# Supplier business identifier **URL:** \ **Category:** Uncategorized\ **Created:** [July 26, 2018, 6:10pm UTC](https://forum.manager.io/t/supplier-business-identifier/17044 "2018-07-26T18:10:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 13\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![manishkumarshivam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb9ed0/32.png) [@manishkumarshivam](https://forum.manager.io/u/manishkumarshivam)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 6:10pm UTC](https://forum.manager.io/t/supplier-business-identifier/17044/1 "2018-07-26T18:10:03Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![Tut](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.manager.io/tut/32/3286_2.png) [@Tut](https://forum.manager.io/u/Tut)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 6:15pm UTC](https://forum.manager.io/t/supplier-business-identifier/17044/2 "2018-07-26T18:15:56Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![manishkumarshivam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb9ed0/32.png) [@manishkumarshivam](https://forum.manager.io/u/manishkumarshivam)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 6:18pm UTC](https://forum.manager.io/t/supplier-business-identifier/17044/3 "2018-07-26T18:18:41Z")
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? ---
**Author:** ![Tut](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.manager.io/tut/32/3286_2.png) [@Tut](https://forum.manager.io/u/Tut)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2018, 7:37pm UTC](https://forum.manager.io/t/supplier-business-identifier/17044/4 "2018-07-26T19:37:55Z")
Please do not double post your questions. This was answered in another thread. ---
**Author:** ![manishkumarshivam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb9ed0/32.png) [@manishkumarshivam](https://forum.manager.io/u/manishkumarshivam)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2018, 2:10am UTC](https://forum.manager.io/t/supplier-business-identifier/17044/5 "2018-07-27T02:10:50Z")
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 ---
**Author:** ![Tut](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.manager.io/tut/32/3286_2.png) [@Tut](https://forum.manager.io/u/Tut)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2018, 3:44am UTC](https://forum.manager.io/t/supplier-business-identifier/17044/6 "2018-07-27T03:44:57Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![Brucanna](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.manager.io/brucanna/32/1960_2.png) [@Brucanna](https://forum.manager.io/u/Brucanna)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2018, 5:22am UTC](https://forum.manager.io/t/supplier-business-identifier/17044/7 "2018-07-27T05:22:33Z")
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. > [@Tut](#): > > Country-specific requirements are not the basis of features that affect all users. 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. ---
**Author:** ![manishkumarshivam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/eb9ed0/32.png) [@manishkumarshivam](https://forum.manager.io/u/manishkumarshivam)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2018, 5:25am UTC](https://forum.manager.io/t/supplier-business-identifier/17044/8 "2018-07-27T05:25:58Z")
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. ---
**Author:** ![Tut](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.manager.io/tut/32/3286_2.png) [@Tut](https://forum.manager.io/u/Tut)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2018, 12:51pm UTC](https://forum.manager.io/t/supplier-business-identifier/17044/9 "2018-07-27T12:51:42Z")
> [@Brucanna](#): > > 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. As I wrote earlier: “The presence of the `Business identifier` field is really a holdover from days before custom fields were available.” > [@Brucanna](#): > > Surely it is better to have programme consistency 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. ---
**Author:** ![Brucanna](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.manager.io/brucanna/32/1960_2.png) [@Brucanna](https://forum.manager.io/u/Brucanna)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2018, 3:27pm UTC](https://forum.manager.io/t/supplier-business-identifier/17044/10 "2018-07-28T15:27:49Z")
> [@Tut](#): > > As I wrote earlier “The presence of the `Business identifier` field is really a holdover from days before custom fields were available.” A factual representation from the developer or just a user’s speculative supposition. > [@Tut](#): > > I don’t know why `Business identifier` was not converted to a custom field when other things, like `Telephone` and `Notes` were. 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. ---
**Author:** ![Tut](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.manager.io/tut/32/3286_2.png) [@Tut](https://forum.manager.io/u/Tut)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2018, 5:38pm UTC](https://forum.manager.io/t/supplier-business-identifier/17044/11 "2018-07-28T17:38:08Z")
> [@Brucanna](#): > > I don’t see the developer implementing such a retrograde step. Factual representation from the developer or just a user’s speculative supposition? ---
**Author:** ![Brucanna](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.manager.io/brucanna/32/1960_2.png) [@Brucanna](https://forum.manager.io/u/Brucanna)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2018, 5:49pm UTC](https://forum.manager.io/t/supplier-business-identifier/17044/12 "2018-07-28T17:49:02Z")
“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” ---
**Author:** ![Ealfardan](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex019/user_avatar/forum.manager.io/ealfardan/32/63166_2.png) [@Ealfardan](https://forum.manager.io/u/Ealfardan)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2023, 2:49pm UTC](https://forum.manager.io/t/supplier-business-identifier/17044/13 "2023-01-18T14:49:46Z")