Skavio Flow: reviewing tax amounts and currency labels as draft evidence

Invoice extraction is most useful when it produces a reviewable draft, not when it asks a reviewer to trust a column. In Skavio Flow, tax amounts and currency labels should be checked against the source page, the line-item arithmetic and the document’s own context before any export is treated as an accounting input.

A tax field is a draft value until a person reviews it

Skavio Flow turns invoices, orders, scans and text into reviewed XLSX, CSV and JSON using custom fields and saved company workflows. Embedded PDF text is read locally, scans go through Worker Fabric OCR, and structured extraction uses the configured OpenAI model. The output includes source evidence and review warnings alongside the extracted values. That makes Flow useful for assembling a draft, not for treating a tax amount as a completed accounting fact. A tax field affects payment checks, bookkeeping handoffs and downstream approvals, so the reviewer should begin with the page evidence and the document context. This is an operational review discipline, not tax advice.

Cross-check the tax amount against visible arithmetic and document context

A printed tax amount should make sense in relation to the net amount, the stated tax basis and the line items shown on the page. If the invoice uses several rates, keep those groups separate instead of collapsing them into one field. If a total or tax basis is missing, unclear or contradicted elsewhere on the document, that is a reason to raise an exception, not to fill the gap with a plausible number. Flow’s stated review rule is to check dates, totals and line items. For tax fields, that means comparing what was extracted with what the document actually displays and with the arithmetic the reviewer can verify. A cell that looks reasonable is not the same as a field that has been checked.

Read currency labels with the document’s own context

A currency symbol can be ambiguous, and decimal separators vary between documents and locales. Before accepting a currency label, look for an explicit currency code or other contextual evidence on the page. A symbol alone may not establish the currency with enough confidence for an accounting handoff. The review should also avoid inventing conversions. If a document shows one currency and a downstream system expects another, the conversion or interpretation belongs in a controlled business process, not in an assumption made during extraction review. Currency ambiguity should remain visible to the person approving the export.

Turn ambiguity into a review exception, not a silent correction

Flow provides source evidence and review warnings, which are most useful when the reviewer records what remains uncertain. A missing tax label, an unreadable amount or a currency mark that does not match the surrounding document should become an exception note with a clear status. The aim is not to make every field look complete; it is to make uncertainty visible before export. A dated 2026-10-01 acceptance check extracted and exported two synthetic PDF invoices. A scalar correction then regenerated results without a second job. That shows a correction and regeneration path in a controlled test; it does not establish that any tax or currency field can be accepted without review.

Export after human review, with the review trail intact

Flow can produce XLSX document and line-item worksheets, CSV and JSON. The export format should match the handoff: a workbook for human review, CSV for a structured table, or JSON for an internal tool that expects structured data. In every case, the approval step should come before any downstream accounting use. The dated acceptance check demonstrates a correction and regeneration path; it does not replace a company’s own approval or posting controls. Define who checks tax and currency fields, retain source evidence with the reviewed export, and check the live quote or current pricing path before starting a processing batch.

Review invoice fields in Skavio Flow →