Error or warning? How to handle NAV’s eVAT feedback
Which NAV messages block an eVAT return? Errors, warnings and R error codes explained, with the changes announced for October and the new A60 messages.
In eVAT, an error blocks submission. A return with a warning can be filed, but the flagged difference needs review. An information message does not block filing. Each severity therefore calls for a different response.
This guide shows where messages arise in the filing process, how to trace an affected item, and when source data need correcting. It also covers the changes NAV announced for October and the new messages of the A60 EC sales list. Individual codes are explained in our eVAT validation message database.
The NAV message list in numbers
- 78 blocking errors that prevent submission
- 20 warnings that ask for review
- 39 technical error codes at request and upload level
- 18 new warnings announced for October
Source: eVAT M2M 2.0 specification v1.1 and NAV notice (#372, 31 August 2026)
Error, warning, information
Messages about the content of the return come in three severities: error (ERROR), warning (WARN) and information (INFO). What to do depends on the severity:
The three severity levels of feedback
First check whether the message blocks submission. The code then helps identify the cause.
Error (ERROR)
The return goes to ABORTED, so it cannot be submitted in this form
What to do:
- Fix the cause in the source data or the tax-code mapping
- Upload the corrected file with a version number one higher
Avoid:
- Resending the rejected file without correcting it
Warning (WARN)
Does not block submission, but may point to a content issue
What to do:
- Review it item by item
- Fix real errors; record the reason for justified differences
Avoid:
- Ignoring it without review
Information (INFO)
No effect on submission
What to do:
- Take note, and record it internally if needed
Severity levels as defined in the eVAT M2M 2.0 specification; the actions are suggestions. Source: eVAT M2M 2.0 interface specification, pp. 137–138
Technical errors have their own severity scale (CRITICAL or ERROR): they concern the request, authentication or upload, not the content of the return.
Where does the feedback come from?
Feedback does not come from a single check. The return passes through several stages, each filtering out a different kind of problem:
Where does the feedback come from?
Move between steps by clicking the numbers or with Previous and Next.
- Before sending: Schema check — The file structure can be checked against NAV’s schema locally, before anything is sent. (Can be checked locally)
- NAV processing: Technical check — NAV checks the request, authentication and permissions. On failure the request never reaches return processing. (Technical error code)
- NAV processing: File processing — NAV verifies the checksum (hash), unpacks the file and checks it against the schema. (Blocking error)
- NAV processing: Business validation — NAV checks the content of the return: header, items, summary and supplementary sheets. (Error, warning, information)
- NAV processing: Form-level check of the return — NAV’s return-processing system also checks the return built from the items. Error codes from this step start with the letter R (for example R742) and are not listed in the specification. (R error codes)
- Independent of submission: Long-running checks — Some comparisons may continue after the return reaches FINISHED. Their results should be reviewed, but submission does not depend on waiting for them. (Warnings)
Steps based on the eVAT M2M 2.0 specification and answers from NAV’s developers.
After checking the items, NAV builds the return from them and also checks whether the lines of the return are consistent with each other. Error codes from this check start with the letter R. One example is “[2465A-01-02] 64C = 64B * 0,05 (Hibakód=R742)”. It means that on sheet 01-02 of the 2465A return, the VAT on line 64 (column C) does not equal 5% of the tax base (column B). R error codes are not included in the M2M specification’s message list, so their explanation cannot be found there or in the error code database. Check the return data first; if they do not explain the result, search NAV’s developer forum. NAV corrected system-side problems reported for the R742 rounding check and the R454 self-revision check.
How do you read a NAV message?
| Field | What it contains | What it is for |
|---|---|---|
| validationResultCode | The severity: ERROR, WARN or INFO | Tells you whether submission is blocked |
| validationErrorCode | The error code, e.g. INVALID_TAXCODE | The key for looking up the explanation |
| message | NAV’s text message | A fuller description than the code; also searchable |
| pointer.lineNumber | The sequence number of the affected analytics item | Identifies the faulty item |
| pointer.tag, pointer.value | The name and value of the affected field | Identifies the faulty data |
For an item-level message, the pointer may identify the item number, field or value. Use the available details to find the item in the filing software. Including your own VAT code in the records also makes it easier to check the internal mapping; see part 4 of the series.
