ŠAVŠ/TAČR Digital Czechia in a Digital Europe

68

can then be used by other state institutions or audit companies to check the business transactions. This method eliminates possible manipulation with already issued documents, which can include, for example, non-accounting changes or modifications of serial numbers of issued invoices, content changes for individual invoiced items, correction of invoiced amounts, adjustments of VAT rates, etc. Electronic invoicing, as defined by Directive 2014/55/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, helps achieve business cooperation at the B2G level as well as in cross-border cooperation between state institutions and companies operating abroad. Without the provision of a single tool for electronic invoicing, it would be a considerable challenge for many foreign companies to engage in performing business transactions with state institutions in other member states of the European Union because of prevailing differences in national legislation. In this way, Directive 2014/55/EU substantially and deliberately reduces barriers in the area of cross-border trade based on B2G, thus facilitating the more efficient implementation of contracts intended for public administration. As can be seen from the above text, electronic invoicing is currently regulated only in the area of ​B2G and does not deal with the legislation of e-invoicing in terms of B2B. The current practice in the field of B2B is thus based mainly on a solution where the supplier first prepares an invoice in the company’s information system, accounting software or other program. It then most often converts this invoice into the PDF format. The file is then usually sent via e-mail to its customer. If the supplier wants to increase the credibility of the entire process, he/she can usually send the invoice to the customer via the data box again in PDF format. However, this solution can be applied only if both parties are allowed to send and receive data messages in the data box and from authorities other than public administration. At the same time, it is important to emphasize that the process described here cannot be understood as a form of electronic invoicing, as it completely denies the possibility of automatic data processing. Unfortunately, theCzechRepublic lacks legislation that would allowelectronic invoicing between business entities. The authors of this comparative analysis believe that electronic invoicing, as it is currently used in B2G transactions, will be a sort of bedrock that will enable the subsequent implementation of e-invoicing in the B2B environment. Mandatory electronic invoicing between business entities would enable more efficient collection of tax liability, especially concerning corporate income tax, value added tax and excise duty. At the same time, this instrument could reduce the risk of possible secondary insolvency as it would motivate debtors to pay their liabilities on time in pre-agreed terms. Since