Jesús Salvador Cristóbal Bueno Business Central Consultant

Good Morning

More and more companies are part of groups with centralised management departments.

To simplify, these centralized management departments, tend to use some tables as if they were a single one,

such as:

• Payment Terms

• Payment methods

•Products

•Clients

•Suppliers

• Financial accounts.

The alternative offered by Business Central is Master Data, but this has several drawbacks:

• A project queue is created for each synchronized table

• Information is duplicated, taking up more disk space

• Delay between one queuing process and another

• Insecurity if at any time a queue has failed or stopped

Microsoft should consider a system that allows you to modify the DataPerCompany property on these tables,

either by code in Visual Code or through a table configuration page.

Thanks.

Good Morning

Allocation accounts can only be used with accounting accounts or bank accounts.

When you use Items or fixed assets in your sales and purchase documents, and you have to break them down due to a split between different dimension values, it would be very useful to use this allocation account functionality,

but it is not possible.

It would be interesting if this functionality were opened to other types or at least that it would be allowed for products and fixed assets to choose the Inherit option from the parent element and take the account of the record group to carry out the allocation distribution.

Thanks

Good morning.

CFOs often use the cost functionality to achieve a distribution of financial accounting down to cost objects.

But when everything is distributed, they want to see a Profit and Loss account for each of the cost objects.

The process of distribution cards of cost centers groups all costs and then distributes using an allocation account in the distribution, losing traceability between the expense initially posted and that received by the cost object.

This is a problem because the CFO does not know whether the figures add up with their financial accounting or not. And it also does not know where the cost items that are harming the result of the cost object under study are.

Therefore, it is vital for the CFO to be able to follow the trace from the expense account of the financial accounting and the cost applied as a cost in the cost object.

If this is not possible, they end up not using Business Centa's cost accounting, or at least discourage its use.

All this could be avoided by using a system similar to that of inheritance in allocation accounts, i.e. the allocation cards of cost centers must allow the account that comes to them from financial to be used as the source account of the distribution.

This is a challenge because the distribution can cause cost movement lines to be created exponentially, so you would have to look for some compression system between dates, similar to the one used in analysis views.

I think that if this idea were applied, the system could launch profit and loss accounts for each cost object and its figures could be drilled down to the initial entry that originated the cost. CFOs could follow the distribution trace and start using the functionality more intensively.

Thank you.

Good morning.

The functionality of multiple NIFs for clients is all well and good, but let's be consistent. If a client may have different NIFs that identify our client's company before the different tax administrations of each country, our company (the base company of Business central) may also be in the same circumstances; and so do our suppliers.

Therefore, it would be interesting to extend this functionality to these two entities.

In the case of the company, I think that, although at first glance it might seem interesting to link the NIF in each country to the warehouse, I think it would be better to associate it with the responsibility center, as an administrative billing center.

This makes me wonder if a responsibility center could have multiple warehouses under its responsibility, and I think it does. Therefore, it leads us to modify the way of relating warehouse with center of responsibility, which at the moment is a 1-to-1 relationship.

On the other hand, this functionality will impact VAT accounting groups, since now it will not only depend on who I sell to and what I sell, but also where I sell from.

For example: If my company is Spanish and has a center of responsibility in another country, for example France. If I sell to a French customer, that sale will have a completely different tax treatment if I sell to them from a responsibility centre-warehouse in Spain than if I sell to them from a responsibility centre-warehouse in France.

In other words, the country of origin of the responsibility centre-warehouse that initiates the operation will be relevant when it comes to the behaviour of the system in terms of VAT.

The way this issue is solved is similar to how it has been resolved for customers. From the Company Information sheet, the alternative NIFs must be reported according to country and with differentiated business registration groups.

In the Responsibility Centers, Warehouse Centers inform the countries and that the system takes this into account when creating sales and purchasing trade documents.

In the case of suppliers, there are no different addresses of origin of the purchase, so this entity would have to be created in a similar way to the customers' shipping addresses.

This must be reported in the purchase documents.

If the country of origin indicated in the address of origin, it will mark the behavior of the operation.

