EDI 867 Product Transfer and Resale Report for Distributor Claims

A distributor sends its October resale report on 2 November, the manufacturer's claims system issues a credit memo two days later, and on 6 November the same report arrives again after a mapping fix. The translator sees a new interchange, the claims system sees new lines, and a second credit for the full amount goes out. Nobody notices until accounts receivable reconciles the distributor's balance three weeks later.

The EDI 867 is the document that turns a distributor's sales to end customers into evidence a manufacturer can pay against. When its header, party loops and quantity lines are validated field by field before any credit is issued, duplicate payments, claims on expired contracts and returns that were never netted off stop at the door instead of in a quarter-end write-off.

• What this guide covers: what X12 defines the 867 for, how it relates to the 852, 844, 845 and 849, the segments that carry claim evidence, the validation rules, and how the resulting credit lands in US accounts and under Indian GST.
• What you can reuse: an annotated 867 sample with the claim formula, a worked claim month in USD and INR, an incident trace and a distributor onboarding checklist.

What the 867 reports, and where the 852, 844 and 849 fit

X12 defines the 867 Product Transfer and Resale Report for three uses: reporting product moved between locations, reporting sales from one or more locations to an end customer, and reporting those sales together with demand beyond actual sales, such as lost orders. Either the buyer or the seller may issue it. Distributor claims use the second purpose.

The neighbouring transaction sets are easy to confuse because they all describe product leaving a distributor. The difference is what each one asks the receiver to do, and in a claim programme that difference decides who owns each message and who must approve the money it represents.

Some partners carry the claim inside the 867 itself. A published 5010 guide from Performance Foodservice, for example, includes an AMT segment with qualifier S for the submitted chargeback claim amount. Others keep the 867 as pure resale evidence and send the request for credit in an 844, answered by an 849. Your trading partner's implementation guide decides which pattern applies.

EDI 867 Product Transfer and Resale Reports supply the end-customer sales evidence behind distributor ship-and-debit and chargeback claims under ANSI X12. Manufacturers that check each QTY 32 sold line against the 845 price authorization valid on the end-customer invoice date reject expired-contract claims before an 849 response or credit memo is issued.

Header segments: purpose code, report number and reporting period

The header tells the receiver whether this is a new report, which period it covers and which number identifies it. That number, carried in BPT02, is the field that prevents a resubmitted file from being paid twice, so its rules belong in the partner agreement, not just the map.

• BPT01 purpose code: 00 for an original report in every guide reviewed; the Defense Commissary Agency's 5010 guide also lists 20 for final transmission and 45 for follow-up.
• BPT02 report number: X12 semantics describe it as the transfer or resale number; treat sender ID plus BPT02 as a unique key.
• BPT03 report date: the date of the report, eight digits as CCYYMMDD.
• BPT04 report type: partner-specific; the Performance Foodservice guide uses IV, while a CDW 4010 guide uses 02 for resale.
• BPT09 previous report: X12 semantics reserve it for referencing a previous report number, which is how a corrected report should point back to the one it replaces.
• DTM 090 and 091: report start and report end dates, which together define the claim period.

Heading-level party data identifies the distributor. In the Performance Foodservice guide, REF with qualifier IA carries the vendor number the distributor assigned, and the heading N1 loop uses DB for distributor branch, with optional CQ for corporate office and RI for remit-to. A CUR segment, where used, states the currency, which matters the moment a distributor reports sales from more than one country.

PTD loops: one block per end customer, with transfer type and ship-to

Each PTD loop groups the lines that share a transfer type and, usually, an end customer. The ship-to party inside that loop is the claim's anchor: without a named, addressable end customer, a manufacturer cannot test the sale against the customer list on its price authorization.

• PTD01 transfer type: the CDW 4010 guide uses SD for ship and debit sale; the Performance Foodservice and Defense Commissary Agency guides use SU for summary.
• N1 with ST: the end customer's ship-to name, followed by N3 street and N4 city, state or province, postal code and country.
• N1 with BT: the end customer's bill-to party where it differs, which helps when one buying group has many delivery sites.
• N1 with VN or DU: the Performance Foodservice guide names the vendor in this loop, while the CDW guide names the resale dealer at heading level; check where your partner puts each party.

