Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- All Categories
- 73 General
- 73 Announcements
- 66.6K Microsoft Dynamics NAV
- 18.6K NAV Three Tier
- 38.4K NAV/Navision Classic Client
- 3.6K Navision Attain
- 2.4K Navision Financials
- 115 Navision DOS
- 854 Navision e-Commerce
- 1K NAV Tips & Tricks
- 772 NAV Dutch speaking only
- 615 NAV Courses, Exams & Certification
- 2K Microsoft Dynamics-Other
- 1.5K Dynamics AX
- 296 Dynamics CRM
- 109 Dynamics GP
- 10 Dynamics SL
- 1.5K Other
- 993 SQL General
- 384 SQL Performance
- 34 SQL Tips & Tricks
- 34 Design Patterns (General & Best Practices)
- Architectural Patterns
- 10 Design Patterns
- 5 Implementation Patterns
- 53 3rd Party Products, Services & Events
- 1.7K General
- 1.1K General Chat
- 1.6K Website
- 79 Testing
- 1.2K Download section
- 23 How Tos section
- 259 Feedback
- 12 NAV TechDays 2013 Sessions
- 13 NAV TechDays 2012 Sessions
No cost posting to G/L needed
ndn
Member Posts: 19
Hi All,
I am into an implementation for NAV 5.0 (SP1) with LS. Need your inputs for one requirement.
The client does not need the Inventory cost posting from to the G/L i.e. Automatic Cost posting is going to be unticked and the Post Cost to G/L will also not be used.
The client will run the Adjust Cost-item entries batch job at the end of the month and then take the inventory value from Inventory valuation report and post the cost to the G/L manually by way of a Journal Voucher.
The conditions that are put forward is:
- The cost, if any, that arise subsequently through Item Charges etc., pertaining to the closed month, should be posted to the first day of the succeeding month.
- Later on there should not be any addition to the cost after the period if closed (I am not sure if this can be done through Inventory Periods or Allow Posting from/to in the G/L Setup) so that the auditor can verify the Cost from the Inventory Valuation report to the respective G/L Accounts
Tried searching for this in the forums but couldnt get the exact answer. Thanks in advance for the help
I am into an implementation for NAV 5.0 (SP1) with LS. Need your inputs for one requirement.
The client does not need the Inventory cost posting from to the G/L i.e. Automatic Cost posting is going to be unticked and the Post Cost to G/L will also not be used.
The client will run the Adjust Cost-item entries batch job at the end of the month and then take the inventory value from Inventory valuation report and post the cost to the G/L manually by way of a Journal Voucher.
The conditions that are put forward is:
- The cost, if any, that arise subsequently through Item Charges etc., pertaining to the closed month, should be posted to the first day of the succeeding month.
- Later on there should not be any addition to the cost after the period if closed (I am not sure if this can be done through Inventory Periods or Allow Posting from/to in the G/L Setup) so that the auditor can verify the Cost from the Inventory Valuation report to the respective G/L Accounts
Tried searching for this in the forums but couldnt get the exact answer. Thanks in advance for the help
0
Comments
If the client is taking the results of the report and posting it manually why are they not simply posting to GL and saving a whole lot of manual work? Also manually entering these figures means you can create differences between the GL and the valuation report - which is what you are trying to avoid, whilst letting the system do it under controlled business processes means there should never be a difference.
Thanks for your suggestion. I agree with you completely. In fact I have been trying to offer the same suggestion, but it seems like for reporting reasons and for the purpose of eliminating the number of entries created in the inventory related accounts, this is needed.
Just wanted to know what could be the scenarios which can create differences between the Inventory balances and the G/L postings subsequent to the running of the ACIE at the month end.
I have tested the results yesterday with the Inventory closing period and I hope to convince the client with the output. Will keep this post updated.
Thanks.
That is a very good suggestion. I will try and make some test entries to see if this can be suggested to my client.