B2B vs B2G e-invoicing: the EU directive, national mandates and B2C

B2G e-invoicing rests on one EU law: Directive 2014/55/EU obliges every public buyer in the Union to receive and process e-invoices that comply with EN 16931, and several Member States have turned that into an obligation on suppliers to send them. B2B e-invoicing has no EU-wide mandate before the ViDA cross-border regime of 2030; Germany, France, Belgium and Poland each legislated their own domestic B2B obligation with their own dates, formats and channels. B2C invoices are covered by none of these mandates, though Poland allows and France reports them.

B2G: what Directive 2014/55/EU obliges and what countries added

The directive obliges contracting authorities and contracting entities to accept EN 16931 invoices from their suppliers; it does not oblige suppliers to send them — that step was added nationally.

Directive 2014/55/EU applies to invoices issued under contracts covered by the public-procurement directives (2014/24/EU, 2014/25/EU, 2014/23/EU, 2009/81/EC). Its Article 2 definition — an invoice "issued, transmitted and received in a structured electronic format which allows for its automatic and electronic processing" — is the origin of the definition every national law now uses. The receiving obligation applied 18 months after the standard's reference was published (17 October 2017), with a further 12 months allowed for sub-central authorities. See EU requirements for the EU layer in detail.

What the directive left open is everything a supplier has to do: whether it must send electronically at all, in which of the EN 16931 syntaxes or national CIUS, through which channel and with which routing identifier. The four countries answered differently.

B2B: national mandates, not an EU mandate

Before 2030 there is no EU obligation to issue structured invoices between businesses; ViDA merely removed the need for a Council derogation, so each Member State legislates its own domestic B2B mandate.

The four countries KRONENWERK covers have all done so, and the designs differ on every axis: who is in scope, from when, which formats count, whether a network or platform is prescribed, and whether the tax authority sees the invoice.

Two patterns recur. Germany is a "format mandate": the law fixes what an e-invoice is and leaves transport free. Belgium is a "network mandate": the format is fixed by the network's specification and the network is compulsory. France and Poland are "clearance-adjacent": a platform or the state system sits in the path and reports to the tax authority. The Peppol versus national networks page compares the transport models; the timeline orders all dates.

B2C: not covered — with two national wrinkles

None of the mandates obliges a structured invoice to a private consumer, but Poland allows consumer invoices in KSeF and France collects consumer-sale data through e-reporting.

Germany: the BMF FAQ confirms that invoices to consumers remain outside the obligation. Belgium: "This obligation does not apply to invoices sent to these individuals" (efactuur.belgium.be). Poland: "Faktury na rzecz osób fizycznych nieprowadzących działalności gospodarczej mogą być wystawiane w KSeF dobrowolnie" — voluntary, at the issuer's choice. France: B2C sales are not e-invoicing operations, but the amounts must be transmitted to the administration through e-reporting via the approved platform, on the same phased calendar as issuing. A shop or SaaS business selling to consumers in France therefore has a reporting duty even without an invoice mandate; its exact content requires professional confirmation.

Where the lines blur

A single company often sits on several sides of these lines at once, and the obligations stack rather than replace each other.

• A public body's supplier that also sells B2B. A German engineering firm sends XRechnung with Leitweg-ID to a federal authority and, from 2027, EN 16931 invoices to its business customers by whatever channel they agree — the same format, two routing conventions.
• A Belgian company with public and private customers. Both go over Peppol; the public buyer is reached through Mercurius' Peppol identifier, the private one through its enterprise number. One channel, one format.
• A Polish company selling to a Polish municipality. Since 2026 KSeF is integrated with PEF, so the KSeF invoice serves the B2G case too, according to the Commission's country sheet.
• Cross-border. All four B2B mandates stop at the border; the cross-border page explains which rules apply instead.
• Exempt and small businesses. Germany excludes most exempt supplies; Poland excludes issuers under the SME procedure of Article 113a; France and Belgium have their own carve-outs. Whether a given company is caught requires professional confirmation.

How KRONENWERK handles this

KRONENWERK generates the B2G and B2B format each country expects at issuance and validates it before the invoice is issued; the transport differs by country and is the part with limitations.

• Germany — XRechnung (with Leitweg-ID for public buyers) and ZUGFeRD, validated with the KoSIT Schematron rules and cross-checked with the Mustang library; delivery by email or download, which the BMF FAQ accepts for B2B. SUPPORTED
• Belgium — Peppol BIS Billing 3.0 UBL for B2B and B2G; KRONENWERK sends and receives over Peppol through an accredited access point provider (Storecove) once the company is connected in Settings → Delivery. SUPPORTED WITH LIMITATIONS
• France — Factur-X generation SUPPORTED; transmission through an approved platform (B2B) or to Chorus Pro (B2G) NOT YET READY. KRONENWERK is not a plateforme agréée.
• Poland — FA(3) generation SUPPORTED WITH LIMITATIONS; KSeF submission NOT YET READY — the module has not been used against the production KSeF.
• B2C — PDF invoices with the tax verdict; no structured file is forced onto a consumer invoice. French e-reporting is not performed by KRONENWERK. REQUIRES PROFESSIONAL CONFIRMATION

Country pages: Germany, Belgium, France, Poland; product: e-invoicing; back to the Europe hub.