenge...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
Suggestions to improve
Service Provider
co-operation
Suggestions to imp...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
Conversions 1/2Conversions 1/2
42 % of respondents say that EU level fo...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
Conversions 2/2Conversions 2/2
Suggestions:
Presenting guidelines to th...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
StorageStorage
73% stores invoices behalf of the originator
58% stores ...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
Electronic signaturesElectronic signatures
“Electronic signature and PK...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
Open questions 1/2Open questions 1/2
What other issues you would like t...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
Open questions 2/2Open questions 2/2
What kind of actions could increas...
eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006
Other notes and commentsOther notes and comments
Collecting best practi...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

CEN/ISSS Task 3. Service Provider Questionnaire Results

312

Published on

Presentation from Heli Salmi and Johanna Puro-Grönblom.

Published in: Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
312
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "CEN/ISSS Task 3. Service Provider Questionnaire Results"

  1. 1. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 Working Group 3 Service Provider Questionnaire Results Heli Salmi / Johanna Puro-Grönblom e-invoicing Public Event - Brussels, 11 April 2006
  2. 2. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 About Service Provider Questionnaire About Service Provider Questionnaire Service provider contact information gathered from CEN/ISSS e-Invoicing workshop members. Questionnaire sent to 100 Service Providers, 41 answers received. Questionnaire included questions regarding company background, storage, digital signatures, modelling and open questions on standards and challenges Answers came from the following countries Finland, France, Sweden, Italy, Germany, Estonia, Latvia, Norway and Switzerland
  3. 3. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 Business areas of respondents Business areas of respondents 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Eletronic Invoice Service Provider Softw are vendor ASP VAN EDI operator Other
  4. 4. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 What kind of invoicing do you offer? What kind of invoicing do you offer? 0 % 10 % 20 % 30 % 40 % 50 % 60 % 70 % 80 % 90 % 100 % Domestic B2B eInvoicing Domestic B2C eInvoicing
  5. 5. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 XML invoice transactions volume / year XML invoice transactions volume / year 29 % 36 % 35 % less than 50 000 50 000 – 1 000 000 invoices over 1 000 000 invoices
  6. 6. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 EDI invoice transactions volume / year EDI invoice transactions volume / year 29 % 36 % 35 % less than 50 000 50 000 – 1 000 000 invoices over 1 000 000 invoices
  7. 7. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 Background information of respondents Background information of respondents Plans to expand operations 32 % don’t plan cross border e-invoicing 47 % planning to co-operate with other operators inside EU XML eInvoice volumes per year 29 % less than 50 000 36 % 50 000 – 1 000 000 invoices 35 % over 1 000 000 invoices EDI volumes per year 46 % less than 50 000 18% 50 000 – 1 000 000 invoices 36 % over 1 000 000 invoices
  8. 8. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 Main topics raised by respondents Main topics raised by respondents Interoperability between different Service providers and countries is challenging Fear for different local legislative requirements Too many country and company specific invoice formats - lack of common invoice format(s) require format to format conversions (93 % offer format conversions). Roles and responsibilities in storage are not clear for all actors in all countries (especially for service providers). Clear need for common signature formats and procedures (for exchanging and storing) Part of the respondents require one EU level format standard – part of the respondents don’t believe it is needed or that it is impossible to reach one standard.
  9. 9. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 Service Provider co- operation Service Provider co- operation Challenges: Many formats require conversions (93 % of respondents provide format conversions from one technical format to another) Fear for country specific legislative requirements It is unclear what is meant by Re-signing / countersigning Invoice volumes low growth due to the complexity of cross border customer implementations Service providers have two sided role: they are competitors but they should be also partners
  10. 10. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 Suggestions to improve Service Provider co-operation Suggestions to improve Service Provider co-operation Establish EU level Service Provider consortium to overcome cross border challenges and improve cross-border interoperability Share information of formats and standards e.g. electronic signatures Process level standardization between operators (data flow etc.) Creating instructions for the customers how to start cross border eInvoicing Agreeing on contents of co-operation agreements Database of Member States legislative requirements regarding e- invoicing (invoice data fields, electronic signatures, storage) Independent eInvoicing www site that gathers all related information and links from service providers, administration, key-users, legal authorities, finance authorities, etc... Presenting best practices of Service Provider co-operation
  11. 11. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 Conversions 1/2Conversions 1/2 42 % of respondents say that EU level format standard is required – some say that no EU level standards are needed at all Challenges: 71,1% of respondents say that they have more than one format standard in their country Data conversions relation to the electronic signatures: should converted messages be re- signed or counter-signed. Storing of original vs. converted invoice
  12. 12. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 Conversions 2/2Conversions 2/2 Suggestions: Presenting guidelines to the following issues related to the conversions between service providers: Invoice data elements in conversions (mandatory vs. optional data elements) Electronic signatures Storage Listing known formats based on questionnaire results and eInvoicing workshop members feedback Excel listing including EDI and XML formats and their special requirements
  13. 13. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 StorageStorage 73% stores invoices behalf of the originator 58% stores invoices behalf of the receivers Many service providers save the invoices behalf of both originator and receiver 13,2% don’t store the invoices Challenges Storing official invoices – what is the official invoice? Paper vs. electronic format Long term storage
  14. 14. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 Electronic signaturesElectronic signatures “Electronic signature and PKI type technologies seems to be an obstacle for rapid widening of eInvoicing” Challenges Different legislative requirements per countries regarding electronic signatures formats, verifications, storage Interoperability between countries that does not require electronic signatures and the ones that require. Suggestions Creating electronic signature implementation guidelines including different legislative requirements by countries
  15. 15. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 Open questions 1/2Open questions 1/2 What other issues you would like to present related to the eInvoicing standards? 3 on miscellaneous Legislation (1) Standards (8) No standards (4) What kind of problems you have faced in eInvoicing ? 4 on miscellaneous Co-operation problems (8) Many standards (7) Legislation/rules (10)
  16. 16. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 Open questions 2/2Open questions 2/2 What kind of actions could increase eInvoicing in Europe? 3 on miscellaneous Legislation/rules (10) Standards (9)
  17. 17. eInvoicing WS Public Event, Brussels 11 April 2006 Other notes and commentsOther notes and comments Collecting best practices and examples how to increase e-Invoicing in the local and European level Nordic country e-Invoicing support and co-operation is successful If signature service is provided it is probably used with all customers no matter which countries they are from. ‘The EU should press the member states to implement electronic invoicing. The model where the government authorities accept only eInvoices seems to be the best way
  1. A particular slide catching your eye?

    Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.

×