1



Window of opportunity



Many countries/EU are focusing on e-invoice/e-ordering/ecatalogues
We regard UBL 2.0 as having the largest potential to realize large scale cross border at this point in time
Possibility to influence and promote the international UBL 2.0 process – adoption of UBL in UN/CEFACT
Common Northern European Subset can:


Reduce problems of interoperability on message level
Facilitate large scale cross border e-trade (B2B/B2G)
2





Danish law on the use of e-invoice (OIOXML) based on UBL 0.7 potential expansion of law to include e-order based on UBL 2.0
Swedish recommendation to use the UBL 1.0 based Svefaktura
Nordic workshops in May and November 2005 on UBL and einvoice lead to December meeting (Sweden and Denmark). Two working groups were established


UBL 2.0 subset group (weekly meetings till October 2006)
ICT architecture working groups (meeting in March)
 cross border trade - Transportation of messages, eID, company dossier
Norway, Finland, England and Iceland have joined the UBL subset working group later
3




The purpose of the development of the Northern European subset is to facilitate harmonisation of different types of eprocurement documents in countries that are already using UBL or that contemplate using UBL 2.0 documents.


This provides an opportunity to base e-procurement documents and processes on a coordinated Northern European subset.
The intention is to facilitate interoperability and practical use of ecommerce both in domestic and cross border trade.
Even if the participants in the working group are mainly from the public sector, the group will try to include both business-to-business and business-to-government e-commerce/e-procurement in its work.
The purpose of working group is also to contribute with its work to the international UBL 2.0 process.
4







Denmark
 Danish Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (VTU),
 Danish IT and Telecom Agency (ITST)
Norway


Norwegian Ministry of Government Administration and Reform eProcurement Secretariat
(www.ehandel.no) e2b Forum (an e-invoicing initiative in the private sector supported by the government www.e2b.no).
Sweden
 Single Face To Industry (SFTI), the public sector initiative in Sweden to promote e-business by the
Swedish National Financial Management Authority (ESV), Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (Sveriges Kommuner och Landsting), and Swedish Administrative Development
Agency (Verva)
England
 OGC buying solutions under Office of Government Commerce
Finland
 State Treasury
 Tieke Finnish Information Society Development Centre
Island

The Financial Management Authority (Fjársýsla Ríkisins).
 Iceland Committtee on e-business and Trade Procedures" ICEPRO
5

 The working group will strive to full fill the following objectives in their work to support the public sector's seamless commercial interactions with its suppliers and software providers:


 ensure the integrity of procurement data for fiscal and management information purposes participate in activities to form an agreed standard for procurement transactions (e.g. ISO) and ensure that public sector sponsored systems and other relevant software providers will be able to comply at a minimal cost when this is agreed allow suppliers and other interested parties to be involved in the review process
6







To establish a subset of UBL 2.0, which defines our needs of domestic and cross border trading, and takes into consideration both business-to-business and business-to-government scenarios. In this context, the subset includes schemas, business rules and the relevant scenarios of use
To support and influence the development of UBL 2.0 in terms of making the results of the working group part of the international
UBL 2.0 process.
To promote international recognition and usage of UBL 2.0, including a promotion of UBL adoption in UN/CEFACT.
7






Develop processes based on a common subset, which describes the domestic procedures as well as cross border trade etc.
Establish a common subset of the UBL schemas that express the expansions and restrictions agreed by the representatives
Formulate a set up for a common and local validation of the
UBL 2.0 schemas expressed in Schematron
Formulate common business rules and recommendations , which the representatives can agree on and which are not expressed in the schemas.
Develop guidelines for the use of UBL.
8



Defined in ToR


The first working group meeting was held on January 4-5th 2006 in
Copenhagen.
The deliverables are to be completed no later than October 1st.
2006.
Proposed overall schedule
9

No Scenario
Business Process/Scenario
1 Stand alone Invoice
2
5
Stand alone Invoice with Credit Note
Order, Simple Response (positive), Invoice
14 Order and Simple Response
7 Stand alone Order
17 Establish Catalogue
18 Price update
20 Item update
Y
Y
Y
DK
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
SE
Country having an interest
NO FI IS
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
(Y)
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
UK
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Country prepared to commit resources
SE, NO
SE, NO
DK, SE, NO
DK, SE
SE
DK, NO
DK, NO
DK, NO
6
9
Order, Invoice
Withdraw Order
21 Self Billed Invoice
8 Order, Order Response (positive), Invoice
11 Counter offer with reject
13 Counter offer with explicit acceptance
23 Requested Price update
12 Counter offer with implied acceptance
10 Change Order
15 Dispatch Advice
22 Self Billed Invoice with Self Billed Credit
Note
3 Stand alone Invoice with Debit Note
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y Y
(Y)
(Y)
Y
(Y)
(Y)
(Y)
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
Y
DK, SE
DK
DK
DK, NO
DK
DK
DK
DK
SE
NO
NO
NO
SE
Lead
SE
DK
10




Focus on the “basic procurement process”
 Catalogue – Order - Invoice
Private sector involvement in subset group:



Denmark: Sektorstandardiseringsudvalget
Sweden: support group for SFTI
Norway: e2b forum
Potential preparation for Phase II
11




Cross border pilot between few countries to identify and solve practical, technical and legal issues


 based on EU-work already done different cross border pilots but with focus on scalebility and flexibility
Working groups



Technical/legal group(s)
Steering group (private/public sector of pilot countries)
Reference group (all interested countries/organisations)
Tests with companies and public sector institutions
12



Large scale cross border trade between multiple countries


B2G
B2B
Interoperable solution to common problems


 eID
Company dossier
Transportation
 The results of the different phases can stand alone
13