Spanish businesses face critical e-invoicing and real-time reporting choice as ViDA looms

The Spanish introduction of the Verifactu invoicing scheme establishes a regulatory framework that defines the requirements for invoicing software systems. Its primary goal is to fight fraud by preventing the application of dual-use software and by ensuring that all interactions with invoicing systems are traceable and verifiable.

Technically, these systems will have the ability – though not the obligation – to transmit invoice records electronically to the Spanish tax authorities. When they do, they will qualify as a “system for issuing verifiable invoices”, or Verifactu.

From January or July 2026 (for companies and self-employed workers, respectively), Verifactu will apply to most taxpayers, with the exception of those already required – or voluntarily opting – to use Spain’s Immediate Supply of Information system (SII), which allows real-time reporting. This exclusion, however, is far from minor. It effectively forces businesses to decide whether to align themselves with the SII voluntarily or to comply with the new Verifactu rules.

At the European level, the VAT in the Digital Age (ViDA) project, embedded in Council Directive (EU) 2025/516, is pushing for a deep harmonisation of digital VAT obligations.

One of the most transformative measures of ViDA is the mandatory adoption of electronic invoicing combined with real-time digital reporting requirements (DRR), which are to be rolled out by 2030. This reform will affect most businesses, regardless of size, leaving little room for exemptions.

The Spanish SII already represents a mature model of near real-time reporting. In contrast, Verifactu is not conceived as a full real-time reporting system but rather as a mechanism to ensure the integrity of invoicing data. This divergence raises a strategic question: does it make sense to adapt corporate systems to Verifactu when, in less than five years, companies will need to transition to a model strongly inspired by the SII and aligned with ViDA?

Verifactu has a clear anti-fraud orientation. It aims to secure the reliability of invoicing records through technical requirements defined by the Spanish Tax Agency. Unlike the SII, it is not designed to create a continuous reporting channel for all transactions (incoming invoices are excluded).

Companies obliged to implement Verifactu will therefore need to adapt their invoicing systems to standards that might soon be obsolete at the European level. This creates the risk of a double investment: first in compliance with Verifactu, and later in adapting to ViDA’s DRR.

Taxpayers using the SII are excluded from Verifactu. This carve-out deserves careful consideration, since it offers a clear alternative path.

The SII has been operational in Spain since 2017. Companies with turnover above €6 million are already obliged to use it, but others can join voluntarily.

The system requires companies to transmit invoice data almost immediately to the tax authority, which brings several advantages, such as exemption from certain VAT formal obligations, pre-completed VAT returns, and faster VAT refunds.

Choosing the SII voluntarily not only exempts a company from Verifactu but also positions it favourably for the 2030 shift. In practice, the SII looks increasingly like the foundation upon which Spain will build its compliance with ViDA’s DRR.

The European reforms are unambiguous. By 2030, electronic invoicing plus real-time digital reporting will be standard across the EU. Spain’s existing SII already fulfils much of this logic, while Verifactu remains outside it.

The strategic decision facing businesses is therefore whether to adapt to Verifactu now or to anticipate the future by opting voluntarily for the SII. The latter path offers significant advantages such as avoiding double adaptation costs, gaining experience in a system that will shape the European standard, and securing time to assimilate the profound organisational changes that ViDA will impose.

Entering the SII sooner rather than later allows businesses to internalise these processes incrementally rather than under time pressure in 2030.

At first glance, 2030 may appear distant. However, experience with previous VAT reforms suggests otherwise. The introduction of the one-stop shop regime took place four years ago, and yet it does not feel like such a distant reform. That is exactly the same time horizon we now have before the implementation of ViDA.

If companies start preparing only when the deadline is imminent, they will likely face higher costs and compliance risks. Conversely, those that adopt the SII voluntarily now will be better placed to manage the transition smoothly.

The future of VAT in Europe rests on two pillars: mandatory electronic invoicing and real-time digital transaction reporting. Spain’s Verifactu, while valuable in combating fraud, does not fully align with this architecture.

For Spanish businesses, the voluntary adoption of the SII represents not just a compliance choice but a strategic investment. It eliminates the intermediate step of Verifactu, reduces duplication of costs, and ensures readiness for ViDA.

In short, companies must ask themselves a decisive question: adapt now to the SII, or wait to make two transitions in quick succession? Those that choose the first option will be better prepared not only for national obligations but also for the truly transformative reform that awaits in 2030.