Dynamics 365 Finance

When the new function "Awareness between ledger settlement and year-end close" is activated, the system lets you post detailed opening balance transactions during general ledger year-end close.

Currently, when the users wants to settle this opening transaction, the only way to identify the corresponding original transaction is the following:

·       Original transaction date

·       Original document date

·       Original document

It would be much easier to identify the original transaction based on the original voucher number. 

Create Posting profile.

Create 2nd posting profile for Default.

While doing customer payment journal we will select one posting profile and we will post it, later we will do the reimbursement for the same customer at this time it is considering the default customer posting profile. where there are two different accounts are mapped.

Accounts Receivable>> Payments>> Customer Payments.

Click on new and update Cust pay and go to lines.

Update the customer account and credit amount and select offset account type ledger and offset account cash payment.

Go to Payment tab and update posting profile is PR and save.

Post the customer payment.

Reimbursement

Accounts receivable >> Periodic tasks >> click on Reimbursement.

In reimbursement parameters page, select include customer with outstanding, filter with customer account.” customer” click on ok. Reimbursement process will complete.

• Accounts Receivable -- >Inquiries and reports-- >Customer-- > Customer to Ledger reconciliation.

• Generate report.

1.Example: Select any month data or small set of date (from date:10/9/2023 and to

date :10/10/2023) with include details option.

2.Select Include details option.

3.click on ok.

While generating the customer to ledger reconciliation report, when there is both customer balance and ledger balance in the report difference column is working fine, when there is no customer balance but there is a ledger balance in the report in this scenario also there is a value in difference column but when there is a customer balance but there is no ledger balance in the report in this scenario there is no value in the difference column.

Actual

Results:

While selecting include details option under customer to ledger reconciliation report unable to see accurate values and system shows zero difference on customer to ledger reconciliation report.

ACTUAL: Select any Example: Voucher number”00004”

Customer balance: 4,000

Ledger balance: 0.00

Difference: 0.00

Expected

Results:

While selecting include details option under customer to ledger reconciliation report, system should show correct difference values on customer to ledger reconciliation report.

Expected: Select any Example: Voucher number”00004”

Customer balance: 4,000

Ledger balance: 0.00

Difference: 4,000

Please fix the Report issue in the customer to ledger reconciliation report.

The drill-down links feature functions only within the PDF Viewer, which means it will only work when the link is clicked within the report generated on screen, and it will open the specific record in the current page.

It should work also if clicked to open on a new tab or if the report is exported to a pdf file or excel file. It would be very useful for the users and make them everyday work easier as a result.

Customers may have legal entities registered in countries such as Germany and be tax registered in Hungary which is available for multiple tax registration however the RITR facility requires the customers legal entity to be based in Hungary to work and requires customisation to be made available.

To be consistent with the MTR functionality - features such as RITR should be made globally available

When generating a purchase order for a fixed asset, where more than one line linked to the same fixed asset is entered, the system is computing for PIS and COFINS purposes only the first line linked to this fixed asset and ignoring that there are more lines in the same order linked to that asset.

For example:

Purchase order: OCxxxxx

1. Item number: BRMF710 - Fixed asset number - BRMF999999 - amount = 985.00
2. Item number: BRMF800 - Fixed asset number - BRMF999999 - amount = 500.00
3. Item number: BRMF900 - Fixed asset number - BRMF999999 - amount = 128.00

Fiscal Books > All PIS and COFINS fixed assets > created 3 lines, but

Created BRMF999999-1 - Amount - 985.00

Created BRMF999999-2 - Amount - 985.00

Created BRMF999999-3 - Amount - 985.00

Hey Guys

Issue we are facing is multiple finance people are settling vendor or customer transactions at the same time.

Employee A open vendor settlement from the Vendor form and select multiple transactions

Employee B open vendor settlement on the same Vendor.

No indications that user A already has marked transactions, these is just marked as as normal.

Employee B start to select transactions, and employee A select settle. The transactions employee B has done and not finalized in the process is getting settled by employee A, so many partially settled. An now updated that Employee A has settled all transactions, but is Employee B which had marked the transaction and is not finalized in the process.

An indication like marked transactions from a General journal or other journal will help so employees not settle unexpected transactions.

When an initial e-invoice submission fails, the status in the Electronic Document Submission Log remains “Failed”. Even after a successful related submission, the original log entry does not update. Users must manually navigate to Inquiries > Related submissions to find the latest status. This makes Submission status unreliable and time-consuming to use for tracking submission outcomes.

We would like to propose a design change request that involves either:

• A status override or chaining mechanism in the submission log to reflect the latest related submission.
• A visual indicator or link in the original failed submission pointing to successful related submissions.
• A consolidated view that merges submission history for the same document.

There seems to be a significant GAP in the Credit and collections automation process. Microsoft designed the product to look into only the oldest/leading invoice per customer and then apply the collection automation process only against this single invoice. Hence the suggestion to enhance this logic so the collection automation process is run against every single outstanding invoice against each customer per LE. Based on this then you can assign an dunning letter and/or activity per outstanding invoice as long as it's overdue.

The enhancement will BE enabled/disabled via Yes/No toggle per each LE located in the Sales ledger parameters > Collection process automation > General 

Toggle = Yes - enhanced logic to include all outstanding invoice for each customer in the LE.

Toggle = No - revert to standard logic for leading/oldest invoice per customer in each LE.

We have often the case that the vendor invoice is not yet posted and the vendor payment (linked to an LC) is already posted via the bank statement import. This is especially the case for LC Sight payment terms.

If we settle the invoice and the payment on the vendor transactions, the LC remains in status Invoiced and not Paid and the bank utilization is still open.

We would need that the LC is paid and that the bank utilization is updated when settlement on vendor transactions is done without needing to create general journals as a correction for each case.

Hi,

This idea is created by Tax Calculation service product team to understand the market requirements to support the integration between D365 Commerce and Tax Calculation service. Please vote for this idea if you need this integration in your project.

Thanks

Eric