Surprisingly , I do not get freight-in âŚin drop down
where did you check for it? to be clear, it will be available under the Item column, not under Account column.
I do not get anywhere , as u see above, In accounts column I get suspense as default âŚeven on Inventory list on search also I could not find it
is it possible that I have edited name during early days?.. if yes, then now how to correct it
It only appears in the Purchase Invoice and Spend Money Item list as displayed above, it canât be edited and it canât be searched for in Inventory List.
You need to check under âFâ assuming you are using English
Finally I got Freight -in
Now issue is , I need to allocate cost of freight in to inventory, but transportation service is provided by third party (not by supplier of goods)
Pl advice how to account for this?
You need to do two things:
1 - Post the transportation third party invoice to a BS Clearing Account
2 - Add the Freight-in with a contra line entry to the goods Supplier Invoice - per example below (note minus)
Actually, you donât need to bother with the clearing account, @Aaviva. The Guide I linked to above, Add freight-in to inventory item costs | Manager, describes how to handle third-party freight billing and payment in its last section.
If you have one freight bill for 100 and there is 15 inventory items (say 250 individual items) in the delivery how does the manual allocation method work without needing the user to re-enter all 15 inventory items and âvery manuallyâ calculate a proportion amount by some basis.
The manual allocation method only functions when there is only one inventory item being invoiced.
It doesnât. But you you still donât require the clearing account. A clearing account saves the effort of manually calculating and entering freight charges for the various items, but at the expense of a more cluttered balance sheet. Which is preferable would depend on your typical situations, that is, who usually charges you freight costs, whether purchases are delivered from different locations in different shipments, etc.
No, it just requires offline calculations when more than one inventory item is involved.
Historically, you have been a staunch opponent (multiple topics) of the clearing account methodology yet the original proponent of this methodology (solution) was @lubos himself, I am merely only repeating his gospel.
Take the everyday situation where you have multiple freight-in invoices inter-related to the one Inventory Purchase Invoice that involves numerous inventory items (over a 100 per delivery quoted by one user in another topic) and thousands of items.
- External Freight Invoice - country to country
- Freight Forwards - various importation fees / duties including government charges
- Local Freight Invoice - port to warehouse
- Bank Charges - overseas drafts
Now the most time and cost efficient way for a user to process these is to put them into one melting point and re-distribute them with Manager doing a âsingleâ automatic Freight-in calculation.
However the advocated manual process would require the user to replica the purchase invoice (with its numerous items) a multiple number of times plus adding in the time consuming exercise of apportioning the invoice total over those numerous items. Imagine trying to do that with the importation directly related bank charges.
Furthermore, this manual process forces users to breach accounting and auditing conventions - the original suppliers invoice should be recorded within Manager so as to accurately represent the exact details of the suppliers charges.
EG: If the Freight Forwards invoice details - handling fees, inspection fees, custom duties, storage charges etc. - then that suppliers invoice when being processed into Manager should be a direct representation of that exact detail.
However the advocated manual process forces users to inappropriately replace that detail with a list of Inventory Items, so that the only thing in common between the suppliers invoice and the Manager recorded invoice is the invoice total. I am unaware of any auditing firm who would accept this as a satisfactory invoice recording process.
Lastly, having ONE clearing account which can have a multiple of uses (eg. money transfer bank rules) is hardly clutter compared to the efficiency gained from its usage.
So âactuallyâ, the Guide currently fails to inform users of an accepted methodology in which multiple freight-in invoices can be effectively processed for a related single purchase invoice which doesnât force the user to inappropriately record the transactions in breach of accounting and auditing standards - why ?
It isnât that Iâm an opponent of clearing accounts. Iâm just in favor of simplicity. Many people do not understand the concept of clearing accounts, despite how simple they seem to you. So if there is a way to accomplish something without setting up and using one, I like to point that out.
As I wrote,
Your purposely complex example is clearly one where a clearing account would be the easier route. But not the only route. If that is typical of situations encountered by a business, I would certainly agree that is the way to go. But if such situations are rare, I suggest the manual method would, on average, be easier.
You will notice that I never said the clearing account approach was wrong, just that there is an alternative.
So based on your response above the Guide should illustrate both the manual and the clearing account alternatives as to how Manager Users should handle multiple purchased invoice Freight-in situations.
How can converting a multiple of non inventory Purchase Invoices into inventory items based Purchase Invoices be an exercise in simplicity - especially if that re-entering is a clear breach of accounting and auditing standards. Your above response is noted for its failure to address this critical issue - that is, that a Manager Guide is clearly advocating to Users that they should use a non-compliant accounting process for these types of Purchase Invoices.
If you want to debate this point further then consult with @Abeiku who stated quite clearly in the topic Landed Cost - Multiple Vendor âI want my purchase invoices to show details and totals exactly as the purchase invoices were received from the vendors.â Something the preferred Guide solution openly contradicts with the proposed manual process.
If you happen to re-read though the forum, then âevery userâ who has raised this type of situation regarding multiple Freight-in invoices has come to an open and clear understanding of the underlying clearing account process, as did many with Money Transfer and Bank Rules. Those who donât require it donât need to understand it.
Yes, but alternatively, if there is a âprovenâ way to accomplish something which does include the setting up and using one (clearing account), you arenât going to point that out. One would have thought that the Guides were there to serve the needs of all Manager Users.
The illustration used is not purposely (nor deliberately) complex (read the last paragraph). You only need to search the forum to see repeatedly that the exact same detailed example has been illustrated by various Manager Users time after time. It is from these posts that I was enabled to provide the above typical example, it is not a dreamtime creationâŚ
Therefore, if (as illustrated) a clearing account is clearly an easier route, why doesnât the Guide clearly provide that solution with clarity for all users.
AGAIN read the forum, many Users have described and sought solutions for these exact same circumstances repeatedly
In closing I would like to quote your own comment from another topic which supports the above solution, yet you continue to resist in providing that same solution in the Guides.
âBut there is no doubt your method is a slick approach that could simplify things when freight-in (assuming that includes brokerage, handling, customs clearing, and a wide range of other charges) is complex.â
EDIT: if simplicity is be an objective, then the manual process should be totally eliminated from the Guide. Why give Users a choice to a method - manual - which has very limited application while the other method - Freight-in - is applicable to all situations. This would naturally extinguish the non-compliant accounting process form the Guide.
Dear Experts , I am really sorry âŚcould not get your conversation properly
I am still need help
- I have several SKU on single purchase invoice
- Goods are transported by third party from another city and need to make separate payment
- Local transportation and handling charges are different
I wish to add this all cost proportionately to all SKU on that invoice , PL advice me simple process
The simplest and easiest process requires you to post all invoices as per normal invoices - there is no need for any fancy spreadsheet calculations.
1 - The initial Inventory invoice
2 - The Intercity transport invoice - using clearing account
3 - The local transport invoice - using clearing account
4 - The Summary tab
5 - Amend the Inventory invoice for the Freight-in + contra line (Note - the Freight-in line Qty must be blank)
6 - The Summary tab
Ok thanks , let me try it that way