You're welcome. :-)
As far as the split between the tax and the net amount between the two payments is concerned, it probably depends on the local tax legislation rather than anything else. If a prepayment is not taxable in your case, then there may be no tax included in the voucher payment. If it is taxable, I'd assume that the ratio between the tax and net amount would be the same for the two payments. But again, ask your financial specialists.
Tomas Hajny
CD - Telematika
Od: Gaber Terseglav via TM Forum Community Odesláno: sobota, 1. května 2021 0:59 Předmět: RE: Open APIs : Connecting payments and product orders via TMF TMF676_Payment Management API and TMF622 Product Ordering ManagementAPI |
Thanks for your detailed explanation Tomas. This is how it could be done, based on my understanding: Let us say that we have only one... -posted to the "Open APIs" community
Re: Connecting payments and product orders via TMF TMF676_Payment Management API and TMF622 Product Ordering ManagementAPI | | | Thanks for your detailed explanation Tomas.
This is how it could be done, based on my understanding: Let us say that we have only one purchaseOrder [id=1] with one net, tax and total amount (e.g. net=50 EUR, tax=5 EUR, total=55 EUR). Customer received voucher for 10 EUR and he would like to use the voucher and pay the rest with cash on delivery. My assumption is that first tax amount is payed and only then net price. Options: V1) payment amount of the first payment instrument (voucher) covers entire order tax amount, but only partially order net amount: second payment instrument is needed for the remainder of net amount, V2) payment amount of the first payment instrument (voucher) covers entire order tax amount and entire order total amount: second payment instrument not needed, V3) payment amount of the first payment instrument (voucher) covers portion of order tax amount: second payment instrument is needed for the remainder of tax amount and entire net amount;
Data model for the described scenario would look like this (option V1): Payment1: [paymentMethod=Voucher, tax=5 EUR, net=5 EUR, total=10 EUR], ** paymentItem 1 [tax=5 EUR, net=5 EUR, total=10 EUR] ** entityRef 1 [purchaseOrderId=1] Payment1: [paymentMethod=Cash on delivery, tax=0 EUR, net=45 EUR, total=45 EUR], ** paymentItem 1 [tax=0 EUR, net=45 EUR, total=45 EUR] ** entityRef 2 [purchaseOrderId=1]
------------------------------ Gaber Terseglav TO BE VERIFIED ------------------------------ | | Reply to Group Online View Thread Recommend Forward Flag as Inappropriate |
Original Message: Sent: Apr 30, 2021 12:24 | |
You are receiving this notification because you followed the 'Connecting payments and product orders via TMF TMF676_Payment Management API and TMF622 Product Ordering ManagementAPI' message thread. If you do not wish to follow this, please click here. Update your email preferences to choose the types of email you receive Unsubscribe from all participation emails | | |
Original Message:
Sent: 4/30/2021 6:57:00 PM
From: Gaber Terseglav
Subject: RE: Connecting payments and product orders via TMF TMF676_Payment Management API and TMF622 Product Ordering ManagementAPI
Thanks for your detailed explanation Tomas.
This is how it could be done, based on my understanding:
Let us say that we have only one purchaseOrder [id=1] with one net, tax and total amount (e.g. net=50 EUR, tax=5 EUR, total=55 EUR). Customer received voucher for 10 EUR and he would like to use the voucher and pay the rest with cash on delivery. My assumption is that first tax amount is payed and only then net price. Options:
V1) payment amount of the first payment instrument (voucher) covers entire order tax amount, but only partially order net amount: second payment instrument is needed for the remainder of net amount,
V2) payment amount of the first payment instrument (voucher) covers entire order tax amount and entire order total amount: second payment instrument not needed,
V3) payment amount of the first payment instrument (voucher) covers portion of order tax amount: second payment instrument is needed for the remainder of tax amount and entire net amount;
Data model for the described scenario would look like this (option V1):
Payment1: [paymentMethod=Voucher, tax=5 EUR, net=5 EUR, total=10 EUR],
** paymentItem 1 [tax=5 EUR, net=5 EUR, total=10 EUR]
** entityRef 1 [purchaseOrderId=1]
Payment1: [paymentMethod=Cash on delivery, tax=0 EUR, net=45 EUR, total=45 EUR],
** paymentItem 1 [tax=0 EUR, net=45 EUR, total=45 EUR]
** entityRef 2 [purchaseOrderId=1]
------------------------------
Gaber Terseglav
TO BE VERIFIED
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: Apr 30, 2021 12:24
From: Tomáš Hajný
Subject: Connecting payments and product orders via TMF TMF676_Payment Management API and TMF622 Product Ordering ManagementAPI
Hello Gaber,
Just my point of view for some of your questions; I'm sure there are others able to provide a more complete and accurate answer:
ad 1) In your particular case, I'd use ProductOrder unless the mentioned Voucher is restricted to be used just for specific Product Offers.
ad 2) As far as I understand it, this refers to CustomerPaymentItem in SID. Imagine that you have three bills due and you get one payment (e.g. one bank transfer, or one payment card charge, etc.) covering all these three bills either completely, or at least partially. Now you need to show that the payment covered the first two bills completely and e.g. the third one just partially. This means that the overall Payment must be split into three PaymentItems with different EntityRefs, each specifying particular amount covered in this item.
ad 3) Yes, I'd say so.
ad 4) See point 2 above - if the PaymentItem covers a particular bill, the tax and net amount come from that bill. Moreover, depending on the local legislation, e.g. the voucher may already include a tax as well (imagine a Christmas gift voucher usable for buying a new phone - the person purchasing the voucher didn't want to select the particular phone type, but wanted to make it more "tangible" than just a few banknotes).
ad 5) I believe that you may either create a Payment and just use the status to show that it isn't finished yet (e.g. you may want to do that if the payment method is already known and you want to document it - as e.g. in case of using Cash on Delivery for the remainder), or to delay creating it until the payment for the remainder is really made (i.e. the total of amounts from received payments wouldn't cover the full amount from the product order).
ad 6) validFor may not have a meaning for cash, but the situation would be different for e.g. a voucher or a credit card.
ad 7) Yes, I believe it is logical. As mentioned above, individual PaymentItems are just parts of one particular Payment made / received. As such, these items may not have different dates.
Hope it helps
------------------------------
Tomas Hajny
CD - Telematika