The European Union is preparing a major VAT shift. The ViDA package (VAT in the Digital Age) will, from July 2030, broadly introduce mandatory e-invoicing and digital reporting for cross-border B2B transactions. This is not just another regulation. Businesses today spend huge amounts on moving documents by email, chasing missing invoices, manually retyping data, and fixing human errors. Moving to truly structured e-invoicing can cut those costs by tens of percent and speed up payments. The Czech Republic is therefore facing a strategic question: which technological path should it take?
In this article I summarize the two main options available to the Czech state for e-invoicing and for any reporting infrastructure that may be built on top of it.
Basic assumptions
- The current system is slow: VAT control statements give the state invoice information only with about a one-month delay. That is too late for modern fraud patterns.
- The ViDA timeline: From 1 July 2030, e-invoicing and digital reporting will be mandatory for cross-border B2B transactions. By 1 January 2035, domestic systems in countries that introduce local reporting will need to align with the European standard.
- PDF invoices are over: The new rules require a machine-readable, structured invoice. A regular PDF sent by email will no longer be enough.
So let’s split the issue into two parts: invoice exchange between business partners, and invoice reporting to the tax authority.
Two possible paths
1. The Polish path: a central inbox
The state builds a large central system through which all invoices must be sent and received.
- Characteristics: Everything is operated and funded by the state. The system is mandatory for domestic VAT payers. If it goes down, companies can invoice offline and upload the documents later.
- Disadvantages: Building and running such a system costs the state hundreds of millions to billions per year. It only solves invoices, so companies still need other systems for purchase orders, delivery notes, or confirmations. Foreign entities are often excluded as well, which means international companies still need the European standard.
2. The Slovak path: Peppol and the five-corner model
Built on the European Peppol network, which enables secure B2B exchange and also reports invoices to the state.
- Characteristics: The supplier sends an XML invoice to its certified Access Point, which validates it, delivers it to the recipient, and simultaneously forwards a copy to the tax authority in real time.
- Benefits for the state: The state is only a passive recipient of reports and does not need to build or operate a large B2B infrastructure. Validation, secure transport, and archiving are handled by certified providers.
- Flexibility: Peppol can handle not only invoices but also purchase orders, confirmations, delivery notes, or document rejection workflows. Businesses can use those additional processes without the state having to build them.
Costs: central system vs. Peppol
A central government system
Building a national database like KSeF is expensive. Development, operations, security, and archiving all cost serious money, and the state pays for all of it. Companies also have to invest in integration, process changes, and employee training.
The open Peppol network
Peppol has a different economic model:
- For the state: no giant infrastructure, only report intake from Access Points.
- For businesses: receiving documents is often free; sending is usually part of accounting software or a cloud subscription.
- Return on investment: automating document flows with Peppol can reduce processing costs by tens of percent because manual retyping, printing, and chasing missing documents disappear.
The Czech opportunity
Instead of building another expensive national infrastructure, the Czech Republic could use the international Peppol network and extend its reporting backend only with intake from certified Access Points. If the state is already building modern reporting for selected payments, it can also use that infrastructure as a fifth corner for e-invoice intake.
That would bring three major advantages:
- lower costs for the state and for businesses,
- readiness for ViDA and cross-border trade,
- an open standard that can handle more than just invoices.
Conclusion
ViDA is not just another EU obligation. It is a chance to simplify accounting processes, reduce errors, and speed up payments. The Czech Republic has two paths: a costly closed central system, or the open Peppol standard, which is already preparing the market for Europe’s future.
In my view, Peppol makes more sense because it is cheaper, more flexible, and much better aligned with where European e-invoicing is going anyway.
