Supplier business identifier

there should be a business identifier coloumn for adding suppliers too like we get while adding customers.
also to add multiple business identifier coloumns options to the user to use it as per his needs while adding customers and suppliers.

Do this with custom fields. The presence of the Business identifier field is really a holdover from days before custom fields were available. The current design philosophy is that non-essential fields (meaning information the program itself does not need) are to be handled with custom fields.

yeah true. nut custom field coloumn is only shown and printed bottom side of the invoice.
is it posible to put it nearby invoice number or date?

Please do not double post your questions. This was answered in another thread.

but it should be available as normally here not as custom field. business identifier are compulsory to b displyed of customer and supplier in sales and purchase invoice in many countries

Perhaps some countries, but certainly not all. Country-specific requirements are not the basis of features that affect all users. That is why custom fields are available.

The problem with the Users “Custom Field” solution is that the Supplier’s business identifier is not available for possible inclusion with inbuilt tax reports.

With regards to business identifiers this is a self defeating statement. Why then is the Customer business identifier an inbuilt feature of the programme when it is also not a specific requirement (al a Suppliers) for all Users.

Surely it is better to have programme consistency, that’s why this topic already exists under the Ideas category - Supplier Business Identifier plus inclusion on Tax Reports.

1 Like

it should be available as normal like while adding customer. so as the supplier info also needs some updated business identifier coloumn as inbuild feature.

As I wrote earlier: “The presence of the Business identifier field is really a holdover from days before custom fields were available.”

I agree. My statement was an explanation, not a defense. From that perspective, I don’t know why Business identifier was not converted to a custom field when other things, like Telephone and Notes were. That is actually the real inconsistency.

A factual representation from the developer or just a user’s speculative supposition.

Because Telephone and `Notes’ are purely user optional fields and have no legal connections whereas the ‘Business Identifier’ has a legal role in many jurisdictions and as Australia is one of those (tax invoices for sales of $1,000 or more need to show the buyer’s identity ABN) I don’t see the developer implementing such a retrograde step.

Factual representation from the developer or just a user’s speculative supposition?

“I don’t see” - clearly noted as a user’s speculative supposition
Compared to “As I wrote earlier” a re-assertion of implied fact “The presence of . . . . is really a holdover”