There is not much legal content that makes businesses both familiar and prone to errors such as the time of issuing value-added invoices (VAT). Most businesses understand that selling goods or providing services must be invoiced. However, determining exactly "when to issue an invoice" is a completely different story.
The enterprise believes that the time of issuing an invoice must be the time to complete the reconciliation and sign the service handover record
In fact, many businesses are not subject to tax arrears due to false declaration of revenue or concealment of transactions, but are sanctioned for invoicing at the wrong time. This error usually does not stem from fraudulent behavior but from the difference in understanding between businesses and tax authorities about when to complete a transaction.
When businesses and tax authorities have different interpretations
WIN WIN Human Resource Supply Co., Ltd. in Dong Nai signed a labor supply contract for customers during the period from March 2, 2026 to March 31, 2026. According to the actual implementation, after the end of the working month, the parties need time to compare timesheets, confirm the actual number of employees, review the completed workload and make a record of acceptance before payment. Therefore, the enterprise believes that the time of issuing an invoice must be the time to complete the reconciliation and sign the service handover record[1].
This argument is not without basis. Decree No. 70/2025/ND-CP amending Decree No. 123/2020/ND-CP has added regulations to allow some types of services to be invoiced at the time of completion of data reconciliation between parties. Since then, many businesses believe that if the contract has reconciliation activities, they can wait for the reconciliation to be completed before issuing invoices.
However, the tax authorities came to a different conclusion. According to the guidance of the Base Tax of 3 Dong Nai city, labor supply services are not in the group of services that are subject to the invoicing mechanism according to the time of data reconciliation. Therefore, the time of invoicing must still be the time of completion of the provision of services, regardless of whether the parties have completed the acceptance test or reconciliation or not.
It can be seen that this is not only a problem of a business. In fact, many businesses are having trouble determining the boundaries between "service completion", "acceptance", "data reconciliation" and "payment".
A transaction but there are many different "time clocks"
The root cause of errors in the timing of invoices lies in the fact that each transaction often exists simultaneously with many different timelines. It can be the time of signing the contract; It can also be the time of delivery or completion of the service. It can be the time of acceptance or the time of debt reconciliation, the time of payment.
From a business perspective, businesses are often interested in the time of acceptance or payment because this is the basis for determining cash flow. Meanwhile, from a tax perspective, the regulator focuses on the time when the actual transaction is completed. It is this difference that creates a significant gap between the way businesses operate and the compliance requirements of tax laws.
For the sale of goods, the time of invoicing is the time when the ownership or right to use the goods is transferred to the buyer, regardless of whether the customer has paid or not.
For the provision of services, the time of invoicing is the time when the provision of services is completed, regardless of whether the business has collected money or not.
In other words, the fact that the customer has not paid or the parties have not completed internal procedures does not always change the invoicing obligation.
Decree 70/2025/ND-CP: facilitating but not applicable to all cases
One of the notable new points of Decree 70/2025/ND-CP is to allow some types of services with a large number of transactions, arise frequently and require time to reconcile invoiced data at the time of completion of reconciliation.
The fields entitled to this specific mechanism include a number of activities such as telecommunications, logistics, information technology sold periodically, banking services, securities services, delivery services, television advertising services and a number of other specialized fields that are specifically regulated.
This is a logical change because in these sectors, revenue is often determined based on data that arises continuously in very large volumes. It is not feasible to request an invoice at the time each transaction is completed.
However, it is worth noting that this regulation is an exception and not a general rule.
That means that not all data reconciliation activities are allowed to be back-to-date invoicing.
Legal consultancy services, tax consultancy, training, labor supply, security, sanitation, operation management, investment consultancy or many other types of ordinary services must still apply general regulations on the time of completion of service provision.
It is the confusion between exceptions and general regulations that is creating many compliance risks for businesses after Decree 70/2025/ND-CP takes effect.
Source: Government Newspaper
Common mistake: Businesses equate acceptance with service completion
One of the most common mistakes today is that businesses implicitly assume that the date of signing the acceptance record is the date of completion of the service. In fact, tax authorities do not always share the same view.
If the dossiers, documents or actual performance of the work show that the service has been completed before the time of acceptance, the tax authority can completely determine the obligation to issue invoices that have arisen from the previous time.
For example, a business provides security services to customers in 3 months. The service is implemented until the end of March 31. It took the two sides another 10 days to reconcile the number of working hours and sign the acceptance record on April 10. The enterprise issued an invoice on April 10.
From a business perspective, invoices are issued immediately after acceptance, so it is completely reasonable.
However, according to the tax authority, the service can be considered completed on March 31. If so, the invoice made on April 10 may be considered made at the wrong time.
The risk does not lie in the amount of taxes, but in the level of compliance
Many businesses believe that if they still fully declare revenue and pay the full amount of tax to be paid, issuing invoices a few days earlier or later will not have a significant impact. However, the current tax inspection practice shows that the regulator not only assesses the final tax obligation but also assesses the level of compliance with the process.
An invoice issued at the wrong time can lead to sanctioning administrative violations on invoices even if the state budget does not lose revenue.
In addition to direct sanctioning costs, businesses are also at risk of being assessed as having a higher level of compliance risk in the tax management system.
When tax authorities are promoting the use of e-invoices, big data and automatic analysis tools to control tax obligations, the possibility of detecting and sanctioning cases of improper invoicing at the right time is increasing.
What should businesses do?
To minimize risks, businesses need to change their approach to invoice management.
First of all, businesses should review the entire list of goods and services they are providing to determine the exact regulations on the time of issuing invoices applicable to each type of transaction.
Next, it is necessary to clearly distinguish what is the time of service completion and what is the time of acceptance or payment. The acceptance record should not be taken for granted as the only basis for determining the obligation to issue invoices.
For long-term or recurring service contracts, businesses should develop internal processes that clearly define the time of completion of services and the responsibility to notify the accounting department.
Contract terms also need to be scrutinized. Many current contracts stipulate that the acceptance period lasts from 10 to 30 days after the work is completed. This regulation may be commercially appropriate, but it does not mean that the obligation to issue invoices is postponed accordingly.
Finally, businesses need to be especially cautious when applying the new regulations on data reconciliation according to Decree 70/2025/ND-CP. Only cases specified by law are allowed to determine the time of issuance of invoices according to the reconciliation mechanism. Expanding adoption to other types of services can result in significant legal risks.
Conclusion
In the context of tax management that is increasingly based on electronic data and real-time monitoring capabilities, the timing of invoices is no longer a mere administrative procedure for the accounting department. This has become an important compliance management issue, requiring close coordination between sales, operations, legal, and finance and accounting. An invoice issued a few days late may not change the amount of tax payable, but it can completely become a basis for the tax authority to assess the level of compliance of the business. And in the modern governance environment, sometimes the biggest risk lies not in the amount of additional taxes to be paid, but in the fact that the business is determined to have not complied with regulations.
Lawyer Nguyen Van Phuc
HM&P Law Firm
Read more: Xuất hóa đơn thuế GTGT - Chết vì cái mốc thời gian
[1] https://portal.mof.gov.vn/hoidapcstc/home/cthoidap/162567, accessed on 03/06/2026.
