The charge reason and its code do not designate the same thing
When a document level charge (BG-21) carries both a reason in plain text (BT-104) and a reason code (BT-105), the two must indicate the same type of charge.
Only the issuer holds this value: Factlint reports it and never fabricates it. Test your invoice to find out whether it is affected.
The message your validator prints
Copied verbatim from the sealed artefact: this is the exact sentence the check prints when this rule fails.
[BR-CO-06]-Document level charge reason code (BT-105) and Document level charge reason (BT-104) shall indicate the same type of charge.
Quoted from schematron-cen 1.3.16, licensed under EUPL-1.2.
Common searches around this code
These phrases mirror what an integrator searches for: code, syntax, rule, business field and correction.
Test your file with this error in mind
Upload the invoice involved: the report will say whether this code appears, where it appears in the document, and whether Factlint can only report it or also fix it.
To automate this check in an ERP flow, call the validation API and link every returned code to its public page.
Why this error happens
Same mechanics as for allowances, with a different list (UNCL 7161). The most common case is freight: the template's generic code outlives a text that has become “packaging”, “handling” or “insurance” as cases went by.
How to fix it
Align the text with the code, or the code with the text. The choice depends on the actual nature of the charge, which the file alone does not state.
XML correction example
<ram:ReasonCode>FC</ram:ReasonCode> <ram:Reason>Emballage</ram:Reason>
<ram:ReasonCode>PC</ram:ReasonCode> <ram:Reason>Emballage</ram:Reason>