The Spanish introduction of the invoicing scheme called VERIFACTU implies a regulatory framework that defines the requirements for invoicing software systems. Its primary goal is to fight fraud by preventing the use 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 and July 2026 onwards, VERIFACTU will apply to most taxpayers, with the exception of those already required—or voluntarily opting—to use the Immediate Supply of Information (SII), the Spanish real time reporting system. This exclusion, however, is far from minor. It effectively forces businesses to decide whether to align themselves with SII voluntarily, or to comply with the new VERIFACTU rules.
The European context: VAT in the Digital Age (ViDA)
At the European level, the VAT in the Digital Age (ViDA) project, embedded in 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 transaction reporting (DRR), to be rolled out in place 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 place since 2017. 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: a domestic control tool
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 SII, it is not designed to create a continuous reporting channel of 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 SII are excluded from VERIFACTU. This carve-out deserves careful consideration, since it offers a clear alternative path.
The SII: a consolidated alternative
The SII has been operational in Spain since 2017. Companies with turnover above six million euros 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 like exemption from certain VAT formal obligations, pre-completed VAT returns or faster VAT refunds.
Choosing SII voluntarily not only exempts a company from VERIFACTU but also positions it favourably for the 2030 shift. In practice, SII looks increasingly like the foundation upon which Spain will build its compliance with ViDA´s DRR.
Looking ahead: the strategic dimension
The European reforms are unambiguous. By 2030, electronic invoicing plus real-time digital reporting will be the universal standard across the European Union. 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 SII. The latter path offers significant advantages like avoiding double adaptation costs, gaining experience in a system that will shape the European standard or securing time to assimilate the profound organisational changes that ViDA will impose.
Entering SII sooner rather than later allows businesses to internalise these processes incrementally rather than under time pressure in 2030.
2030 is closer than it seems
At first glance, 2030 may appear distant. Yet experience with previous VAT reforms suggests otherwise. The introduction of the OSS regimes 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 who adopt SII voluntarily now will be better placed to manage the transition smoothly.
Conclusion
The future of VAT in Europe rests on two pillars: mandatory electronic invoicing and real-time digital transaction reporting. Spanish VERIFACTU, while valuable in combating fraud, does not fully align with this architecture.
For Spanish businesses, the voluntary adoption of 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 who choose the first option will be better prepared, not only for national obligations, but also for the truly transformative reform that awaits in 2030.