The short answer
Choose a provider by the evidence it can show for your billing workflow—not by a logo, a deadline banner or an unexplained monthly price. Confirm its current Ministry of Finance accreditation status, document the work your business needs, and agree how you will prove the connection works before accepting the implementation.
The checklist below is Meraki’s suggested procurement and operational review, not a substitute for the Ministry’s requirements or an official certification. Use the linked timeline guide to establish your applicable phase; this page focuses on getting ready.
First distinguish the provider from the adviser
The Ministry’s provider page separates fully accredited providers from pre-approved providers still undergoing final production assessment. Check the named contracting entity and its current listing when you shortlist and again before appointment. Do not treat a reseller badge or another group company’s listing as evidence for the entity in your proposal.
An accountant can help prepare records and coordinate implementation without being the accredited provider. Put each party’s responsibility in writing. The official programme uses provider connections to exchange structured invoice data and report it to the FTA; a readable PDF alone does not establish that this process happened.
Prepare one brief before comparing quotes
Send the same brief to each shortlisted provider. Keep commercial comparison separate from unresolved regulatory interpretation so the cheapest incomplete scope does not look equivalent to a complete one.
| Write down | Why it changes the work |
|---|---|
| Legal entities and billing locations | Clarify which entities and teams the quote covers. |
| Current accounting and billing systems | Identify manual invoices and disconnected systems as well as the main ledger. |
| Invoice and credit-note volumes | Ask what the allowance counts and what happens during seasonal peaks. |
| Customer and transaction types | List the flows that need scope or tax review; do not silently assume they all work alike. |
| Data owner and software owner | Name who resolves missing records and who changes the integration. |
| Target dates and unresolved questions | Distinguish a provider proposal from an approved implementation plan. |
Ask for evidence, not only a yes or no
These are practical questions to agree with the provider, not a claim that every item is a standalone statutory requirement. Ask your IT or security adviser to review the proposed connection where the integration or information sensitivity warrants it.
| Question | Useful evidence to request |
|---|---|
| Will it work with our exact software version? | A written integration scope, limitations and responsibility for upgrades. |
| What happens when an invoice fails validation? | A controlled walkthrough showing the error, correction, resubmission and status history. |
| How do we know exchange and reporting succeeded? | A status view or export that finance staff can reconcile to the billing record. |
| Who sees our records? | Access roles, support-access procedure and a clear data-processing explanation. |
| Who handles a disruption? | Named escalation route, agreed response commitments and recovery procedure. |
| Can we move later? | Contract terms for exporting records, identifiers and history, and any exit charge. |
Build a small, controlled test pack
Do not email a live customer ledger to several sales teams. Agree the test environment, access and purpose first. Start with synthetic or properly redacted records. If genuine records are necessary, use an approved secure route and the appropriate permission.
Select the cases that your business actually uses, and have the relevant adviser confirm their tax treatment. The test objective is to expose broken workflows before launch, not to invent transactions or tax positions.
- A straightforward invoice with all required data supplied.
- A deliberately incomplete record to demonstrate rejection and correction.
- A credit note linked through the agreed workflow.
- A duplicate submission attempt to establish how duplicate handling works.
- A connection interruption followed by recovery and reconciliation.
- An export that lets your finance team trace the outcome without depending on a salesperson.
Give every gap an owner and an acceptance test
For a company with separate project billing and subscription billing, one successful test from the main accounting system leaves the other billing route unproven. Keep a row for each route, its owner, the unresolved issue, the next action and the evidence needed to close it.
For instance, ‘customer identifier missing’ is not closed because someone opened a ticket. Close it when the agreed master record is corrected and the relevant controlled test passes. This working method is an internal project suggestion, not an official government template.
Compare the whole commercial scope
No universal ASP price is asserted here. Obtain written provider quotations on the same assumptions. Meraki’s professional support fee is separate from the provider’s subscription, usage and development charges.
- Implementation: mapping, setup, testing, training and any custom connector.
- Ongoing charges: subscription, transaction allowance, overage and support.
- Change charges: new entity, new system, software update or revised scope.
- Exit and recovery: exports, transition assistance and archive access.
- Tax and exclusions: confirm the quotation’s VAT treatment and third-party charges.
Before you call the project ready
Hold a finance-and-technology handover. Identify who checks failures, who can authorise corrections, who owns provider communications and where the acceptance evidence is kept. Ask staff to demonstrate the normal process and one exception without the implementation team taking over.
A passed technical test does not replace ongoing monitoring, accurate source records or the business’s applicable obligations. Keep the project checklist linked to the current official programme documents as they change.
E-invoicing support and scope Accounting-software support Plan your support budget Discuss a readiness gap
