Peppol is getting a lot of attention as countries move toward mandatory e-invoicing. Many organizations are therefore looking for clear Peppol explanations. What exactly is changing and what remains the same in invoice processing.
To get that clear, we spoke with industry expert Hans van der Kolk of 4CEE. He sees daily where misunderstandings arise and what Peppol does and does not regulate. His insights show why the process behind Peppol remains so important.
In this blog, we answer the seven questions we hear most often. This will give you a down-to-earth, complete picture of Peppol’s role in your billing process.
- 1. How does Peppol explanation help you understand Peppol’s role in your billing process?
- 2. What does Peppol explanation teach us about the risks of waiting?
- 3. Does Peppol work the same everywhere in every country and system?
- 4. Is a Peppol or XML invoice always complete and accurate?
- 5. Is it complicated to use Peppol in conjunction with ImageCapture?
- 6. Can we get by with just our ERP system and Peppol?
- 7. Will OCR become obsolete because of Peppol?
- Conclusion
- Additional Peppol explanations for your software environment
1. How does Peppol explanation help you understand Peppol’s role in your billing process?
Peppol is a European network for the secure and structured exchange of electronic invoices. It ensures reliable transmission of an XML invoice and checks that the file technically complies with the standard. This makes the inflow of invoices more predictable and peaceful.
What Peppol does not do is the processing itself. Checks, matching, reviewing discrepancies, approving and building files remain part of the process. Peppol changes the front end, not the entire process.
2. What does Peppol explanation teach us about the risks of waiting?
In several countries, e-invoicing is already mandatory. Other countries are following step by step, bringing their deadlines further and further forward. Practice shows that this is happening faster than many organizations think.
Some examples:
- Belgium is accelerating toward full B2B e-invoicing. The number of registrations is skyrocketing and organizations that start late are already experiencing time pressure.
- Germany and France are phasing in their obligations starting in 2026, directly impacting suppliers with international relationships.
- Poland works with the national KSeF platform and applies higher setup costs per entity, making late connection more expensive.
- For the Netherlands, it is expected within the industry that national legislation will be introduced as early as 2029, leading up to the European VIDA obligation that will apply as of July 1, 2030. However, this is an expectation; official legislation is yet to follow.
Those who start too late run into time constraints, implementation problems and limited support. Connecting to Peppol for receiving takes little time and lays a foundation on which you can expand later. Waiting mainly creates risks and practical challenges.
3. Does Peppol work the same everywhere in every country and system?
No. Every country works differently with Peppol. Some countries have additional requirements or even use their own platforms in addition to Peppol. Systems also vary widely. Modern cloud packages often support Peppol by default. Older or industry-specific systems sometimes only offer receiving or have no direct connection at all.
Therefore, you should always look at the combination of countries, systems, suppliers and processes. Only then will you see how Peppol works in your situation.
4. Is a Peppol or XML invoice always complete and accurate?
An XML invoice has a fixed structure, but that does not mean that the content is always correct. Errors remain possible, such as incorrect quantities, incorrect prices or missing order references.
Peppol mainly checks whether an invoice technically meets the standard Peppol BIS 3. Only invoices that meet these minimum requirements are allowed through. You can think of BIS 3 as a digital gatekeeper: if the basic structure is not correct, the invoice is rejected.
But a BIS 3-cleared invoice is not automatically correct in terms of content. Suppliers can fill in fields incorrectly, use their own interpretations or send UBL variants that contain less data than your process needs. The invoice is then technically correct, but still incomplete or incorrect for your organization.
Therefore, content checks, matching and review remain essential. Peppol provides structured and reliable transfer, but does not take over content validation. The process behind Peppol continues to determine whether discrepancies are recognized, order references are found and invoices are approved correctly.
Even when an invoice complies with BIS 3, in practice it may be missing information or be structured differently than your system expects. A Peppol invoice is therefore a reliable carrier of data, but not a guarantee of correct content. The internal process ultimately remains decisive for correct processing.
5. Is it complicated to use Peppol in conjunction with ImageCapture?
Receiving is relatively simple. You register the organization with the correct data and get invoices delivered to the channel ImageCapture reads. The impact on existing systems is small and no heavy project is required.
Sending works differently. Countries have their own requirements and systems do not always fully support sending. Sending therefore requires more attention and additional setup.
Receiving and sending are thus two different pathways. Receiving is quick to arrange, sending requires more fine-tuning.
6. Can we get by with just our ERP system and Peppol?
This is possible when the processes are simple. An ERP with Peppol can receive and book invoices, and for some organizations that’s enough.
In most organizations, there is more at play. Consider multiple entities, purchase orders, contracts, deviations, role-based approvals and reporting requirements. This requires additional process logic. ERPs vary widely in what they support, so an additional process layer often remains necessary.
7. Will OCR become obsolete because of Peppol?
For Peppol invoices, OCR is not required. After all, the XML provides structured data. But many organizations process more document types than just invoices through Peppol. Order confirmations, packing slips and customer orders often still come in as PDFs or scans.
Also, the inflow remains hybrid. Not all vendors work through Peppol or can technically connect. As a result, OCR remains relevant to other document flows and channels.
In practice, many organizations wait until the last minute. Then time pressure arises, implementations fill up and connection becomes more complicated than necessary. Those who are ready to receive Peppol invoices now are choosing peace of mind. You don’t pay for transactions until they are actually sent via Peppol, but the foundation is there.
Conclusion
Peppol brings structure and stability to the inflow of invoices. It resolves technical noise, but does not change the process afterwards. Matching, discrepancies, checks and authorizations remain.
The greatest confusion arises when Peppol is seen as a complete replacement for invoice processing or as an ICT setup that you implement once. In reality, Peppol is part of a broader chain. The quality of the process alongside it still determines the speed, peace of mind and reliability of financial administration.
For organizations that want to look further into the details, we have added an additional FAQ below. These questions are specifically about Peppol in combination with software and setting up the process around it.
Additional Peppol explanations for your software environment
This varies by vendor and version. The documentation of the package usually shows whether Peppol-receiving is supported and whether XML or UBL messages can be read directly. Sometimes additional links or modules are needed to set this up properly. Receiving is supported by many systems. For sending, the differences are greater. Organizations often coordinate this with their software supplier or implementation partner.
The core of the process remains the same. Checks, matching, authorizations and dealing with deviations remain necessary. However, the availability of structured data may give reason to extend automatic checks, route exceptions differently or base reports on data from the e-invoice.
In practice, a hybrid situation usually arises. Part of the suppliers send via Peppol, while others continue to work with e-mail, portals or their own file formats. Many organizations therefore set up a process in which Peppol is one of the inflow channels in addition to other sources. The software chosen determines how these flows are brought together.
This varies by access point, software vendor and country. Costs can include one-time connection or implementation fees, periodic fees or fees per message sent or received. Some countries have higher setup fees per entity. Therefore, organizations often look at the total cost in relation to the number of invoices and the benefits of standardized e-invoicing.
