The problem with this example is that the second line is using the wrong Account.
The promotional buy is NOT a reduction in total sales but a marketing expense, hence the debit.
In effect, the business is “purchasing” the third pair on behalf of the customer.
What if the promotion was buy 3 and get cash back for one.
The total sales would still have been $360, and the marketing expense $120 would have been a purchase (debit) when the cash back was paid. The cash back does not reduce total sales.
Once again, the business is in effect “purchasing” the third pair on behalf of the customer.
The accounting result (income $360 expenses $120) doesn’t change just because the transactions were conducted differently,
Therefore “Under previous model, this would result in $360 in total sales and $120 in total purchases (because every credit is sale, every debit is purchase)” was totally correct.
And furthermore why “Under current model, this very same transaction will result in $240 in total sales (because every line item on receipt is a sale)” is totally incorrect because you can have genuine line items that are purchases on a receipt, nothing to do with sales.
Take this example of a Livestock sale, where the Stock Agent sends you the sale proceeds.
Now “Under previous model, this would have resulted in $4800 in total sales and $426 in total purchases (because every credit is sale, every debit is purchase)” which is totally correct
However "Under current model, this very same transaction will result in $4374 in total sales (because every line item on receipt is a sale) which is totally wrong.
Now lets review the BAS lodgement perspective. In the March quarter under the previous model I would have reported Sales as $4800 and purchases as $426 which accurately reflected the nature of the transactions. However the June quarter under the current model I would have reported Sales $4374 and purchases as $0 which inaccurately reflects the nature of the transactions.
Furthermore, as a Taxpayer I am NOT going to start reporting genuine purchases as negative sales therefore the current model worksheet, for a Livestock Producer, has become totally USELESS as it doesn’t contain one accurate value, which was not the case previously.
This model change doesn’t just affected the Livestock Producer, it also affects all these other industries, Property Rentals, Produce Markets, Auction Houses, Publication Distributors plus many others, where ever Recipient Created Invoices are used as they ALWAYS contain both sales and genuine purchase line items - not negative sales items.
I don’t understand why Manager has to do anything for any particular user group. The previous model produced by Manager had a solid uniform basis (every credit is sale, every debit is purchase) and where ever a User had a transaction which didn’t suit this basic model, then the User always has the freedom to make amendments to the worksheet so that it correctly reflected their position / interruption with regards to those transactions. The worksheet is just that a worksheet and Manager just has to educate Users to that fact and not attempt to manipulate the basic worksheet into something to suit every possible User because it will just becomes to complicated / cumbersome.
It appears, in my opinion but I could be wrong, that Manager could be reacting to the promoted falsehood (in fact stupidity) that a single transaction can’t be both a sale and a purchase at the same time. All the examples above clearly prove that to be wrong.