Under Chart of Accounts we have created headings.
Currently these created group headings appear in the Profit and Loss Statement and Balance Sheet Statement without issue, however, these same created group headings aren’t appearing in other reports which are based on the chart of accounts - namely General Ledger Summary and Trial Balance for example.
Would it be possible to have these created group headings added to all reports which are based on the chart of accounts. This feature is requested so that those reviewing these reports can figure out which group an account is related to and when comparing different reports there is a logical flow of data.
I understand that these COA based reports serve different purposes, but that in itself is no reason why Manager can’t present the same data in a consistent format.
Groups do show on both the balance sheet and profit and loss statement. Post screen shots of your chart of accounts from Settings and your Summary page. Also post a screen shot of the Edit screen from Settings for one of the groups you think should show that is not.
Having the option to include all levels of groups would be very useful indeed.
For example, for standard reporting to our local authorities, the required accounts are not “granular” enough (i.e. they are far too general for management reporting), so I create groups for the reporting “accounts”, then populate my more detailed accounts into those groups. I then report the group totals to the authorities.
When presenting the Trial Balance and General Ledger to our auditors, not having more than the first level of groups is a major drawback.
I want to add to what I wrote earlier. After re-reading my response in post #4, I realize it might not be clear enough. I wrote that trial balances and general ledger summaries only show accounts. What I should have written is that they only show figures or balances for accounts. They do show group names, but not group subtotals.
Another reason for that is that figures and balances are clickable on those reports. If subtotals for groups were shown, drilling down would present an incomprehensible mix of transactions from different accounts.
@abdulbari, I am not certain whether that is what you were actually asking about.
I am looking only to Show the Heading. so it will be clear for auditors this account is sub-group of another account.
Report should be readable without any assistance from other. it should be self explanatory. anyone will look to this report as external entity has to know company chart of account or someone need to explain to him group accounts and sub-group.
External Auditors in our country always will ask for detailed Trail Balance which is General Ledger Summary in Manager. I used to add the Group Accounts Heading by Excel. it would be great if group heading will be shown in these report.
Profit and loss Statement and balance sheet will be used most of the time as internal reports.
if sub-total will be added it will make these reports comprehensive.
Second, as I already wrote, both of the reports you mentioned already show group headings. Your own screen shots illustrate this. For example, INCOME is a group. COST OF GOODS SOLD is a group. Everything in boldface type on your chart of accounts under Settings is a group.
That is an unusual perspective. While they are useful internally, those two reports are the most frequently required external reports. Regardless of what auditors request, banks, shareholders, and others work most frequently from the balance sheet and profit and loss statement, which provide position and performance information. Trial balances and general ledger summaries do not.
A trial balance only verifies that debits and credits match. With computerized accounting systems, many accountants consider them obsolete relics of manual bookkeeping. The general ledger summary only shows movement in accounts.
You have been claiming that neither groups nor sub-groups show on trial balances or general ledger summaries. You did this after first referring to these as accounts, which caused initial confusion. What you have now demonstrated with your screen shots is that the program is functioning as designed. Top level group names are included on trial balances and general ledger summaries for basic categorization. Lower level groups within those top level groups (that you have referred to as sub-groups in your later posts) are not included.
The reason is simple. There are neither totals nor clickable balances for groups on those two reports. Therefore, there is little reason to have lines containing no information. Top level group names help with basic navigation. Lower level group names are eliminated to keep the reports more compact. This philosophy of minimizing non-essential information and clutter is followed throughout the program.
Then you have plainly failed to understand the very first “statement” in the topic - which was:
Note the clear identification of “group accounts” so how you can claim “You did this after first referring to these as accounts” is beyond understanding. In fact if you re-read the first post it is littered with “group accounts”, “Main group of account” and “account group” - no confusion there.
As for all the other inconsistencies in logic contained in your last post - I will just ignore.
@abdulbari, apologises that your very simple request to the “developer” that all reports which are based on the chart of accounts have a consistent presentation got distracted by others.
Yes, these reports may serve different purposes but that is no reason in itself why Manager can’t present the data with a consistent format based on the chart of accounts. Yes, the Balance Sheet sub-group heading may have a sub-total and the same Trial Balance sub-group heading will not have a sub-total but that is not justification for not showing the sub-group heading.
@abdulbari, I am going to edit your opening post for clarity and then add it to Ideas.
You do realize having people with different perspective actually enhances the forum?
Do you really think Tut is here trolling, responding to posts just to annoy people?
Most early posts on the forum are initially ambiguous. Most requested program changes are because users do not use the existing functionality properly. As such questioning a users approach is almost always the best way to explore a topic. Sometimes on re-reading of full tread the initial post makes sense in hind sight.
Do you really think the forum is enhance by denigrating others attempts to help.
You guys bitch like year 10 school girls
That is all personal attacks.
In contrast @Brucanna the later half of your post is an insightful review of a topic. Clearly a valuable contribution.