Yes that’s 100% correct, I first go to the guides and then the forum and in the earlier stages (over a year ago), there were some YouTube tutorials.
My background is actually in engineering and manufacture, my last position as country manager of multinational, I was P&L responsible manager, but accounts were prepared by overseas HQ corporate accounts using SAP, we only did basic 'finance for non-financial managers, and sufficient knowledge to be able to present our financial position at global manager conferences.
As I’m now a self employed micro-business owner, I’ve done some local bookkeeping upskill classes (very basic), but largely self taught the rest through the trial and error of using Manager.
I set myself some steep learning curves, and for accounting it was to be fully independent and understand all the accounts processes from beginning to end.
Without Manager I would not have easily got this far, for that I’m very grateful.
These were the transactions affected, causing the Suspense account to fill
In the Tax Code edit mode, the the Account box was blank.
I have selected the Account ‘20000 - Tax Payable’, which I assume the software combined the CoA code with the Tax Account name … this is not something I created.
This may pose an entirely separate question for testing, does the localisation installation fail to consider the way the CoA & its Code number combine and alters the long name of the ‘Tax Payable’ Account and fail to populate the field in the Tax Code?
I don’t think so. It is not possible to tell for certain, and @Elfroar says he doesn’t remember. The exact form currently shown in the tax codes’ account selection field is how the program would display a a tax code, Tax payable with a code, 20000, applied. But it would show the same way if the tax code were renamed as 20000 - Tax payable. And once you have used the new program version, you cannot revert the database to determine which was originally the case. Still, if that particular renaming had occurred, it would have been quite recent, and @Elfroar would probably remember. Further, in another thread, @Elfroar showed a screen shot of his balance sheet from the Summary, with account codes displayed. The account showed as 20000 Tax payable (without the hyphen). Had the account been renamed, it would have shown as 20000 20000 Tax payable.
I can only say that all my test companies updated and converted correctly. And no one else has complained of this problem. So I doubt it is an update bug. I believe @Elfroar did something at some point that he doesn’t remember. We will probably never determine what that was. The important thin is that it was fixed.
To the best of my knowledge the only edits I ever made on the Balance sheet side were only to add in the unique code numbers, with exception for the three Accounts you see listed here which show a strike through of the original names.
I possible added some new Accounts or deleted some not intending to be used.
As the Tax payable name remains unchanged, I would consider this to be 100% to the adding of the Account code number, not a name change.
Please advise if these being renamed could cause any issues?
Tax payable: No. Whatever issue you had has been cleared up according to what you’ve reported.
Accounts receivable/Accounts receivable (AUD): No. I have addressed this in another subject. This account will function as your default receivable account, for AUD customers and all others.
Employee clearing account/Wages Payable: Renaming this account won’t harm anything, but it will be confusing, because this built-in account does more than absorb wages payable. It also reports expense claims for employees
Capital Accounts/Owner’s Equity: Again, renaming it won’t be a problem. But this is a built-in control account with automatic functions, and capital accounts are treated differently from owner’s equity accounts. They involve subaccounts and require different transactions. They are usually more appropriate for partnerships. Since you are a sole trader, read this Guide: https://www.manager.io/guides/6971. That said, it is perfectly acceptable from an accounting viewpoint for a sole trader to use a capital account, although it might be unnecessarily complex.
No need to read the Guide, as you will not qualify. Your description of your operations in another thread made you sound like a sole trader. If you are the sole shareholder in a Pty Ltd company, then I believe capital accounts are appropriate. But I’m not an Australian tax expert.
The terminology of Owner’s equity is generally associated with sole traders/proprietors, which typically do not have separate Retained earnings accounts. Check with your accountant.
Then your ‘Capital Account / Owners Equity’ account should be called “Issued Shares”.
Owners are “Shareholders” and have received a number of “Issued Shares” to indicate their contribution / investment in the business.