The ship-to address also links the claim to physical evidence. A manufacturer auditing a large claim can ask for the distributor's bill of lading or proof of delivery to that address, and a freight audit team can compare the claimed delivery points with the distributor's outbound carrier invoices. A claim to a site the distributor never shipped to is the clearest sign of a misreported sale.

Quantity, item and price lines that turn a sale into a claim amount

The QTY loop holds the numbers that become money: how many units moved, which item, at what price basis, and against which invoice and contract. Claim value is the difference between the distributor's cost and the authorized contract cost, multiplied by eligible net units.

ST*867*0001~
BPT*00*RR-2610-0031*20261102*IV~
DTM*090*20261001~
DTM*091*20261031~
REF*IA*V48812~
N1*DB*NORTHFIELD SUPPLY BRANCH 04~
PTD*SU~
N1*ST*LAKESIDE CLINIC GROUP~
N3*1200 HARBOR DR~
N4*TOLEDO*OH*43604*US~
QTY*32*120*EA~
LIN*1*SK*NF-55210*VN*55-210~
UIT*EA*14.60*DI~
UIT*EA*11.25*CT~
AMT*S*402.00~
REF*CT*CT-7741~
REF*AI*INV-77310~
DTM*003*20261014~
QTY*76*10*EA~
LIN*2*SK*NF-55210*VN*55-210~
UIT*EA*11.25*CT~
AMT*S*-33.50~
REF*CT*CT-7741~
SE*24*0001~

Illustrative 5010 layout after one published distributor guide; values are invented.
Claim per line  = Q_net x (C_dist - C_auth)
  Q_net  = QTY 32 units - QTY 76 units, eligible lines only
  C_dist = distributor unit cost (UIT with basis DI)
  C_auth = authorized contract cost on the invoice date (UIT with basis CT, checked against the 845)
Example: (120 - 10) x (14.60 - 11.25) = 110 x 3.35 = 368.50 USD before eligibility checks

• QTY 32 and 76: quantity sold and returns, both used in the CDW and Performance Foodservice guides; returns must reduce the claim, not sit as an unmatched negative.
• LIN qualifiers: SK for the distributor's SKU, VN for the vendor's item number, BP for the buyer's part number in the CDW guide; match on the manufacturer's own number first.
• UIT03 price basis: CT for contract and DI for distributor price in the Performance Foodservice guide, giving both sides of the claim in one loop.
• REF qualifiers: CT contract number, AI end-customer invoice, DI distributor invoice, PO purchase order, and in the CDW guide PD promotion or deal number and SE serial number.
• DTM 003: the end-customer invoice date, which is the date the contract's validity is tested against.

The summary CTT segment gives the receiver arithmetic to check before reading a single claim. The Defense Commissary Agency guide notes that CTT01 counts the LIN segments and CTT02, if used, is the sum of the QTY02 quantities. A report whose totals do not match its lines was truncated or edited in transit and should be rejected whole, with a reason the distributor can act on.

Validation rules to pass before a resale claim is credited

A claim should be paid only after five tests pass on every line: the report is not a duplicate, the totals reconcile, the end customer is authorized, the price matches the authorization on the invoice date, and the claimed quantity is plausible against what the distributor bought. Lines that fail are rejected individually in the response.

1. Duplicate control: reject any report whose sender ID, BPT02 and BPT03 already exist, unless BPT09 names that report as being replaced.
2. Arithmetic control: CTT01 equals the LIN count and CTT02 equals the sum of QTY02; AMT values equal quantity times price difference within one cent.
3. Customer eligibility: the N1 ST party matches an account listed on the authorization referenced in REF CT.
4. Price and date: UIT CT equals the authorized cost, and DTM 003 falls inside the authorization's start and end dates.
5. Quantity plausibility: cumulative claimed units for the item do not exceed the distributor's purchases at book cost over the agreed look-back period.

Duplicate control for EDI 867 resale claims should key on sender ID, BPT02 report number and BPT03 date rather than ISA interchange numbers, because a resent file receives a new envelope. Requiring BPT09 to cite the replaced report lets a corrected October claim supersede the original instead of doubling a $18,940 credit.

