-
Sales Order Prepayment Function
Suggested by Anna Davies – Planned – 31 Comments
It would be useful if you could replicate the PO prepayment functionality and apply similar functionality on the sales order side. We frequently have requests from clients to be able to create payments in advance from customers and link them to a SO. I know it is possible to create a prepayment journal and link that to the sales order using existing functionality but the problem is there are limitations. These are as follows:-
1) You can't generate an invoice off the back of the prepayment
2) It is not easy to see what prepayments you have generated in the system with remaining balances.
3). It would be a simpler process if you could generate the prepayment directly from the SO, similar to the PO prepayment function.
-
Reverse Purchase order invoice
Suggested by Brent Wilson – Planned – 12 Comments
We need a quick easy process to reverse Purchase order invoices. The current process of adding a negative quantity line, posting the product receipt and invoice for that line, and then adding a third line to be posted with the correct invoice is much too lengthy and difficult. -
Financial dimension based on transaction type / posting type (cross-module)
Suggested by Hansjuergen Mueller – Planned – 7 Comments
Transaction-based financial dimension:
There was an easy-to-implement possibility to largely improve GL reporting and analysis capabilities by extending the ledger integration by financial dimensions.
In several setups, a posting integration is defined by ledger account defined in the posting profiles and some additional set-up tables (i.e. item postings, resources postings, fixed asset postings, indirect cost postings, project postings, bank postings, customer/vendor postings, automatic postings, etc.).
The idea is to add financial dimensions to the main account entries. The filled dimension depends on the posting type / transaction type and brings all types of transactions together (cross-module) and hence makes it easier to run reports on GL postings on general level.
Advantages:
1. Quite easy to implement since the framework is already there.
2. Separation of quantity values from transaction values in the GL - more transparancy
3. Enables cash-flow statement according to the direct method as required in financial reporting of many groups of companies
4. Enables standard reports (tax development, provision development, cash development, fixed asset balances, inventory changes) or makes it easier to create from GL (using financial reporting)
5. Reduces number of required GL accounts
This kind of "movement" or "flow" analysis is almost always required by customers but so far hardly supported by D365. The extension brings big improvements by low effort.
-
Provide ability to cancel or correct vendor invoices associated with purchase order
Suggested by JJ Yadav – Planned – 0 Comments
Similar to purchase order product receipt correction functionality. It will be nice to have a vendor invoice correction functionality. This functionality should allow adjusting qty or unit price or both at the invoice line. Such Functionality will be usefull in handling debit memo or credit memo scenarios where product return is not applicable.
-
There is no blocker to submit Pending vendor invoice to the Vendor invoice workflow when there is missing mandatory financial dimension
Suggested by Bojana Glisovic – Planned – 1 Comments
Pending vendor invoices can be submitted to the Workflow without any error message, even if there are missing mandatory financial dimensions. This is not the case with the Purchase order. When there is a missing mandatory financial dimension on the purchase order, an error message appears, and submit action is blocked (message attached). What is causing the inconvenience is that if the Pending vendor invoice is submitted to the WF without needed financial dimension values when the workflow is completed vendor invoice can not be posted. To post it, the user must turn it back to the first step in the WF, fill in missing data, and submit it again. These additional steps slow down the business process and lead to wasting time. In the end, latency can cause losing the right to deduct VAT.
-
Support multiple VAT registration IDs in the same order
Suggested by Allie Tang – Planned – 4 Comments
The scenario where sales tax codes are assigned to different registration numbers under the same sales order or purchase order isn't supported currently by MS. During sales tax calculation and document posting, you receive an error message Different tax registration numbers (VAT IDs) of the legal entity are assigned to the document lines and can't continue the process.
Please kindly help to vote!
-
Enhancement of line-specific billing schedule termination with refund
Suggested by Melissa Mähnert – Planned – 0 Comments
Current situation
Billing schedule lines can be either terminated completely or line-specific. At the moment, when terminating a specific line with refund, it is neccessary to do double work. The "Terminate" button in the Billing schedule lines section (not action pane header) also just opens the "Mass termination processing" mask. Means, the selection on the specific billing schedule line before does not have any consequence, as you have to remove all lines, which are not supposed to be terminated, afterwards again.
Suggested solution
The "Termination" button in the Billing schedule lines section should only be working when a line (or lines) is (are) selected. After that, it should not be neccessary to remove again all the other billing schedule lines, which should not be terminated. For the solution, you only have to enhance the filter criteria on the "Mass termination processing" mask by adding a filter on the lines.
-
Withholding tax amounts calculation on Purchase Invoice
Suggested by Federica Li Donni – Planned – 5 Comments
The need is to calculate the withholding tax amounts during the Purchase invoice process, without the posting on withholding tax accounts. The reasons for this requirement are: 1) Not all the items/main accounts are to be included in the calculation of the withholding tax base amount. 2) During the invoice phase, the people who is posting the invoice is aware of the correct withholding tax amount. 3) The person who posts the invoice is different from the one who pays the invoice. 4) Starting from 2019, vendor invoices are received through electronic .xml document. This calculated amount should be inherited during the payment process (invoice settlement), for the following reasons: 5) The person who posts the payment is different from the one who posts the invoice. 6) The person who posts the payment does not have the invoice pdf/xml. 7) In 95% of the cases, the D365 calculation is not coherent with the archived invoice. -
Voucher "Created by" shown as incorrect in Journalizing report and Audit Trail
Suggested by Julian Mifsud – Planned – 2 Comments
When vouchers are posted from the sub-ledger to the ledger via the batch job (Asynchronous or Scheduled batch job), the "Created By" field shows the name of the person configured to run the "Batch transfer for subledger journals" batch job. This is showing incorrect names in the Journalizing reports and audit trails. An audit trail is to know who created the original vouchers, not shown as created all by the same batch job user (typically an admin account). -
Configurable business documents - Merge document with application attachments
Suggested by Charissa Stevens – Planned – 1 Comments
For now the MergePDF feature in the ER format can only be used to merge PDF's present as attachment of the running ER format.
It would be nice to extend that list to application attachments in pdf format originating from the source data.
Additionally even using the URL of the attachments to retrieve the pdf document from external location (sharepoint, ...) as well.
Many Thanks!
You’re offline. This is a read only version of the page.
