Direct Cost Applied Account not required

davealfa

Hi!

Our client does want to have the double entry to the Direct Cost Applied account, but just the entries to the Creditors, Purchases & Vat.

I tried to omit the Direct Cost Applied Account from the Posting Groups setup, but on trying to post a Purchase Invoice I get a message "You must specify Direct Cost Applied Account in General Posting Setup ...."

is there a way around this problem?

thanks
Dave

Alex_Chow

Just have your entries all go into one account.

Why doesn't your client want double entry posting? It's absolutely needed when using landed cost and reconciling A/P to inventory.

davealfa

probably coz the stock items are purchased from one of their companies....actually in Nav they have another company in the same database which sells them the stock items.

Alex_Chow

It shouldn't matter if the item is purchased in an intercompany environment. You still need double entry to be able to properly reconcile the purchases made for the period.

idiot

If it is a simple transaction of purchases of end-product then the way navision handles this transaction creates an unnecessary resultant set of entry:
Dr Purchase
Cr Direct Cost Applied
What you need to do is to set both the Purchases account & Direct Cost Applied account to the same G/L account (clearing account).

ayhan06

Alex Chow wrote:

It shouldn't matter if the item is purchased in an intercompany environment. You still need double entry to be able to properly reconcile the purchases made for the period.

when using average, fifo or lifo costing method and running nav's item costing batch job, you need this account. otherwise, you can not reconcile inventory and g/l If wrong purchase returns is done.

for example, in turkish legislation there is one inventory account. but, we need to use different purchase, direct cost applied and inventory accounts in nav.

davealfa

hi!

In Warehouse - Setup - Inventory Setup, i have unticked the Automatic Cost Posting option, and now the system is not posting to the Direct Cost Applied account....postings are exactly what the customer was after.

regards
Dave

ssingla

When you will run the Post cost to G/L the transaction you are avoiding will be posted. If you don't run the batch job your inventory valuation will not reflect in the General Ledger which means Cost and Financial books are not integrated.
If I am a client i will be very sad if so much of money spend gives me disintegrated accounts.

davealfa

will they be posted transaction by transactions or just a batch total?

ssingla

You have both the options i.e per entry , per posting group.

davealfa

ok thanks...so will use Per posting group, as this would create just 1 transaction in the Direct Cost Applied Account

thanks for your help!

dave

bbrown

davealfa wrote:

ok thanks...so will use Per posting group, as this would create just 1 transaction in the Direct Cost Applied Account

thanks for your help!

dave

There will be an entry "per posting group" for each posting date.

ssingla

I dont think so. If you run the batch job after a month it will post cummulative transaction for the month and not day wise.

lally

hi experts,


what is the best method u generally used to update general ledger using per entry or per posting group.


Please let me know .


what is your opnion about Automatic cos t posting .
Do i need to place a check mark always.


If not what is the period to run the batch job , that means daily , weekly....



plesase suggest me.

ssingla

There is no thumb rule for using different options. The use will depend on the nature of requirement and its effect on the performance of the system. Automatic Cost posting slows the performance as it creates more entries at the time of posting sales/purchase invoice and other inventory transaction.
Simillary in the case of posting cost entries (Post Cost to G/L batch job) per entry option though creates more entries but give you a good tracking of inventory transaction in the G/L & value entry.

Why you leave so much space between two line?

bbrown

I'm going to state a difference of opinion. Not to say that other statements are wrong. Just that I have a different opinion and experience.

Turning off "Automatic Cost Posting" is a carryover from the old days when NAV understood nothing about performance tuning and provided no tuning capabilities. Their official solution to performance issues was to start disabling features.

I have been integrating NAV for over 9 years (including many high transaction systems) and have never found a need to turn off "Automatic Cost Posting". (I do have a few were "Expected Cost Posting" is disabled) I've worked with many clients that demand (and expect) real time General Ledger. It is not uncommon to see a department manager, toward the end of the period, running their P&L almost hourly to see where they stand. You don't tell a client like this that their GL will update overnight.

ssingla

Thats what I was saying : There is no thumb rule. The consultant needs to decide how to provide the solution. My last 2 implementation with NAV 4.0 SP3 SQL Server 2005 standard edition are good with automatic posting but before that it was a problem.

ssingla

Coming to the question posted by "Lally" I will never advise to turn cost posting to G/L off untill client owns the responsibility (though I will still resist).