I think a problem with this approach would be that the program has no way of determining how long an individual transaction should be deferred. Perhaps a customer will resume purchases next week, perhaps not for two months. In the pandemic situation, the deferral could be indefinite. And should a transaction be cancelled while during the deferment or only delayed?
Suppose you are a landlord. Your local government issues an order temporarily preventing you from sending invoices for rent during the pandemic if the tenant is a healthcare worker. But the order does not include rent subsidies or forgiveness. Currently, you have several options:
- Create invoices, but do not send them until conditions change. This allows you to accrue income and build the Accounts receivable balance. That could be advantageous or disadvantageous, depending on tax law and other circumstances.
- Delay the next issue date for qualifying tenants. This could possibly require repeated modifications. It also presents the question of how to catch up later.
- Delete the recurring transaction. Of course, this might require you to re-enter it later.
It seems two options offer attractive flexibility:
- Allow checking of recurring transactions to be created now. Recurring transactions not checked would remain in the queue for eventual generation later. When the recurring transaction is finally generated, you could immediately delete any that were permanently bypassed. However, if you were going to do that, it would be cleaner to just change the next issue date.
- Incorporate a Batch Update capability for recurring transactions. This would allow quicker modification of dates.
The longer you think about this subject, the more questions come to mind. While the possibility of automation is attractive, potential tax and legal questions (especially surrounding pandemic recovery programs) suggest it might be beneficial if you are forced to really think about consequences before just checking a box or pushing a button.