The quantity test is where warehouse data earns its place. If a distributor claims 600 units sold at contract price in a month when it received 400 at book cost and held 50 in stock, the claim exceeds what it could physically have shipped. Receipts from the manufacturer's 856 ship notices or invoices give the ceiling, and our EDI mapping specification guide shows how to record each of these rules against the fields they read.

One claim month worked in dollars and in rupees

The same validation produces different accounting in each market. In the US the approved amount is a ship-and-debit credit, accounted for as variable consideration; in India no X12 mandate exists, so the resale evidence often arrives as a distributor system file, and GST rules decide whether the credit note reduces tax.

Under US GAAP, the claim is part of the transaction price on the manufacturer's original sale to the distributor. ASC 606-10-32-6 lists rebates, credits and price concessions among the items that make consideration variable, so expected claims are estimated when the distributor buys, and the 867 data later confirms or corrects that estimate.

India has no 867 mandate, but GST decides how the credit lands

No Indian rule requires the X12 867, and domestic secondary sales data often arrives as a file from a distributor management system or a spreadsheet. The validation logic is the same, but the credit's tax effect depends on the CGST Act, which changed in 2025 and has a 2026 amendment awaiting commencement.

• Section 34 credit note: a supplier may issue credit notes to the recipient, and must declare them no later than 30 November after the end of the financial year of supply, or the annual return date if earlier.
• Recipient reversal proviso: from 1 October 2025, the supplier gets no reduction in output tax if a registered recipient has not reversed the input tax credit attributable to the note.
• Section 15(3)(b) discounts: post-supply discounts are excluded from value only when that clause is met; the Finance Act, 2026 substitutes the clause, and CBIC's site showed the new text as not yet in force when checked.
• Commercial credit notes: CBIC Circular 92/11/2019-GST confirms that financial or commercial credit notes can be issued when section 15(3)(b) is not satisfied, but they do not reduce the original tax.

Distributor scheme credits in India follow CGST Act section 34: a GST credit note must be declared by 30 November after the financial year of supply, and from 1 October 2025 the manufacturer's output tax falls only if the registered distributor reverses the matching input tax credit, here ₹1,274.40 on a ₹7,080 claim.

A resubmitted report that paid the same claim twice

Duplicate payment is the most expensive 867 failure because every line looks valid in isolation. The trace below follows a distributor's October report through a manufacturer whose claims system trusted the envelope instead of the report number.

1. 2 Nov, 09:15, report sent: the distributor sends report RR-2610-0031 dated 20261102, 412 QTY lines, claim total $18,940.00, in interchange 000004417.
2. 4 Nov, 14:30, credit issued: the translator returns a 997 acceptance, the claims system loads the lines and issues credit memo CM-88102 for $18,940.00.
3. 6 Nov, 11:05, resend: after fixing a unit-of-measure map on four lines, the distributor resends the whole report with BPT01 00, the same BPT02 and no BPT09, in interchange 000004431.
4. 6 Nov, 16:20, duplicate paid: the claims system checks only the interchange number, finds it new, and issues CM-88177 for $18,940.00.
5. 27 Nov, 10:00, found and fixed: the AR reconciliation flags two credits for one period; a debit memo recovers the second, the duplicate key becomes sender ID plus BPT02 plus BPT03, and corrected reports must cite BPT09.

The envelope numbering itself was correct; our guide to ISA and GS envelope control numbers explains why a resent file must get new ones. The fault was using a transport control as a business control. Report identity belongs to the 867's own header.

Claim checks the translator enforces and those an analyst reviews

Structural and arithmetic checks should run without anyone looking, while judgement about customer identity and contract exceptions stays with a channel analyst. Naming each task stops the team from either over-trusting automation or re-checking what a rule already guarantees.

Onboarding checklist for a distributor's first 867 feed

A distributor's 867 feed is ready for live claims when a parallel month reconciles to the distributor's own claim spreadsheet within an agreed tolerance and every rejection carries a reason code the distributor understands. The checklist below lists the evidence to collect before switching off manual claims.

For the ledger and deduction side of the same programme, see our distributor rebate and chargeback claim ledger blueprint, which covers claim accounting rather than the 867's fields. Price lists that feed the authorization often arrive as an X12 832 price and sales catalog. Browse more EDI guides in the Logistics and Supply Chain hub, or tell us about your claim programme if you want an 867 intake reviewed.