Being able to file receipts automatically is especially worthwhile for recurring documents with a clearly recognisable sender and content. The real work begins, however, before the first rule: you must decide which details can be recognised reliably, where a receipt belongs and what happens in case of doubt. This guide shows one possible operating procedure. The checks proposed are practical recommendations and not statutory recognition rates or processing deadlines.
Choosing simple cases to start with
Start with a manageable group of documents, such as recurring supplier invoices of one company. Such records are easier to compare than a mixed inbox of contracts, advertising, invoices and internal notes. Check several actual variants from the same sender before you derive a general rule from them.
Determine the target structure first. If your business needs the distinction by company, document type or financial year, these details must also be determined reliably. A folder name that merely fits does not yet answer whether the receipt belongs to the right company. The same suppliers may work for different parts of your business.
Also define which documents deliberately stay in manual processing. Unknown senders, contradictory amounts or incomplete scans should not be filed automatically just because a general rule somehow fits. For notes on the quality of the source material, see the guide “Digitising documents” in this section.
Building rules from unambiguous features
A filing rule links recognisable features to a desired assignment. Features such as sender, subject and characteristic passages of text can be suitable. Use features that distinguish the actual case. The word “invoice” alone is too general if different companies and document types end up in the same inbox.
Describe the rule in everyday language before you set it up: “Documents from this sender with this feature belong to this document type and in this folder.” If you cannot formulate the sentence unambiguously, the specialist delineation is still missing. The technical set-up should not hide an unclear business decision.
Plan for changes in appearance. A new subject line or a changed invoice template can alter features that were previously reliable. Therefore name a person to maintain the rules. An automation once set up is not lasting proof that every later receipt still has the same characteristics.
Checking recognised fields against the receipt
Separate the recognition of a piece of information from its meaning for the business. A date may be the invoice date, the date of supply or the due date. An amount may mean net, tax or total. Just because a value appears in the document does not mean it belongs in the selected field.
For QR-bills, structured details help. According to SIX’s Swiss Implementation Guidelines, the payment part contains the details needed to execute a payment as a QR code and as readable information. That is the payment side: IBAN, amount, reference. The invoice itself remains decisive for the supply and tax; structured additional details in the “billing information” field of the QR code are possible but not mandatory. A correctly read payment reference also does not prove that your company ordered or received the supply.
Structured electronic invoices also need a check on substance. The file may deliver fields reliably while the business transaction is still unclear. Treat recognition and approval, therefore, as different steps. The guide to digital incoming invoices explains the further processing route from the accounting point of view; how the other side builds a QR-bill is covered in the guide Create a QR-bill.
Keeping exceptions visible and editable
Decide where documents that are not clearly recognised go and who checks them. An exceptions pile without responsibility quickly becomes the new unsorted filing system. Each query should show which information is missing: for example, assignment to the company, an illegible amount or an enclosure to which the document expressly refers.
Check faulty suggestions without immediately widening every similar rule. A single special invoice can remain an exception. If a general rule becomes too generous, other documents may in future be filed wrongly without anyone noticing. Decide deliberately whether a manual correction is enough or the rule must be adjusted.
For corrections it must remain traceable what was changed. A wrong assignment is no reason to silently remove the history of a record. Distinguish the retained file from corrected filing details, and record the reason for the correction.
What the law requires of receipts
Invoices are generally vouchers. Under Art. 958f of the Code of Obligations (CO, OR), para. 1, accounting records and vouchers must be retained for ten years; the period starts at the end of the financial year. Under para. 3, they may be retained on paper, electronically or in a comparable way, provided correspondence with the underlying business transactions is ensured and they can be made readable again at any time. Anyone liable for VAT retains vouchers under Art. 70 of the VAT Act (MWSTG), para. 2 until the tax claim reaches absolute limitation; Art. 958f CO remains reserved.
The Ordinance on Accounting Records (GeBüV) makes this more specific. Under Art. 3 GeBüV, vouchers must be captured and retained so that they cannot be changed without the change being detectable. Depending on the nature and scale of the business, Art. 4 requires work instructions on organisation, responsibilities, workflows, procedures and infrastructure; Art. 4, para. 2 requires them to be updated and retained for the same length of time. Describe automatic filing in them as well: who changes rules, who checks results, how are errors corrected?
Art. 5 GeBüV requires careful, orderly retention protected from harmful influences, and Art. 6 requires inspection and checking by an authorised person within a reasonable time. An automation must therefore not only file quickly: the record must afterwards remain retrievable and checkable, and the access rights of the target filing location must suit the content. Where personal data are involved, the principles of Art. 6 of the Data Protection Act (DSG), paras. 2, 3 and 5 (proportionality, purpose limitation, accuracy) also apply, together with the duty of appropriate data security under Art. 8 DSG, paras. 1–2. Automatic filing is no licence to make confidential content visible throughout the company.