Where do you see the feedback?
eVAT M2M
Over the machine connection, the software receives the technical and business messages by querying the processing status — with a reference to the item for item-level errors — together with the status of the long-running checks. The query requires the “Convenience services, queries” permission for the technical user.
A large analytics file can produce many warnings, so it helps if the software shows the messages sorted by severity and item.
Web XML upload
For web XML upload, after “Refresh status” the “Validation results” page shows every error and warning with its code. According to NAV’s manual, filing is blocked by errors and severe errors.
eVAT web interface
On the eVAT web interface, the messages appear under “Pre-validation results” after the draft return has been pre-validated. With an error, the return cannot be filed until another pre-validation finds it error-free; if there are only warnings, the return can be filed.
Some typical blocking errors
NAV’s list currently contains 78 blocking errors. The table below shows only a few examples, to illustrate the kind of problems that block submission. The full list can be searched in our eVAT validation message database.
| Message | What it means | Typical cause |
|---|---|---|
| CONFLICTING_FREQUENCY_PERIOD | The filing frequency does not match NAV’s master data | The frequency changed during the year, or a wrong value was entered in the header |
| CONFLICTING_RETURNDECISION_RETURNSTATEMENTS | The payout decision and the payout statement contradict each other | No payout requested but a statement is present, or the other way round |
| CONFLICTING_TOTALROWCOUNT_ANALYTICSITEMCOUNT | The stated number of analytics rows does not match the actual number | An item was removed or added afterwards and the count was not updated |
| MISSING_SHEETLIST | A supplementary sheet required by the tax code is missing | A transaction tied to a sheet, such as reverse charge, without the sheet |
| INVALID_CONFLICTING_SUMTAXAMOUNT_SUMACCOUNTEDTAX | The summary balance does not match the value calculated from the items | Different rounding, or counting the full VAT for partial deduction |
| INVALID_TAXCODE | A tax code that does not exist or is not valid on the tax point date | An outdated mapping table |
| INVALID_DEDUCTION_AMOUNT | The deductible amount exceeds the item’s VAT | A wrong deduction rate or sign |
| MISSING_DEDUCTION_RATE | For MD64–MD66, the rate is missing next to deduction data | Incomplete partial-deduction data |
In detail: INVALID_TAXCODE · INVALID_CONFLICTING_SUMTAXAMOUNT_SUMACCOUNTEDTAX · MISSING_SHEETLIST · CONFLICTING_FREQUENCY_PERIOD
Warnings: when do they need attention?
A warning does not block submission, but it flags a difference that may point to a content error. It is therefore worth reviewing each one and, if the difference is justified, recording the reason. The table shows only a few examples per group; the full list of the 20 warnings in force is in the database.
| Group | Example | What it points to |
|---|---|---|
| Timing differences | TAXPOINTDATE_NOT_IN_DECLARATION_PERIOD, TAXPOINTDATE_TOO_EARLY, TAXPOINTDATE_LATE | The tax point date does not fit the return period; this can be justified under cash accounting |
| Incompatible tax codes | INCOMPATIBLE_TAXCODES_1–6 | Mutually exclusive transaction types on one document, e.g. domestic and intra-Community supply |
| Self-revision surcharge | CONFLICTING_INCREASE_ALLOWANCE, CONFICTING_REDUCTION_ALLOWANCE, NO_ALLOWANCE_REQUIRED | The surcharge does not fit the change in liability or the 15-day deadline |
| Differences from NAV’s data | CONFLICTING_STANDARDTAXCODE, CONFLICTING_SOURCEDOCUMENTID, CONFLICTING_SUM_TAXAMOUNT | The analytics differ from Online Invoice data, e.g. a deducted invoice is not in it |
| Nil return despite data | TOTAL_ROW_COUNT_REGISTER_DATA_MISMATCH | Nil analytics, although NAV holds invoice, cash register or customs data for the period |
One particularity in self-revisions: a developer reported on NAV’s developer forum that, for a decreasing liability, a warning can arrive however the surcharge fields are filled. This does not block submission, but the taxpayer is responsible for the correct surcharge, so it is worth checking the calculation separately.
Warnings NAV announced for October
NAV’s notice of 31 August 2026 describes 18 new warnings planned for October and changes to the wording of 11 existing messages. Six of the planned checks are immediate and twelve are long-running; most compare VAT records with invoice and cash register data held by NAV:
A business event recorded twice: an item with the same partner and content, but under a different document number.
The same invoice appears both as a sale and as a deductible item.
