Attain 3.6a Multiple Employer w2 problem

jsh01

Hello,

We are having a problem which I am hoping someone might be able to lend some insight into. We have been running attain 3.6a for the last several years without major problem, about 10 months ago we opened another facility in another state and so to handle the new payroll requirements for different state taxes etc plus they are paid bi weekly and we are paid weekly, we created a new employer within the same company, so we have emplr1 and emplr02 - Everything has worked fairly well over the last 10 months, the different payrolls have posted and reconciled. The problem arose this month when we started getting ready to run our w2's. Emplr1 runs w2's no problem, emplr02 however will not. The report stops almost immediately and throws up this error:

The Reporting Authority Does Not Exist.

Identification Fields and Values:
Employer No.='EMPLR02' Reporting Authority Code ="

Thats it, so I went and checked and no there weren't any reporting authorities set up for emplr02 so I copied them from 1 but... it didn't help.
Also there is also one code in emplr1 that is a blank code that I cannot recreate in emplr02, it won't let me. I believe it is being used for vacation accural and emplr02 may have some ledger entries that use it but I cannot recreate it.

What I think is happening is numerous ledger entries exist that have a blank value someplace for employer reporting authority. I've pored over the tables and cannot find them though so I don't know if they do or not. I am truly at a loss here, does anyone have any suggestions?

TIA

Savatage

you would probably need a developers license to fill in the blanks anyway. Have you contacted your NSC about this?

It's things like this that make you wonder why they you post ledger entries in the first place if needed fields aren't filled in. :-k

Turning on the debugger will help you find where it's stopping.

jsh01

Well we don't have a nsc, they went out of business several years ago. The debugger thing was a good idea, still haven't figured it out but the latest data provided by the debugger is the program is stopping here

ERRepAuth.GET(Employer."No.", PayrollTaxForm."Reporting Authority Code");

Any thoughts?

Savatage

Sorry we don't use the payroll granule.

But it appears that your first thought's were right.
If you have no NSC you can always get a hold of a freelancer that can zip in fix your prob and zip out.

There are many exceptional one'e who visit this site regualrly :-$

perhaps they can contact you because it doesn't sound to me that it's a fix you can handle.

Hopefully someone else can chime in on this. Beause it's always better to have more than one opinion.

In many cases w/navision proper setup's are everything

jsh01

We would definately consider talking with a freelancer, we'll pay airfare lodging whatever

Savatage

note..most can connect to your system via the internet and fix it remotely. I guess it all depends on the severity of the problem. This appears not to be too severe.

themave

Open your test company, and run a payroll now that you have added the reporting authority,

run a test w2 and make sure it works now, giving the info from that test payroll you just ran.

if it does, you will know you have it set up correctly.

Now, you can look at the payroll ledger entries and see what fields need to be filled in. Unforcunately you will not be able to edit them yourself, as they are posted ledger entries and your license won't allow it. But a developer can create a report that will go through and add the apporiate entries. They should be able to do this just by emailing the fob back and forth. I am an end use, so I can't help.

FYI, there was no need to make a separate company to handle the second state, we have ran payroll from Nav2.0 to 4.0 with mulitple states without a problem.

Captain_DX4

themave wrote:

FYI, there was no need to make a separate company to handle the second state, we have ran payroll from Nav2.0 to 4.0 with mulitple states without a problem.

I believe he stated he just setup a new Employer, not a new company.

I worked with a woman who should be regarded as a leading payroll expert in North America. She's worked closely with (formally) VisionPay on the payroll system and setting it up for release in Attain. I worked with her to setup a multi-Employer payroll in Canada.

From what you're saying, I'm not wondering if this might not be a bug in v3.60 code because that was when a lot of new functionality was first introduced in Attain, and I believe we had some issues regarding Employer at that point. Our customer was quickly upgraded to v3.70 in order to make their payroll system live because the v3.60 code was just too buggy to deploy a very complex and sophisitcated payroll the customer wanted to setup.

PM me to let me know if you would like to speak to my ex-coworker. She belongs to an NSC who does work with customers in Canada and US and she understands the payroll system very well.

themave

Captain DX4 wrote:

themave wrote:

FYI, there was no need to make a separate company to handle the second state, we have ran payroll from Nav2.0 to 4.0 with mulitple states without a problem.

I believe he stated he just setup a new Employer, not a new company.

I worked with a woman who should be regarded as a leading payroll expert in North America. She's worked closely with (formally) VisionPay on the payroll system and setting it up for release in Attain. I worked with her to setup a multi-Employer payroll in Canada.

From what you're saying, I'm not wondering if this might not be a bug in v3.60 code because that was when a lot of new functionality was first introduced in Attain, and I believe we had some issues regarding Employer at that point. Our customer was quickly upgraded to v3.70 in order to make their payroll system live because the v3.60 code was just too buggy to deploy a very complex and sophisitcated payroll the customer wanted to setup.

PM me to let me know if you would like to speak to my ex-coworker. She belongs to an NSC who does work with customers in Canada and US and she understands the payroll system very well.

Yes said he set up a new employer, not company, wrong term on my part, but he did not say employee. It is not a bug in 3.6, and support for 3.6 is gone, it would be very hard to get payroll upgraded to 3.7. I am pretty confident this can be fixed.

the Reporting Authority Type, Reporting Authority Code, and Employer No. get recorded with the payroll ledger entries, when he set up EMPLR02, he did not set up the related Reporting Authority Code, and thus his entries were recorded without this information.