You receive the message “The Posting Date is not within your range of allowed posting dates” when trying to post a Purchase Invoice in Business Central.
According to the user setup the “Posting Date” of the document I’m posting is within the allowed posting range so why won’t the system allow me to post it?
Background – Value Entries
To provide a little more detail I’m trying to post a Purchase Invoice that I’ve matched to a Posted Purchase Receipt and I’ve increased the Unit Cost on the Purchase Invoice as the price has changed since the goods were received. I’ve also sold the items on a Sales Invoice before I’ve tried posting the Purchase Invoice.
Therefore, if we look at the value entries of this item prior to attempting to post the Purchase Invoice they are as follows
We have a value entry for the Posted Purchase Receipt showing a date of 12/05/2017 and a “Cost Amount (Expected)” of £10.00 (this the amount I used when posting the Purchase Receipt)
We also have a value entry for the Sales Invoice showing a Posting date of 25/05/2017 and a “Cost Amount (Expected)” of £10.00.
Details of the Purchase Invoice
The Purchase Invoice I’m posting is dated 01/06/2017 and I’ve amended the Unit Cost from the original £10.00 that pulled through from the Posted Purchase Receipt to £12.00
Now when I try and post this transaction, I receive the message
Therefore, just to confirm the Posting Date of the Purchase Invoice is within my allowed posting dates below is a screen shot of the User Setup window showing my Allow Posting Dates
The dates are also within the General Ledger allowed posting dates as shown below
Therefore, at first glance its not apparent why the system isn’t allowing me to post this document? The Purchase Invoice posting date is 01/06/17 and this is within my range of allowed posting dates?
The Issue – Automatic Cost Adjustment and Adjust Cost Item Entries
When posting the Purchase Invoice, the system has detected that the cost has changed from the Posted Purchase Receipt, and as this has been sold on a Sales Invoice, the cost of goods sold need adjusting.
The system therefore tries to post an adjustment using the Posting Date of the entry its adjusting (in this case the Sale Entry on the 25/05/17), which is in May, and as this falls outside of my posting range I receive the error “The Posting Date is not within your range of allowed Posting Dates”.
** Its also worth noting I’m getting this message when posting the Purchase Invoice because the option “Automatic Cost Adjustment” is set to “Always” in Inventory Setup. This means the system checks for cost adjustments when you post the transaction. If this wasn’t set to “Always”, then depending on its setting its possible the document would post however when the “Adjust Cost Item Entries” batch job was subsequently run the error would occur.
See below for my Inventory Setup
There are two possible solutions to my issue here. The first is to change my “Allowed Posting Dates” in the “User Setup” to 25/05/2017 through to 30/06/2017. This will then include the posting date of the entry that will be adjusted.
Alternatively, I could change the “Allowed Posting Dates” in the General Ledger Setup to 01/06/2017 through to 30/06/2017. Then, as per the article I linked to, the system would use the date of 01/06/2017 for the adjustment entries, (i.e. the first open date in the General Ledger Setup) which does fall in my allowed periods to post to.
Therefore I’ll change my “Allowed Posting Dates” in the User Setup as per below
And now when I post the Purchase Invoice this is succecssful
If I now view the Value Entries you can see the adjustment entry created with a Posting Date of 25/05/17.
Although this is a simple example it shows why you may encounter this error when it seems the postings date configuration on the User Setup should allow a document to post.
I recently had an issue where a user was stuck in a batch in the Bank Management module. You can usually run the “Clear Activity” option to resolve the issue however on this occasion it didn’t work. I found I had to manually delete a row in an SQL table to clear the lock and allow the user access to the batch.
The exact issue they received is as follows:
With this error message the first thing to try is to clear activity and although this didn’t work on this occasion I’ll detail the steps below.
Ensure there are no users in Dynamics GP and click “Yes” to the message below. (rather than asking everyone to log out I usually just ensure there’s nobody doing any Bank Management activities)
After doing this you will be prompted with the message below confirming activity is cleared
However I found I still couldn’t access the batch. On investigation there is still some activity for the batch in the CBEU1020 table which needed clearing. I therefore ran the SQL query below in the company database to delete the row. (replace TWO18 with the name of your company database)
Within Dynamics NAV \ Business Central you can switch Expected Cost Posting to G/L both ON and OFF via the option below in Inventory Setup.