A reverse-charge invoice whose item is missing from the analytics, on both the issuer and the recipient side.
Online Invoice or cash register data show VAT payable, but the analytics do not — for example a 27% or 18% item is missing.
A higher VAT rate on deduction than in Online Invoice, or a different issue date or partner tax number.
For an intra-Community supply of goods (MP02), the customer’s EU VAT number is missing.
The notice does not assign identifiers or codes to the new warnings. They are therefore listed in our database as announced messages, using the text NAV published. NAV’s notice (#372)
The A60 EC sales list has its own messages
On 3 October, NAV also published the schema and validation list of the A60 EC sales list (recapitulative statement), for now on a separate development branch of its GitHub repository. The statement is a separate XML, but it is submitted through the same eVAT channel with the same API logic as the VAT return. Feedback works the same way too: an error blocks submission, a warning does not.
| Group | Identifiers | What it checks |
|---|---|---|
| Tax ID and EU VAT number | SV0001, SV0002, SV0006, SV0008 | Whether the tax identification number matches the master data and the EU VAT number matches the logged-in user’s data; if the tax number has ended, the tax identification number is mandatory |
| Legal predecessor and name | SV0007, SV0009, SV0010 | Whether the legal predecessor’s tax number matches, and whether the family and given name fields fit the taxpayer type |
| Statement period | SV0003, SV0004, SV0005 | Whether the period fits the statement frequency, does not start before 1 January 2024, and does not end before it starts |
| Item data (warnings) | SE0002, SE0003, SE0004, SE0005 | Duplicated item, a partner with a domestic tax number, or a conflict in the tax base or currency calculated from invoice-level data |
SE0004 and SE0005 run only if the statement also contains invoice-level data. According to NAV, this part cannot be made mandatory because the EU directive requires only the summary; those who fill it in get additional checks. Two A60 codes share their name with a VAT-return code (PERIOD_INTERVAL_FREQUENCY_MISMATCH and CONFLICTING_PERIODSTART_PERIODEND), so for A60 it is best to search by the SV or SE identifier. NAV’s answer (#348)
The messages go live when filing the statement through eVAT is introduced; NAV will announce the date together with the legislative changes. On the same development branch, the VAT return schema also changes: on attachment sheets 07 and 08, quantity and tax base may be negative. A60 messages in the database
Technical errors
Technical error codes such as FORBIDDEN, INVALID_SECURITY_USER or INVALID_REQUEST_SIGNATURE arise at the level of the request, authentication or upload; NAV has not yet looked at the content of the return. Typical causes are a missing permission or an incorrectly computed signature; permissions are covered in part 5 of the series.
OPERATION_FAILED indicates an unexpected technical failure. Check the operation’s status before trying again, especially after a submission request, to avoid starting a duplicate operation. If it did not complete, retry; report persistent failures to NAV. In late September, NAV said it had fixed one such issue reported on its developer forum.
What does this mean for you?
For companies
In a company, it is worth deciding in advance who handles which kind of feedback:
Technical errors: whoever operates or provides the software, since the cause lies in the connection, authentication or permissions.
Blocking content errors: accounting or the chief accountant, since the fix is in the source data or the tax-code mapping.
Warnings: the person responsible for the return, who decides on a fix or records the reason for the difference.
Time buffer: do not upload the return on the last day, since fixing an error means a new upload and a new validation.
Assign owners and agree on the order of review before the first live return.
For accounting firms
In an accounting firm, feedback arrives from many clients at once. It is worth organising it:
An overview per client: one place should show which return needs fixing and which can be submitted.
Recurring errors: if the same error appears for several clients, check the shared tax-code mapping and the accounting software’s export.
Involving the client: some errors, such as a missing document or the payout decision, can only be fixed with the client.
Track the resolution separately for each client: the same error code may have different underlying causes.
Practical cases: error or warning?
Error or warning — and what to do?
Six typical pieces of feedback from upload to submission. The explanations are based on NAV’s specification, its manual and public answers from NAV’s developers.
- The return is FINISHED, but several items get the warning TAXPOINTDATE_NOT_IN_DECLARATION_PERIOD. The company uses cash accounting. What should you do?
- The return cannot be submitted until the warning disappears — No. A warning does not block submission; only errors do.
- Change the tax point dates to fall within the return period — No. The tax point date must reflect when the VAT liability or right of deduction arises. A warning is not a reason to change it arbitrarily.