Practical example: introducing automation under control
The fictional repair company Tannensteg processes a first stock of 60 receipts. By the criteria set, 42 are suitable for unambiguous automatic filing. For 12, details for assignment are missing, and for 6 legibility is insufficient. That accounts for 42 + 12 + 6 = 60 receipts, and 18 of them go to manual processing as exceptions.
The team does not describe all 60 as successfully filed. It checks the 42 automatically assigned documents and handles the 18 exceptions separately. 42 of 60 is 70 per cent automatic assignments. The figure is a fictional example, not a product metric and not a recommendation for a minimum rate.
During the check, one receipt stands out: it comes from the expected supplier but concerns a different company. The team confirms 41 of the 42 assignments, corrects one with a reason and refines the rule. The case shows why a correct sender as the only feature is not enough: a high assignment rate would be worth little if it concealed such errors of substance.
For the next round the team keeps the clear separation between automatic assignment and open cases, documents the rule change in its work instruction under Art. 4 GeBüV and pays particular attention to the error pattern it has identified.
Checklist before wide use
- Suitable group of documents clearly delimited
- Target company, document type and folder determined
- Rules traced against several variants
- Recognised data checked for their meaning to the business
- Uncertain cases have a manual processing route
- Person responsible for rules and exceptions determined
- Automatically filed documents are checked
- Corrections and procedural changes remain traceable
- Rules of automatic filing are described in the work instruction
- Access rights of the target filing location suit the content
Automatic filing is also not a payment approval. A receipt that is technically fully recognised may still be unchecked on substance. If other people have to confirm the supply or the amount, you need a separate decision step for that, as described in the guide on document approval as a workflow.
How KMU | base helps
Docu | base suggests document type and fields on the basis of rules, from keywords, date, amount, IBAN and number. For Swiss QR-bills, Docu takes over IBAN, amount and reference; other barcodes become searchable. Structured e-invoices, that is embedded XML in a PDF or an XML file, fill the fields of the incoming invoice directly. Support for every conceivable invoice format is not promised; what is not recognised stays in the Inbox and is completed by hand.
New documents appear under Docu | base › Inbox. There you check the suggestion for each document, add missing details and click “File”. Authorised people set up the filing rules on the “Inbox rules” page (in the setup checklist under “Set up intake rules”; this requires the right “Manage document types, filing rules and views”). A rule determines the document type and the folder from sender, subject or text; the first matching rule applies.
Docu can file reliably and completely recognised documents itself, but only under conditions: it needs a fixed target (a folder’s scan address, a rule with the option “automatic” or three identical filings from the same sender) and all mandatory details of the document type, and the switch “File reliably recognised documents automatically” must be on; it is on by default. If you want to use the automation only after a trial phase, switch it off for now on the “Inbox rules” page. Everything automatic then stays in the Inbox for 30 days for checking; with “Correct” you confirm the filing. These 30 days are a checking window of the product, not a statutory period.
You should know two limits. First: document types such as the incoming invoice are archived unalterably as soon as they are filed, including by automatic filing. You correct wrong filing details afterwards only with a mandatory reason through “Correct details after archiving”; the file and versions remain unchanged, and the field history records the change. Second: automatic filing means neither automatic posting nor approval for payment.
The Docu | base user guide describes how to operate it and complements the operating procedure presented here. Take a look at the Demo, open a test account or write to us through the Contact page.
Sources
- Code of Obligations (OR, SR 220), Art. 958f, paras. 1 and 3, as at 1 October 2026: fedlex.admin.ch (German original), accessed on 27.10.2026.
- Ordinance on Accounting Records (GeBüV, SR 221.431), Art. 3–6, as at 1 January 2013: fedlex.admin.ch (German original), accessed on 27.10.2026.
- Federal Act on Value Added Tax (VAT Act, MWSTG, SR 641.20), Art. 70, para. 2, as at 31 March 2025: fedlex.admin.ch (German original), accessed on 27.10.2026.
- Data Protection Act (DSG, SR 235.1), Art. 6, paras. 2, 3 and 5 and Art. 8, paras. 1–2, as at 7 July 2025: fedlex.admin.ch (German original), accessed on 27.10.2026.
- SIX: Swiss Implementation Guidelines QR-bill, version 2.3, ch. 2.2 (document of 20 November 2023, valid since 21 November 2025): PDF (in German); overview of versions: six-group.com (in German), accessed on 27.10.2026.
This guide does not replace legal or tax advice. Information as at 27.10.2026.