Consolidation

sabzam

Hi Everybody,

A client of ours has to perform consolidation for a number of clients. What has emerged is that NAV is not following IFRS standard. Has anyone ever met this issue. Is there any solution to this, maybe an add-on which someone has already implemented?

Savatage

Which is the exact question - Merging Customers? or IFRS standards?

jglathe

Hi sabzam,

... not yet I have met this issue more than once. There are several methods to cover parts of what you need with IFRS. The real challenge is to do the accounting for local GAAP and IFRS in the same company without suffering from complexity issues. Consolidation is a matter of itself. The consolidation NAV provides out of the box is very basic. If your client is just starting on this, I'd recommend using a specialized consolidation software like IDL or Frango.
I've been doing development in this area for some years now, but no Add-On yet... only a set of building blocks and some experience on how to implement and operate this. But I'm working on it

with best regards

Jens



---
I am here: http://tapatalk.com/map.php?nxzum5

NASi

Hi jglathe: we have a Customer working in Spain, with NAV 2009 ES version and four companies, following the standards G/L for Spain.
Now, this customer wants to add a company that is eradicated in a small European country, which follows the IFRS standards.
My question is, it is unreasonable to make certain adjustments in the ES version to achieve the results requested in this standard?.
What would your advice be? Maybe export the G/L information and report with a local software.
Is there currently a document, or any development on this issue?.
Thanks.

jglathe

Hi NASi,

I assume that you mean "situated" instead of "eradicated" If they:

- only do IFRS and no special local GAAP,
- have a G/L Chart of Accounts differing from the other companies, and having the same in every company is not a requirement,
- the valuation methods for IFRS (adjust exchange rates) can be customized into the existing ES version and being set up per company,

then yes that should be the way.
If, on the other hand, the customer needs IFRS accounting on all companies and a local GAAP, then it depends on the size (complexity) of the business. If it's only small ("a few") adjustments with respect to the local GAAP, then setting up dedicated accounts for IFRS valuation and account schedules should do. This means doing the calculations needed by hand/excel. If not, for example: you have lots of leased equipment, you do acquisitions (purchase price allocation), you're leasing out equipment, complicated company structures, then I would recommend using a dedicated consolidation software like IDL Konsis or Frango for consolidation and IFRS reporting.

Is there currently a document, or any development on this issue?

Nothing public yet. The development I'm on covers the issue of holding parallel ledgers in the same company. And doing it without increasing complexity for the user.

with best regards

Jens

NASi

Sorry for 'eradicated' (has not sense).
Thanks for your answer.
The scenario that we want to work will be a database in Spain, 2009 SP1 ES and from this country work against this database (via terminal server, via citrix, we don't know yet), where we have Spanish companies, and the company from this country (only one company).
It will be more simple work in this scenario because we have made a lot of modifications at the ES version, and work with an International version in a different Database only for this country will be complicated.

Now we are analysing the requirements for this country, not only for financial reporting but for tax management and others.
We want to use all the functionality that we have developed for Sales, Inventory and Purchases and if it's possible made some developments to achieve the particular financial reporting and tax management.
Do you think that it could be a good plan?

jglathe

Hi NASi,

from what you describe I would go this way. There have been frequent discussions about mixing localizations (also on mibuso), the consensus seems to be that it depends a little on which localizations are to be mixed. It adds complexity, though. Running several databases adds complexity, too.

with best regards

Jens

NASi

I'm in the same way of thought about mixing localizations. This question requires a deep analysis to be able to make a good decision.
Thanks Jens for your advice.
Regards