Search options (Page 2 of 5)

Don't know if this is a bug in v 3.2.23 or just in my own installation?

When I delete a line in a journal entry and in an issue to to a work order in advanced manufacturing, the line above the one I want to delete is removed and the line I want to delete is left on the screen.

When using drill down reports - like the trial balance..
I change the date range to my required range like Jan to March for example and drill down - it's great.
But when I return back the date range has changed to current month and I have to keep re-entering by required date range.
Is there any way that this could be changed so that the drill down reports remember the last date range used?
Don't know if other have same need?
Mark

I noticed the following:

When I process a customer payment with today's date it appears in the customer aged analysis in the 30 day column and not the current column.

Tried several times with same result.

Then I processed a customer payment with last month's date.  Instead of showing in the 30 day column in the customer aged analysis it showed in the 60 day column.

Did same test with a payment to supplier with same results as above.

Conclusion: it looks like customer / supplier payments are shown on the customer/supplier aged analysis one aging column too old which means customer/supplier aged analysis report is not always reliable. A fix is needed.

Adding a facility to process withholding tax (WHT) would greatly improve the usefulness of FA where WHT is applicable - which it is in many places.

In simple concept it would entail coding similar to settlement discount. 

In the same way FA deals with settlement discounts on payments from customers and payments to suppliers, there is an additional, similar type of transaction commonly dealt with by accountants - withholding tax (WHT)

When certain (not all) customers pay me, they are obliged to deduct with-holding tax from the amount they pay me.

For example, I invoice $100 to my customer, and he will pay me $97 and then he will pay the $3 balance to the tax authorities - as a payment of tax on my behalf. 

As far as the customer is concerned his account with me is zero - the $3 should not appear on the statement I send him. 

The accounting for this would be

Dr Bank                                       97
Dr WHT deducted on my behalf      3  (balance sheet receivable account as opposed to the discount allowed GL acc)
Cr Debtors Control                     100 

There is no way I see to account for this in FA at the level of customer payment. 

The ideal solution would be to have, at the level of customer and supplier set up, an option to process withholding tax on customer or supplier payment.

The reverse can happen when I pay certain suppliers.  For example, if I pay my rent I need to deduct 5% tax and pay it to the tax man.

The accounting entry for this would be

Dr Rent                                  100
Cr Bank                                    97
Cr WHt deducted by me              3 (balance sheet payable account - as opposed to the GL acc for discount received)

When I pay the tax man the entry would then be

Dr WHt deducted by me              3
Cr Bank                                      3       

Mark

Hi

I'm selling both services and purchased items.
I need to see a list of sales to see what service is being bought by what customer.
When I run the report Inventory Sales Report the service items don't appear on it.
When I run the report Inventory Sales Report For purchased items the product and customer appear - great report!
When I run the report Sales Summary Report I see total sales by customer name (incl services) but not what they bought
When I run the report Item Sales Summary Report I see the items sold (incl services) but not who bought them.
Is there a report that shows sales by product (incl services items) by customer  - like the Inventory sales report does for purchased items? 
It would be great if Inventory sales report could display sales of all types of items sold - incl services.
Is this possible?

Mark

I noticed a bug when processing supplier payments through banking and general ledger.
                                                                             ****************************
Here is the scenario:

1. I processed a supplier payment using banking and general ledger payments
2. I selected "pay to supplier" as payment type and then selected the correct supplier
3. By mistake I then selected a GL account called printing and stationery (instead of supplier control account which the system defaults to when I select supplier as the payment type)
4. When I processed this payment Front updated the GL by DR Printing and Stationer and CR Bank and it also updated the supplier account.
5. But it does not update the Supplier Control Account.
6. The problem becomes that that supplier control account and the supplier aged analysis don't balance

The point to note is that it would really help if the user was prevented from changing the allocation from the default Supplier Control Account after selecting the payment as a "Supplier".  Probably the same with payment type as "Customer" 

The overall objective being that there seem to be a number of (subtle) ways to produce the wrong results in Front and closing these loopholes makes Front a better solution. 

Mark

The following anomaly was noted in Front:

1. Today (7.11.14) I entered a sales invoice dated 31.10.14
2. The customer payment terms are 10 days from invoice which should in theory be from 31.10.14
3. The due date reflected on the invoice says 17.11.14

Unless the customer knows that it was on 7.11.14 that I raised the invoice, it does not make sense that the invoice dated 31.10.14 with payment terms of 10 days is due on 17.11.14.  He would expect to see that it's due on 09.11.14.