daniel thorowgood Posted October 12, 2021 Share Posted October 12, 2021 The new Reduced Rate 2 tax code has been introduced recently but now using a GUID instead of the string value (e.g. GB_EXEMPT) as per previous VAT codes. This breaks our integration as some Tax Codes use string code naming convention and now the new one uses GUID (As per screenshot). This must be a mistake, right?! Can you please update so the new VAT rate uses a Code following the original naming convention? Or, move all to GUIDs so the construct is uniform and we can code against it effectively? Unless this is fixed we will have to code for this glaring inconistency. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel thorowgood Posted October 13, 2021 Author Share Posted October 13, 2021 @Ben Smith as an administrator (sorry for picking on you!), could review this topic and provide some response? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Ben Smith Posted October 13, 2021 Administrators Share Posted October 13, 2021 Hi Daniel, Thank you for bringing this to my attention - I'll investigate and get back to you ASAP. Thanks, Ben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Ben Smith Posted October 13, 2021 Administrators Share Posted October 13, 2021 Hi Daniel, Could you give me details on what specifically about the use of the GUID is breaking your integration please? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel thorowgood Posted October 13, 2021 Author Share Posted October 13, 2021 (edited) @Ben Smith Thanks for the swift response. Previous UK / GB tax codes supply a string value for the "Code" / 'ID" (e.g. GB_Lower, GB_Exempt, GB_STandard etc.). Therefore, we coded our integration on the basis that the auto-managed tax rates in SBC will supply named codes ot GUIDs. The newly / recently introduced VAT rate for "Reduced Rate 2 UK" supply's a GUID as the code (as per original screenshot), which is a different data_type and also breaks the uniform naming convention. In our integration we concatenate "code + ' - ' + name" to provide a more user-friendly name in our UI. The introduction of GUID means our UI now displays a GUID to users, which is obviously sub-optimal. Ideally, we'd like you to update the underlying code / object on your side to follow the original convention, for example GB_REDUCED. Edited October 13, 2021 by daniel thorowgood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Ben Smith Posted October 13, 2021 Administrators Share Posted October 13, 2021 Thanks a lot Daniel, that makes perfect sense. I'm discussing it with the engineering team at present and will update you as soon as I have more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daniel thorowgood Posted October 19, 2021 Author Share Posted October 19, 2021 @Ben Smith any update on this thread? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Ben Smith Posted October 20, 2021 Administrators Share Posted October 20, 2021 Hi Daniel, Sorry for the delay. I've had a meeting this morning to figure this all out. Essentially the change from a string ID to a GUID has come about with recent changes made as part of the EU VAT reform updates we made. A new endpoint has been added called tax determinations which essentially returns a list of legislatively valid tax rates when queried along with params describing the usage etc. Due to the vastly increased number of rate combinations required and the way they are generated a GUID was used. It isn't a one off and won't be something we'll be in a position to change. I am however sorry that this hasn't been communicated prior to the change going into production. What we are recommending going forward is that you don't use the ID property to show information to the customer (allowing for selection etc.), and rather than concatenating name + id, just the displayed_as property instead, as that will remain a string description, and as you may have seen is in many instances in fact a better description than the ID & name were previously. I hope you are ok to make this change, and apologies again that we didn't get this information out prior to that release. Ben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now