Two approvals, not one
Article 4 sets the conditions a sales register system is licensed against: the taxpayer’s own identifiers on the document, an audit log that records what was done and by whom and can be exported for an inspection, access that distinguishes a waiter from a cashier, encrypted transmission with a digital signature on what is sent, and geo-fencing where the point of sale moves.
The supplier is held to conditions of its own. Those run to security clearance, a performance guarantee, and a checksum proving the code has not changed since it was approved. A restaurant buying a register is buying both approvals at once, and only one of them is visible in a demonstration.
Why this is the restaurant’s problem
Article 19(1) puts the obligation on the taxpayer who keeps books of accounts, not on the company that wrote the software. The supplier’s accreditation is the supplier’s to obtain; the duty to issue a valid invoice is yours, and a system that is not accredited is not one you may lawfully sell through.
So the cost of a system that cannot be accredited is not the refund. It is the second purchase, the menu typed in again, the staff retrained, and the stretch in between where the receipts you are handing out are not the ones the law asks for.
Six questions to ask any supplier
- Under what accreditation is the system registered, and in whose name?
- Has it been submitted for inspection, and what stage is that at today?
- Does the receipt carry all four identifiers (TIN, VAT registration, FS number and machine registration code) on the printed slip and on the customer’s phone?
- Does the audit log export in a form an inspector can read, and can I get at it without asking you?
- What happens to my records if your accreditation is refused or withdrawn?
- Can the register keep selling with the line down, and does it track the 72 hours the law then gives me?
The fifth is the one that separates the answers. A system that keeps its records on a supplier’s server, under a subscription, has an answer to it that involves trusting the supplier. A system that keeps them in the restaurant has an answer that does not.
Nothing has a date yet, and that is not a reason to buy badly
Article 29 leaves commencement to a schedule the Authority has not published for this sector, so no café in Addis is late for anything today. What that buys is the chance to make the decision once. A register bought this year on price alone is a register bought again when the schedule arrives.
What Easymaz answers
Easymaz is built to the directive rather than adapted to it, which is the whole of the difference the six questions are asking about. It is not yet accredited, and it does not yet register receipts with the Authority: that switches on when the Authority publishes its transmission specification. Receipts carry the four identifiers, on the slip and on the phone, dated in the Ethiopian calendar. Every receipt, cancellation and refund goes into an audit log that exports. Sales are recorded on the register in the restaurant, so the answer to the fifth question is that the records are already where they would have to be sent. It keeps selling through a power cut and an outage, and it times the 72 hours afterwards.
Put the six questions to us the way you would put them to anybody else quoting you. The ones about the system have answers you can check on a machine in your own dining room.
This is a summary written for restaurant owners, not legal advice. Directive 1142/2026 is the authority on itself, and your accountant or the Ministry of Revenues is the authority on how it applies to your business.