Hi,
On a projects, there are things that we need to buy without having to create purchase orders because of urgency (for ex : buying from local shop, fuel, etc). To record this transaction we create expense claims right, then we create payments for this expense claims.
But if we assign expense claims on projects, and then we create payments for these explain claims and assign it to projects also, the cost on projects will be doubled
Your workflow is incorrect. You should select a project for only one, either the expense claim or the payment, but not both.
Either selection will have the same financial impact, but I would recommend selecting projects on the expense claim, because that is where the liability is first created, just as it is with a purchase invoice. That is also where the merchant from whom you have purchased is recorded. So all necessary project-related information should be recorded there. Once the expense claim is created, the project cost has been captured for accounting purposes.
The payment, on the other hand, is made to the person who advanced the funds on behalf of the business. Their purchase of the goods or services was, in effect, a loan to your business. Reimbursement to them is like paying off a loan and is not a project cost.
Okay, but then shouldn’t the projects field on the payment menu be removed? Because all payments must have its own cause right, whether it’s from purchase order/invoice or from expense claims
No. Payments can be made without any precursor. For example, the employee who buys project materials with her own money and files an expense claim could have made the same purchase with a company credit card. In that case, there would be no purchase order or purchase invoice.
Yes correct, no need for purchase order,
But on the case that you mentioned, the order is that the employee should create an expense claim first right? And then after the expense claim is created then the payment should be made that refers to that expense claim. And we can assign the project on the expense claim, so it’s not necessary anymore for the payment to have project field?
An employee might actually create the expense claim in Manager, if they have been created as users with appropriate permissions. But someone else (such as an accounting clerk) might also enter the expense claim for them, based on submission of non-Manager documentation. Personally, I do not believe it is good practice to allow everyone direct access to the accounts of the company, no matter how restricted that access is.
No. When the program is used properly, the expense claim will be posted as a liability in the Employee clearing account. The payment need not reference the expense claim at all, but can be paid at the same time as liabilities to the employee created by payslips. In fact, when used this way, Manager does not offer the ability to designate a project, because that designation should have occurred when the expense claim was created.
Now, when an expense claim is created for someone who is not an employee, such as a partner through a capital account, the project selection can occur on a payment form. But that is because payments to such people could be for other purposes besides expense claims.
In summary, where context does not allow project selection because of the risk of double counting, the program does not permit it. But where context is ambiguous and project selection might be appropriate, selection is available. The user must be well enough educated on accounting principles to know whether to make such a selection. (That is another argument against widespread access to Manager.)
It sounds like your difficulty might have originated with improper designation of expense claim payers and misunderstanding of the intended workflow for reimbursement.