In this post I’ve been playing with this feature to see how things work and how the various postings differ to Dynamics GP. I also take a look at how the Value Entries in Inventory play a pivotal role in this. I end by taking a closer look at the SQL tables involved and how things fit together.
Expected Costs in Dynamics GP
When you receive goods via a Shipment transaction in Dynamics GP a Purchase Accrual is automatically created to a General Ledger accrual account to record the expected cost in the General Ledger. This account is generally taken from the Creditor Card as per below:
opposite debit entry is taken from the Inventory Item card as per below:
Let’s add a Purchase Order Shipment transaction in Dynamics GP and see this in action:
As you can
see from the screen shot above, I’m receiving one Inventory item, and this has
created an accrual distribution crediting the 000-2111-00 accrued purchases
account I specified on the creditor card. The balancing debit side is to the
Inventory code that we specified on the Inventory Item card.
see what happens when we invoice the Shipment:
Just as expected the accrual is reversed via a Debit entry to the 000-2111-00 accrued purchases account and the accounts payable is credited. Therefore, the balance in the accrual account is now nil.
There’s no way to disable this behaviour in Dynamics GP. When you post a “Shipment” for some Inventory Items General Ledger entries are always created. (however you can prevent the entries posting through to the General Ledger via the Posting Setup)
Expected Costs in Dynamics NAV \ Business Central
Before we look at Expected Costing in Dynamics NAV \ Business Central we first have to take a step back and look at the various inventory entries that are created when you post inventory transactions.
When you post an inventory transaction in Dynamics NAV \ Business Central the system creates a minimum of two inventory entries: an Item Ledger Entry and a Value Entry. The Item Ledger Entry records the change in quantity and the Value Entry records the change in inventory values. For the purposes of this post we just need to know that when posting Purchase receipts Value Entries are created for Expected Costs, and when you post Purchase Invoices, Value Entries are created for Actual Costs, and Expected Costs are reversed.
Expected Cost Posting to G/L – Switched ON
Unlike Dynamics GP you can switch ON and OFF accrual postings in Dynamics NAV \ Business Central via the Expected Cost Posting to G/L option in Inventory Setup. When you switch Expected Cost Posting to G/L ON interim accounts are used to post the accrual and inventory entries for Purchase receipt transactions.
The equivalent Dynamics GP accrued purchases account is called Invt. Accrual Acc. (Interim) and is specified in the General Posting Setup window and is selected based on the Posting Groups used on the Item and Creditor. (see my previous post for more details on the posting groups). I’ve highlighted this below
The Inventory code for the debit side of the transaction is taken from the Inventory Posting Group and again is based on the combination of posting groups used. I’ve highlighted this below
The key difference here is Dynamics GP doesn’t use an interim Inventory account whereas Dynamics NAV \ Business Central does.
In my Cronus demo data, the option Expected Cost Posting to G/L is currently switched ON so let’s see how this works when I create a Purchase Order for an Inventory item and receive it.
Here’s my Purchase Order and after clicking Post I’m going to choose receive so I receive the items into the Inventory:
When I view the item I can see this has created the following Value Entry (Number 454) which shows the Cost Amount (Expected) and Expected Cost Posted to G/L both populated.
If I highlight the Value Entry and click Navigate > General Ledger I can see the G/L Entries associated with the Value Entry
we can see the 5510 Accrual account is being credited and the debit entry is
posting to the 2111 “Interim” Inventory code.
Now let’s invoice the purchase order and take a look at the G/L entries. First I click Post and select Invoice on the Purchase Order. (Incidentally if I were to select Receive and Invoice the system recognises I’ve already received the items. It doesn’t receive them again)
This has created the a new Value Entry (Number 455) . There’s a few things to note here. Firstly the Cost Amount (Expected) and the Expected Cost to G/L have been reversed. Secondly the Cost Amount (Actual) and Cost Posted to G/L have been populated.
Again if I highlight the Value Entry and choose Navigate > General Ledger we can the G/L Entries associated with this Value Entry.
As you can see the original entries created via the Purchase Receipt have been reversed by posting a debit to the 5510 Inventory accrual account and a credit to the 2111 Interim Inventory account. The system has then posted new entries to the 2210 Resale items inventory account (debit) and the direct cost applied account (credit). (for more info on the direct cost applied account see my previous post).