For example, if our company buys from a supplier in Morocco but they send us the goods from a responsibility centre-warehouse they have in Italy, the tax treatment of the operation must be different from if the goods are sent directly from Morocco.

This would be resolved in an analogous way to how it has been resolved for customers.

But it could go further, taking into account that the shipping conditions usually inform the ICOTERM, which mark the moment of transfer of ownership of the goods, which can also be decisive for the taxation of the operation. To do this, you could simply add a field to mark whether for that ICOTERM the transfer of ownership takes place in the country of origin, and take that circumstance into account.

Greetings to all.

Good morning.

When a shipping agent is included in a sales document, the system only takes this into account in terms of calculating the delivery time.

It would be interesting for transport agents to be linked to a supplier file that determines the way in which they are going to invoice us for their services.

In sales orders (it would also be interesting in purchase orders) there should be an amount with the cost of transport to be reported by the user, so that when a shipment is registered, apart from the delivery note that is created from the shipment, a purchase note is created for the freight services. These purchase notes could be brought to the carrier's purchase invoice.

This could go even further, by adding freight forwarder fees and extending the functionality for purchasing, i.e. the shipping agent could be reported in the purchasing documents in the same way as in sales.

Best regards.

Good morning.

The accounting budgets allow you to see the comparison between what has been done and what is budgeted, but it does not exercise any control at the time of registration.

It would be interesting to have a functionality that does not allow the accounting record if it exceeds the budgeted amount.

To do this, the following should be done:

1.                 Have a field in accounting settings that identifies the budget that is going to control the records.

2.                 An option field that allows the user to configure:

A. if the budget is going to be totally restrictive, that is, it will not allow registration without budgetary allocation under any circumstances.

B. if, on the contrary, it only issues a warning.

C. just not exercising any control.

3.                 It should also be revised so that the system allows registration exceeding the amount allocated in the budget but after undergoing an approval flow.

All this control must be carried out by controlling the dimensions, since it is possible that the budget allocations are for a specific dimension, such as: by department.

This functionality would provide greater security to the CFOs, thus guaranteeing that the budget approved by their board of directors will never be exceeded.

Thank you

Good morning.

In Spain there are local functionalities related to the Spanish portfolio (Cartera Española).

The entities used do not allow you to create bills of exchange or invoices to the portfolio. If payments to employees are not allowed to take effect, they cannot be included in a payment order.

It is very common to collect all payments in payment orders and if payments to employees cannot be included, it has to be done manually.

It would be interesting for employees to endure the whole game of the Spanish wallet functionality.

Thank you.

Good morning

The lines of a service contract are linked to a service item in Table 5940, which in turn is linked to a product in Table 27 – Items.

This functionality is very good when we have to provide maintenance service on a sold product.

But what about service contracts that aren't tied to a product sold?

For example, if I have a service contract for my services as an advisor, or if I am dedicated to parking rental and I have the parking registered in my system as fixed assets. I suppose that for these cases I have 27 products of type Services in the table, but I cannot link them to a control of service contracts.

It would be great if the service contracts functionality were opened to these cases:

• Service type products in Table 27. Consultancies, consultancies, insurance,...
• Services on fixed assets – Leases.

Thanks a lot.

Hi.

In the Spanish localization, when you upload sustainability data from the Contoso tool, you don't load data for new accounts and categories on Water consumption.

It would be interesting to have this initial data load to be able to present the functionality in a complete way.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

In the Spanish location.

Within the Cartera Española functionality,

In Payment orders.

• When the "payment file" is exported using the action button in the menu, if an error occurs "The recipient Bank Account field must be completed" it forces the user to remove the effect from the line. Then go to the documents to be paid, report the data there and then include it again. This could be easily fixed by adding the field on the line in editable format.
• At the time the file is exported, the system also forces you to modify the expiration date to the work date or later. I think it should put the date of registration of the header as the transfer date, but not force the modification of the maturities of the bills to be paid since it would lose the trace of the initial maturity of the document.
• When the file is exported, a field called Elect is marked. Pmts Exported (35, Boolean). If a problem is detected after the export and something in the payment order has to be modified, it no longer allows you to do anything until this field is unchecked. The problem is that it is visible and editable, nor does it have an action button to uncheck it.

Thanks a lot