- Correct: Review the items; if cash accounting explains the difference, the return can be submitted — Correct. The NAV message itself notes that cash accounting may explain the difference. If the items are correct, record the reason; the return can be submitted.
- NAV returns ABORTED with the error CONFLICTING_TOTALROWCOUNT_ANALYTICSITEMCOUNT. What happened?
- NAV holds more invoices than the analytics — No. Differences from Online Invoice data are reported as warnings; this error is an internal inconsistency of the file.
- The file is too large and must be split — No. Exceeding the size limit has its own error code.
- Correct: The stated number of analytics rows does not match the actual number of items — Correct. Typically, an item was removed or added afterwards and the count was not updated. After fixing it, upload again with a version number one higher.
- The return fails the form-level check with: “[2465A-01-02] 64C = 64B * 0,05 (Hibakód=R742)”. Where does this come from, and where should you look?
- Correct: From NAV’s return-processing system: the VAT on line 64 does not equal 5% of the tax base — Correct. Error codes starting with R come from the form-level check of the return built from the items, and are not listed in the specification. For this message, NAV’s developers confirmed a rounding problem and fixed it, so it is also worth checking NAV’s developer forum in such cases.
- From the schema check; the XML checker shows the error — No. The schema check covers structure, not the arithmetic relationships between return lines.
- From the tax-code catalogue: code MD64 has been withdrawn — No. An invalid tax code produces an INVALID_TAXCODE error.
- The upload succeeds, but querying the processing status returns FORBIDDEN. What does it point to?
- The return has a content error — No. FORBIDDEN is a technical error code: the request never reached content validation.
- Correct: The technical user lacks the query permission — Correct. Querying the processing status requires the “Convenience services, queries” permission. Permissions are covered in part 5 of the series.
- NAV has not processed the return yet — No. During processing, the query returns the in-progress status, not an error.
- A CONFLICTING_SOURCEDOCUMENTID warning arrives: a deducted invoice is not in the Online Invoice system. It was issued by a foreign supplier. What is the right approach?
- Remove the item from the analytics — No. If the right of deduction exists, the item belongs in the analytics; the warning only flags the difference.
- Correct: Check the invoice; if it is genuine, the warning is justified and the return can be submitted — Correct. The Online Invoice system holds data from domestic issuers, so the difference is explained for a foreign supplier’s invoice. Record the reason.
- The return can only be submitted once the warning disappears — No. Warnings do not block submission.
- In a self-revision, VAT payable decreases, and a warning (E0014 or E0015) arrives however the surcharge fields are filled. Can the self-revision be submitted?
- No, NAV has to fix the rule first — No. A warning does not block submission.
- Yes, but only if the surcharge fields are filled with zero — No. Zero can also trigger a warning, and the surcharge value is determined by the actual calculation.
- Correct: Yes; the warning does not block it, but check the surcharge calculation separately — Correct. A developer reported on NAV’s developer forum that, for a decreasing liability, both ways of filling the fields can trigger a warning because of how the two rules are defined. Submission is not blocked, but the taxpayer is responsible for the correct surcharge.
How SimplyX supports this
SimplyX pre-validates the return before submission, so format errors surface before NAV sees the file. It displays NAV’s validation results, tracks submission statuses, sends notifications about changes and logs every step, so feedback and fixes can be traced later. How SimplyX eVAT M2M works
Related resources
eVAT validation messages — validation messages, changes and technical codes
eVAT XML checker — schema validation in the browser, without sending data
eVAT M2M registration — technical user, keys and permissions
Next step
Part 8, the final part of the series, shows when a return is really submitted, how versions work, and when a self-revision is needed. The test return is covered in part 6.
Sources
NAV: eVAT M2M 2.0 interface specification, v1.1 (July 2026, in Hungarian)
NAV notice: eVAT M2M validations are changing (#372, 31 August 2026, in Hungarian)
NAV: eVAT user manual (in Hungarian)
NAV notice: A60 schema published (#455, 3 October 2026, in Hungarian)
NAV: A60 ERROR and WARNING validations (30 September 2026, in Hungarian)
NAV developers: the A60 itemised part is optional (issue #348)
NAV developers: what the BEVFELD_CHECK status means (#45)
NAV developers: R742 rounding error (issue #129)
NAV developers: fix of the R454 self-revision error (issue #390)