So that’s it. Although there are a few extra distributions to Dynamics GP everything makes sense. Its also apparent that the Value Entries have a direct relation to the G/L entries that are created.
Expected Costing to G/L – Switched OFF
Now let’s see what happens when we post a Purchase Receipt with the Expected Cost Posting to G/L switched OFF. First I switch the option OFF and then create and post the Purchase Receipt
This has created the following Value Entries (Number 456)
The key thing to note here is that although the Cost Amount (Expected) is populated the Expected Cost Posted to G/L isn’t. This means no G/L Entries have been created. To prove this click Navigate > General Ledger to view any G/L Entries
Let’s now invoice the Purchase Order and see what happens:
This has created the following Value Entry
This Value Entry records the Cost Amount (Expected) being reversed and the Cost Amount (Actual) and Cost Posted to G/L are also populated. Therefore we get the following G/L Entries
As expected no expected cost postings have been created or reversed for this transaction.
Bonus – G/L Item Ledger Relation and Post Value to G/L SQL tables
An unexpected bonus of writing this post was the chance to geek out on some of the Dynamics NAV tables. Unlike Dynamics GP, I don’t have much of a grasp of the SQL tables in Dynamics NAV however while going through the various scenario’s I was curious about how a couple of things worked which encouraged me to dig a little deeper.
The first thing was how I was able to drill down on the G/L Entries from the Value Entries screen? This meant there must be a direct or indirect relationship between the tables.
After some digging I found the link was via the G_L – Item Ledger Relation table. Therefore writing the SQL query below enabled me to join the G/L Entries and Value Entries table to see all the details for Value Entry Number 455
The next thing I was curious about was what would happen if the Expected Cost Posting to G/L was switched from OFF to ON when there were lots of Purchase Receipts that hadn’t yet been invoiced?
I found the answer to this question lay in the two prompts you receive when you switch Expected Cost Posting to G/L from OFF to ON (or ON to OFF). Below are the two messages you get when toggling the setting
As per the first message it seems when you switch the option Expected Cost Posting to G/L ON the system determines if the Actual Costs for the Purchase Receipt have been posted and if not a record is written for that Value Entry to the Post Value Entry to G_L SQL table. This has a link back to the Value Entry so the system knows to create the Expected Cost interim postings for this Value Entry.
To show this in action, I switched the Expected Cost Posting to G/L option OFF and queried the SQL table:
As per the image above the SQL table is currently blank.
I then created
a Purchase Order and received it as per below:
After posting this I queried the Post Value Entry to G/L SQL table again to see if any new rows had been added and the table was still blank
I then checked the Value Entry for my receipt and as per the screen shot below the Cost Amount (Expected) is populated but the Expected Cost Posted to G/L is blank. As this is only the Purchase Receipt the Cost Posted to G/L is also zero.
I then went back to Inventory Setup and switched Expected Cost Posting to G/L back ON and clicked YES to the prompt and now when I check the Post Value Entry to G/L table its populated as per below
After toggling the Expected Cost Posting to G/L option to ON the system has determined that this Value Entry has no G/L Entries for the Expected Costs and has inserted a record into the Post Value Entry to G_L table with a direct link back to the Value Entry that was created when I posted my receipt.
Now if I run the Post Inventory Cost to G/L batch job as instructed in the second message G/L entries are created for the purchase receipt, the SQL table is cleared, and the Value Entry is updated. See below:
The report output
of the “Post Inventory Cost to G/L” shows entries have been created:
Below are the expected cost General Ledger entries created to the interim accounts. (in my previous example these were created immediately because I had Post Expected Costs to G/L switched ON)
And finally the Expected Cost Posted to G/L field on the Value Entry has been updated to show the General Ledger entries have been created and posted.
If I now check the Post Value Entry to G_L table in SQL I can see its been cleared.
Incidentally if I were to switch OFF Expected Cost Posting to G/L before running the Post Inventory Cost to G/L batch job the SQL row is removed from the Post Value Entry to G_L table.
In conclusion I find the way Dynamics GP deals with expected costs to be a much more conventional and simple approach however there’s no doubting that Dynamics NAV \ Business Central gives more flexibility.
