Patricia Cervello Mrs

The new function to "Post customer and vendor payment journals from bank statements and reconciliation worksheets" is great, specially for customer payments, but, as it is designed the process still remains a two step process:

1. Payment journal is created and posted from reconciliation worksheet
2. There is no option to select the specific transactions being cleared so a second step is needed
3. From vendor/customer transactions, settlement function to settle the payment with the individual transactions

It would be great if at the point of journal creation in the reconciliation worksheet, the transactions that are being paid could be selected, taking into account any settlement discounts there may be. Only then this would become a true one step process.

It would be very handy if approved rebate lines could be edited within the same agreement, and audit trail of the changes kept and a workflow to approve those changes.

The logic could be similar to the one of editing leasing agreements. The dates on the existing lines should be expired and a new line should be added below with new data for the coming periods.

At the moment, the only option available to make changes to a rebate after it's been approved is to copy all the data into a new deal and deactivate the old one.

Also, I think there should be a dedicated category in this portal for the rebates module.

In the Project Management module of D365, there is an option to add budgets to projects. However, it's mandatory to use an approval workflow when working with these budgets. Unlike other workflows in D365, the project budget workflow does not allow for automated approvals or the option to bypass the approval process entirely.

This is inconsistent with other workflows in the system, which can be disabled by deactivating the version.

The goal of this idea is to enable the use of project budgets without requiring a workflow for approval.

Thanks!

When entering rates in the indirect costs of the costing sheet to add them to the finished goods, we are limited to use only two decimals. This means that for companies that produce thousands of Kgs as output have a huge amount of overheads added to the product which is not realistic. Example:

• Node type: output unit based
• Subtype: Quantity
• Rate: 0.01

A company produces 1.000.000Kgs in each production order absorbing 10.000eur as indirects. This is way too much. There should be a way of introducing more decimals or working with conversion units in a way that we can define indirect cost absorption not per unit of FG produced but per 1000units for example.

Currently, funding limits can be used as a way of tracking how much has been invoiced on a given item, category, resource...etc and comparing with an established limit amount.

I think it would be nice to have as part of the parameters an option to enforce warnings or errors when an invoice is going to make the spent amount to go over the funding limit amount.

Since the consumer price index schedule values have to be updated for every month of the year in case of monthly billing and annual escalation frequency, it would be very useful if these values could be updated via data entities or even better excel add-in. At the moment only a composite data entity in xml format exists for this.

The CPI functionality for updating prices on billing schedules based on price indexes cannot be used for items of type Usage. This limitation makes the functionality unusable for companies that rely on this item type. We use the Subscription Billing module to invoice cloud subscriptions based on the number of users, which varies each month. Additionally, those users are billed using tiered pricing. We need the base prices for each tier—defined in the trade agreements—to be updated with CPI adjustments, just like other item prices.

It would be great if the submission of this tax model would be available in the Spanish localization as electronic reporting that allow automated submission. It's a tax model that all companies have to file once per year.

If a vendor invoice is captured in Invoice Capture and no errors or warnings are detected during validation, the system should automatically send the invoice to D365FO without requiring the user to open Invoice Capture, select the invoice, review it, and manually trigger the send action.

The standard process requires manual review for every invoice, even when the invoice has been fully validated in Invoice Capture without any detected errors or warnings. This creates unnecessary workload for AP users, as they must open Invoice Capture, review, and send invoices that do not require any correction.