More Related Content Similar to Moscow final 27.4.2012 (20) Moscow final 27.4.20121. e-Invoicing
Observations from
EC Expert Group and
Nordic implementation
Moscow
27.4.2012
Bo Harald
© 2010 Tieto Corporation
2. Story-line and questions
• EU and national states globally drive e-Invoicing > When will
the Russian public sector make e-invoicing mandatory?
• Nordic countries already moving to next layers – the Real
Time Economy > Russia is well placed to do the same
• VAT automation is important step > Russia ahead of the
game
• Cross-border invoicing needs support next – tax invoice to
customs?
• SKB Kontur is a very impressive company to partner
with for Tieto
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
4. Agenda in many countries:
1.Create a clear perspective on what is
really necessary to get E-invoicing
numbers up fast and
2.assure sync with the international
developments.
•
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
5. Major steps for productivity and
the Single Market
• Two key recommendations
implemented
• New VAT directive – equal
treatment (no mandatory digital
signatures)
• ISO20022 global message
standard
• Next natural step
• Harmonized and automated
VAT-reporting and -collection
with split-payment model
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
6. 54bn reasons in Germany
“The bulk of the companies [SMEs in Germany]
squander
the sizeable efficiency gains
that come with the introduction of digital invoices
The German economy offers total cost-savings potential
of around EUR 54 bn,
mainly in more efficient processes
(immediate further processing of invoice data in company
bookkeeping and controlling systems)
Why don’t more companies make use of digital
Deutsche Bank Research report (Emphasis mine)
invoicing?”
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
7. EC Expert Group on e-Invoicing
Crystal clear mindset:
Paper invoices
have NO future
in EU
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
8. Lessons
learned in
Nordics
© 2010 Tieto Corporation
9. What we would do differently now:
solutions
• Scanning invoices delayed
migration to e-invoicing for
no good reason
• Buyer-specific portals
deployed despite most
enterprises signed up by
generic portal service
providers
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
10. What we would do differently now:
communication
• Cost-cutting aspect dwarfed
other - even more important
aspects
• Earlier deadlines for paper
and PDF
• Late and patchy visible
pricing for paper invoices.
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
11. What we would do differently now:
involvement
• SME-sector’s
organizations were not
involved strongly enough in
the beginning
• Accounting profession
should have been strongly
involved from the beginning
• Municipal sector should do
more for tax payers and
driving local enterprises
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
12. What we would do differently now:
standards
• The Finvoice standard was not
implemented strictly enough in the
beginning
• Separate bank network initially
supporting only Finvoice
• Too radical attempt to eliminate use
of attachments in Finvoice standard.
• International work should have
started earlier
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
13. What we would do differently now:
internationally
• Wrong order in SEPA
payments first - e-invoicing
later – despite our protests…
• Direct debit should be part of
e-Invoicing
• Global aspects should be
taken into account from the
start
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
15. The best way to …
approach an
e-invoicing
program
© 2010 Tieto Corporation
16. Numbers up fast..
• Only one way – invoice receivers
make it mandatory in the public
sector – and in large organizations
Why?
• SME senders do not have big
immediate benefits and do not see
the big ones coming in next phases
• Immediate benefits for society at
large, EU, the public sector and
large enterprises are enormous.. –
cannot wait – deadlines needed
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
17. Example of clear deadlines
United Paper Mills (UPM) letter to suppliers:
Model case: NO scanning
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
18. UPM not alone – deadlines (examples) for incoming
paper & PDF:
2005 – 2008 2009 cont. 2010
Denmark (by law) Rautaruukki Kone
Aalto University
Nordea Bank Helsinki Fed of Financial
Services Borås
Tampere Kesko
Blekinge
Singapore Wärtsilä Jönköping
Elisa
Italy (by law) Hansel Basware
Turku
Lindström Spain
Sweden Deloitte
2009
Götene Espoo
IBM Bank of Finland
HP
OpusCapita Corporation Finland Nokia
© 2010 Tieto 11/01/12
19. UPM not alone – deadlines (examples) for incoming
paper & PDF:
2010 cont 2011cont 2012
Vattenfall OP Bank Nordic Investment Bank
Oulu Sanomat
Kazakstan
Brazil (by law) RAY
YLE Norway
Greece (by law)
PwC Uusikaupunki Technology Industry Fed
Lahti USA
Tampere Chamber Vantaa
Canada
Stora Enso Kirkkonummi
MTV3 Russia?
Ahlström The Netherlands?
Turku University
Hämeenlinna
Mexico (by law)
2011
Finnair
© 2010 Tieto Corporation Lappeenranta 11/01/12
20. 3 approaches to adopting technology
“Any hype will do”
Early start: “Explorer”
Late (re)start: “Panicky follower”
“Ice Age”
“Huge Ice Age”
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
2006-03-23 Page 20
21. We believe in:
Collaborative offerings, making the markets and
creating networks and standards:
If you want to go fast
– go alone.
If far – go together
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
22. Wisdom from ice hockey:
“Do not go where the puck is >
go where it is going!”
Wayne Gretzky
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
23. The future is not planned
nor prognosed
It is created !
Thank you
bo.harald@tieto.com,
http://boharald.blogspot.com
© 2010 Tieto Corporation 11/01/12
Editor's Notes From Billentis report 2011 “ Esteemed trading partner, UPM moves to electronic invoice practices from 1.7.2009 onwards. In practise this means that the company only accepts electronic invoices. … . From the beginning of 2010 UPM will have to return paper invoices to the senders….”