Although I don’t know much about the inner workings of Dynamics NAV \ Business Central it also seems to me that G/L Entries are created based on the Value Entries.
In another post I hope to look at how Expected Costs work with Sales Shipments and Sales Invoices.
All ERP systems aim to make data entry simple, fast and accurate. One way to achieve this is to default as much data as possible when the user is entering transactions, including the General Ledger distributions. In this post I aim to show how Dynamics NAV \ Business Central defaults the General Ledger codes when entering a Sales Invoice using inventory Items. Also, as I come from a Dynamics GP background, I’ll start off by providing a quick overview of how Dynamics GP achieves this, to offer a comparison between the two Dynamics systems.
The Dynamics GP way
GP you enter default General Ledger codes on entities like customers, vendors,
items, fixed assets and then the “catch all” which is the Posting Accounts Setup window.
Once this has been configured the General Ledger codes default automatically onto the transaction. For example, when creating a Sales Invoice for an inventory item usually the control account would default from the customer card and the revenue code would default from the inventory item (you can change this but usually it would be setup this way). At this point the user can potentially edit and change the General Ledger codes on the transaction prior to posting thus overriding the system defaults. Being able to edit the General Ledger codes inside the transaction gives the user more flexibility however it can also introduce mistakes or errors. An example would be someone changing the control account, which would likely cause a reconciliation issue at month end.
The Dynamics NAV \ Business Central way
From a Dynamics GP perspective things change quite dramatically when you look at how Dynamics NAV \ Business Central defaults the General Ledger codes. Instead of assigning specific General Ledger codes on customers, vendors, items, fixed assets, you assign Posting Groups to each of these entities. It’s the posting groups that have the General Ledger codes assigned and based on the combination of the posting groups used, general ledger postings are automatically performed when the transaction is posted. This means unlike Dynamics GP you can’t edit or change the default General Ledger codes prior to posting which gives less flexibility but there’s also less chance of mistakes being made.
So how do Dynamics NAV \ Business Central posting groups work?
There are two main types of posting groups – Specific and General.
Specific posting groups are used to default the control accounts. For example, I’ve assigned the specific Customer Posting Group “DOMESTIC” to the customer below:
If we open the Customer Posting Group window and look at the setup, we can see when I post a transaction for this customer the General Ledger code 40400 will be used for the receivables control account.
to the General Posting Groups things
become a little more complex.
posting groups can be split into two further groups – Business and Product. You
assign “Business” posting groups to customers and vendors and “Product”
postings groups to Items.
combination of the General Business
Posting group from the customer and the General
Product Posting Group from the item determines the General Ledger codes
that will be used. This is something that is best explained via an image, so
I’ve included a screen shot below of the General
Posting Setup window from my demo version of Business Central.
As you can see the posting groups form a matrix and the combination of “Business” (labelled Gen. Bus. Posting Group in the window) and “Product” (labelled Gen. Prod. Posting Group in the window) determines the General Ledger codes used when you post a transaction.
based on the General Posting Setup
above, if a customer has been assigned a Gen.
Bus Posting Group of DOMESTIC as per below:
item they are buying has been assigned a Gen.
Prod Posting Group of RETAIL as per below:
Then based on the General Posting Setup matrix defined in the General Posting Setup window the General Ledger sales account that will be used when the transaction is posted is 10200.
Defaulting the VAT Codes – VAT Posting Groups
A similar concept
is used when Business Central is determining the VAT percentage and VAT General
Ledger codes to be used. The matrix is defined in the VAT Posting Setup window as per below:
So, in this
example if the VAT Bus. Posting Group
on the customer was “DOMESTIC” and the VAT
Prod. Posting Group used on the Item is “STANDARD” the VAT percentage used
would be 20 and the General Ledger code used would be 56100.
So there you have it. A very quick overview of how Dynamics NAV \ Business Central uses Posting Groups to create the General Ledger distributions when posting a Sales Invoice with inventory items.
A client reported that when reversing a large journal via the “Reverse” option in the “General Ledger Entries” page only part of their original General Journal was reversed?
This stumped me and forced me to dig deeper into how the journal was posted. On investigation it seems the journal lines on the journal had been grouped, and each group has been given a different “Transaction No.” in the G/L Entry table. Then, when the reversal option had been selected, only those lines with the same “Transaction No” had reversed.
