Bug with Special Accounts

just wondering, in this forum, as i understood, special account purpose is to create sub ledgers for particular account. e.g. if i create account for Loans receivable, that will be the account to sum up the loans i extend to creditors, for me to create that sub accounts, i will use “special account” and choose Loans receivable for creditors as main account for each. when i go to the main dash board, i see this “special account” thing appear. though it is null in value, since i didnt use that “special account” because i use Loans receivable . not so big deal, but i feel like, it shouldnt be there as it has no purpose for me because i already assigned an account for my sud ledgers.

@roger3820, you almost got things right. Following the Guide, https://www.manager.io/guides/10555, when you created the account Loans receivable, you should have marked that as a control account and indicated it is made up of special accounts. (I cannot tell if you did this from your screen shot.) There is no need for the account named Special Accounts.

Then in the Special Accounts tab, you should create a special account for each loan. Assign them to the control account, Loans receivable.

I also notice you have tabs enabled with no transactions in them. If you are not going to use those, you should disable them. You can always enable them again if you find you need them.

thanks tuts. i did assign loans receivable as control account. i have tried to make a new biz from scratch, and see if i have just made some mistake, and it appears that, the moment u input a sub ledger into “special account” such account will appear as well into the dashboard.loans%20receivable%20image

Oh, I see what you mean. This looks like a bug, @lubos. The account, Special Accounts, has appeared spontaneously in the chart of accounts, with no ability to designate it as a control account, so it could not even be renamed for normal usage as a control account. And it cannot be deleted:

18%20AM

I am splitting this portion of the thread off as a standalone topic and putting it into the bugs category.

This bug may be related to this one: Bug - Control Accounts.

thats exactly it. thanks tuts.

I suspect a similar thing may have happened with “Fixed Assets” / “Fixed assets”
01%20Fixed%20assets

All of my old entries for “Fixed Assets” are under the lower heading in bold with the capital A in Assets. I believe this was system generated and under it is listed “Fixed assets, accumulated depreciation” (note the lack of capitalization in “assets”).

The chart of accounts shows the new account is a system account
02%20Fixed%20assets%20-%20new

And the old account is now a custom account
03%20Fixed%20Assets%20-%20old

When entering transactions only the new account and my control accounts are selectable

Similarly when creating an new fixed asset only the new lower case “Fixed asset” or my additions control accounts are selectable
05%20Default%20new%20account

But when setting up control accounts only to old upper case “Fixed Assets” account is selectable
06%20contol%20account

Note
tested using Manager v19.10.10

I’m not sure how it is suppose to work because the old “Fixed Assets” shows a gray total of the subsidiary accounts (can’t drill down) but the new “Fixed assets” contains a solid click-able total of fixed assets added to the default fixed asset account. Combining them would cause a problem.

The bug work around is trivial in my opinion ie ignore it as the only problems is it takes up screen space, or enable “Hide zero balances”. So if Manager had not behaved differently in the past, it is unlikely it would be classify it as a bug imo.

@Patch, your situation looks unrelated to the subject of this bug report.

Your Fixed Assets (all leading capitals and bold type) is not an account. It is a group, like your Current Assets group, categorized under the default group, Assets. This was definitely not generated by the program.

The account, Fixed assets (initial capital only and plain text), is the automatic account Manager creates when the first fixed asset is created. It cannot be deleted as long as you have any fixed assets, but it could be renamed. Fixed assets, accumulated depreciation is, likewise, an automatic account.

Neither receipts and payments nor new fixed assets themselves can be posted or assigned to a group, only to an account. Your screen shots illustrate exactly this correct behavior. Similarly, when you set up a new control account, it can only be assigned to a group, again just what your illustration shows.

First, you mistakenly refer to Fixed Assets as “old.” This is the group you created. It properly shows a greyed-out subtotal, the same way the major group, Assets, shows a total in its yellow header bar. Second, the Fixed assets account is not “new,” but in fact is the automatic account created by the program when you started entering fixed assets.

I was unsure if I had got things confused, so was checking (the information I was looking for was here). Thanks for confirming.

I think that only leave, is the system “Fixed assets” account supposed to show if nothing is in it? I assign all my fixed asset to other control accounts. I thought it didn’t in the past but now does. Which is why I posted it here, if not I’m clearly way off topic.

Yes. The account is hard-coded to appear. But more importantly, it is the account through which fixed asset transactions are routed when they are redirected to accounts you create. If you want every fixed asset to be under some category with your self-created Fixed Assets subgroup, a way to do that is to rename Fixed assets as one of your preferred names. Then create the other accounts with whatever other names you like. This is exactly the technique illustrated in an Example in this Guide: https://www.manager.io/guides/9256.

Interesting
So the solution for fixed assets is to accept when you first create a fixed asset, Manager will create “Fixed asset” control account. You can’t delete it as Manager needs at least one fix asset control account (so it protects one) but you can rename it to something more useful to your business eg
10%20Correct%20COA

Similarly with special accounts, when you first create a special account (via the special account tab), Manager creates a Special Account control account called “Special Accounts”. You can’t delete it as Manager needs at least one Special Account control account (so it protects one) but you can rename it to something more useful to your business eg
11%20Special%20accounts

But we classify this as a bug.
I find this a bit confusing, the program is being consistent now and was inconsistent in the past. Is this actually a program bug or do we just need to update the documentation.

Although I agree it would be better if during version update Manager choose an existing account to protect and rename but that may upset some people if it choose the wrong account to protect

Very interesting, @Patch. I had not looked at things this way, but I suppose you may be right. What I do not understand is why the program needs to protect Special Accounts, as there aren’t other functions operating through it like there are with Fixed assets. In the latter case, you have the depreciation function allocating transactions to both the current expense account and the accumulated depreciation account, the disposal function transferring amounts off the balance sheet, etc. As far as I see it, with special accounts you only have direct postings. But @lubos will have to evaluate all this as he looks at this “bug.”

So, while your initial post about your Fixed Assets group was not related, discussion of it has raised issues that probably are.

When you create an entry in the special accounts tab Manager needs to be sure it can put it somewhere. The menu needs at least one entry.

The same requirement applies to creating entries in the fix assets tab.

So, you are saying the need for “protection” comes from needing somewhere to lodge a subsidiary entry, not from connection to other processes. That sounds logical, and may well be right. What puzzles me is that this seems to have first been noticed (although it might have been there, unseen) after the changes on showing zero quantity accounts. That may or may not be related. I wish I knew more about how the program works.

Fixed in the latest version (19.10.11)