Regulation

XBRL, iXBRL or SBR Report Package — which do you choose when?

SBR is the delivery method, not a format; XBRL and iXBRL are the formats within it. The SBR Report Package is the wrapper for an iXBRL filing.

For finance and reporting teams that have to file financial statements digitally and see the three terms used interchangeably.

The three terms are often used interchangeably, but they name three different things. SBR is the delivery method. XBRL and iXBRL are the formats delivered within it. The SBR Report Package is the wrapper in which an iXBRL filing is sent. Once you see that distinction, usually only one real choice remains — and it comes up when filing with the KvK.

SBR: the delivery method, not a format

Standard Business Reporting (SBR) is the Dutch framework of agreements for the digital delivery of business data to government bodies and banks. It standardises how data is delivered: structured according to the Dutch Taxonomy (NT), through the government channel Digipoort, to the KvK, the Tax Office and Statistics Netherlands (CBS), among others.

SBR is therefore not a file format but the route. Delivery happens via SBR, in a format. Presenting “SBR or iXBRL” as a choice is thus a category error — iXBRL is a format within SBR, not an alternative to it.

XBRL: purely machine-readable

XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language) is structured data. Every figure and every data point is linked to an element from a taxonomy — the standardised vocabulary that defines exactly what “net turnover” or “equity” means. The receiving machine validates and processes the filing automatically.

What XBRL lacks is presentation. An XBRL file is written first for machines; it can be made readable, through Consistente Presentatie, the standardised rendering of an SBR filing. That rendering shows the same figures in its own uniform layout, not in the design of the report itself.

iXBRL: one document, readable by human and machine

Inline XBRL (iXBRL) solves that by embedding the XBRL tags inside a readable document. An iXBRL report is an XHTML document — the designed report as people read it, in its own brand style — in which the same machine-readable tags are invisibly embedded. The auditor, the regulator and the machine read literally the same document.

That makes iXBRL suitable wherever the report itself is the filing: the annual financial report under ESEF, and the iXBRL financial statements filed with the KvK.

SBR Report Package: the wrapper

An iXBRL filing consists of more than one file: the iXBRL document plus the extension taxonomy and accompanying files. The report package is the standardised wrapper (a zip container) in which that whole is delivered.

Two names, one thing — and it helps to know which applies where:

In short: the Report Package is not a third format alongside XBRL and iXBRL. It is how an iXBRL financial statement is delivered to the recipient.

What applies where?

ObligationRouteFormat
Filing financial statements with the KvK — mandatory digital for micro and small (FY2016), medium-sized (FY2017) and large (FY2025) entitiesvia SBR (Digipoort)XBRL or iXBRL — iXBRL delivered as an SBR Report Package
Annual financial report of issuers on an EU regulated marketESEF filing with the AFM, no separate SBR filingiXBRL: XHTML with the consolidated IFRS financial statements tagged according to the ESEF taxonomy
Annual figures of educational institutions to DUOXBRL OnderwijsportaalXBRL, based on the OCW taxonomy
dVi and dPi of housing corporationsSBR-wonen (the SBR channel of Aw, WSW, BZK and Aedes)XBRL
Tax returns to the Tax Officevia SBR (Digipoort)XBRL

Two things stand out. First: issuers on an EU regulated market make no separate SBR filing of their own. They file their ESEF report with the AFM, and the AFM forwards the report to the Business Register (art. 2:394(8) Dutch Civil Code), so the filing does happen, just not by the issuer and not through Digipoort. Second: in most rows there is nothing to choose. The mandate determines both route and format; only for KvK filing is there room for a choice of format.

The choice that remains: XBRL or iXBRL with the KvK

Both formats are a valid filing, though not in every situation. An entity that files sustainability information along with its financial statements must use iXBRL. And a ready-made XBRL instance cannot be submitted through the KvK’s Zelf Deponeren portal; filing that format takes SBR software. Where the choice does stay open, the difference lies in what gets filed:

  • XBRL files the data. Machine-readable and compact, but without the designed report — what sits in the Trade Register looks different from the financial statements the auditor examined.
  • iXBRL files the report with the data inside it. One document in which figures, text and tags coincide — the designed report stays intact, down to the last tag.

The latter weighs more heavily the more closely the auditor is involved: the filed financial statements must demonstrably match the audited financial statements. With iXBRL that is one and the same document. For large legal entities — required to file digitally from FY2025 — this is the core trade-off; the full context is on the page filing financial statements with the KvK, large size class.

How Taxxor does this

Taxxor Disclosure Manager keeps the choice of format from becoming a technical project. Figures, text and tags come from one structured source; from it the platform generates the XBRL or iXBRL filing, the designed annual report as a print-ready and online PDF, and where needed the ESEF report for the AFM — consistent by construction, validated against the applicable taxonomy. The same source, every route: KvK filing via SBR and ESEF reporting.