DAC8 Quality Assurance: Ensuring Report Accuracy

Submitting accurate DAC8 reports is not just a regulatory requirement — it protects the CASP from penalties and preserves the value of the data for tax authorities. This article describes a quality assurance framework for DAC8 reporting.

Pre-Submission QA Process

Before submitting any DAC8 report, CASPs should perform a multi-step quality assurance process:

Step 1: Completeness check. Verify that all reportable users are included in the report. Cross-reference the report against a list of all users with reportable transactions during the period. Investigate any discrepancies.

Step 2: Data quality check. Review a sample of user records for accuracy — name spelling, address formatting, TIN validity, and self-certification completeness. For high-risk records (such as users with multiple tax residencies or recently updated information), perform individual verification.

Step 3: Transaction verification. For a sample of users, reconcile the aggregated amounts in the report against the underlying transaction data. Verify that all transaction types are correctly classified and that fair market values are accurately calculated.

Step 4: Schema validation. Run the XML report through the schema validation tool to verify structural compliance. Fix any validation errors before proceeding.

Step 5: Business rule check. Apply the competent authority's published business rules to the report. These rules may cover aspects not checked by schema validation, such as logical consistency between data fields.

Step 6: Comparison with prior period. Compare the current report against the previous period's report to identify unusual patterns — significant changes in user count, transaction volumes, or aggregate amounts that may indicate errors.

Post-Submission QA

After submission, monitor for rejection notices or error messages from the competent authority. Track correction volumes as a measure of upstream data quality. And document any issues identified during the QA process for process improvement.

Conclusion

A systematic QA process is the last line of defense against reporting errors. CASPs should treat QA as a non-negotiable step in their annual reporting cycle and allocate dedicated resources to this critical activity.