Its the first time I’ve come across this behaviour in one distinct journal, so in this post I’ll demonstrate how this happened and the correct way this should have been reversed. (i.e. I’d expect this for different document numbers but not the same document number)
The clients journal contained many lines however I can recreate the scenario with a much simpler journal.
Below is a journal with five lines. All the lines have the same Posting Date and Document number and the journal balances to nil. This is essentially one journal which we want to post as one unit.
I’ll now post the journal and go and view this in the General Ledger Entries page. I filter on the document number and I can see the full journal. This is great and just what I expect 🙂
I now realise I’ve made a mistake and want to reverse the whole journal. Therefore, while still in the General Ledger Entries page, I select the top line and choose “Process > Reverse Transaction” from the menu however it only gives me the option to reverse a portion of the journal? (the first three lines of the original journal)
So what has happened here? Why is the system not offering to Reverse all the entries on this Document Number?
The Transaction No. column
As shown on the screen shot above it seems the “Reverse Transaction” option pulls back the G/L Entries based on a “Transaction No.”?
I’ve never seen this column before, and when I try and add this via personalisation to the “General Ledger Entries” page, its not an available column?
I’ll therefore dig deeper and look at this document number directly in the the G/L Entry table, and there I can see the journal has been grouped and each group has been given a separate “Transaction No.”
So now the question is why has a journal with the same Posting Date and Document Number been broken up and given two separate “Transaction No.”?
The answer lies in how I posted the journal. If I look back at my original journal I’d inadvertently balanced the journal in two sections.
It seems even though the journal lines have the same posting date, and more importantly the same document number, the system gave these a different “Transaction No” based on how its balanced part way through.
Finally, it seems the “Reverse Transaction” function pulls back the entries based on this “Transaction No.” which causes a complication if I wanted to reverse the whole Document Number.
Quickly Reverse all Entries
So how do I reverse all the lines?
In my example its quick and easy as the journal is small. I could stay in the “General Ledger Entries” page and select one of the first three lines, and click “Reverse Transaction” and then select the fourth line and use the same “Reverse Transaction” option. However what happens if the journal contained many lines that had been grouped into lots of different “Transaction No.”?
In this scenario you can reverse via the G/L Registers page.
As the G/L Register contains all the G/L entries in my journal I just click click “Reverse > Reverse Register” as per below
This gives me all the G/L Entries in my journal that I can then reverse.
It was great investigating and finding out more about how Business Central works in the background. In some ways you could argue this behaviour is advantageous, as you have the opportunity to only reverse part of one huge journal.
My biggest takeaway from this is when reversing an entry via the “Reverse Transaction” in the “General Ledger Entries” page ensure all the expected lines are being reversed.
Also, if you do want to reverse all the journal lines consider using the “Reverse Register” function on the “G/L Register” page rather than “Reverse Transaction”.
Sometimes when you select “Smartlist” off the menu in Dynamics GP nothing appears to happen? Smartlist doesn’t load but you don’t get any errors. When you look at the Windows toolbar, smartlist appears to be open but you can’t select it. Its all very strange.
We get this scenario quite often on the support desk and although solutions are documented online I wanted one I could quickly refer to so decided to write this blog :).
I also wanted to show a solution I use to resolve this rather than using a SQL script which is also sometimes recommended.
Fixing using keyboard shortcuts
Most of the time when this happens smartlist has actually loaded however its opened off the viewable screen. To fix this, and bring it back on screen, you can use a series of keyboard shortcuts.
The exact steps I follow are:
Click on smartlist on the menu bar (even though this won’t load smartlist you now have focus on it)
Press the right cursor key
Wriggle the mouse to drag the smartlist window back on screen.
For clarity by pressing ALT+SPACE you are using the keyboard shortcut to load the menu on the smartlist window i.e.
Pressing M selects “Move” off the menu.
Pressing the right cursor moves the smartlist window slightly
Moving the mouse controls the window and you can bring it back on screen.
When this happens it can prove to be a pain so hopefully these simple steps will help anyone else struggling with this issue.
Within Dynamics 365 Business Central you have the ability to create Vendor Approval Workflows which can be triggered on certain conditions. I’ve found that although this is really cool functionality you get right out of the box, it does have a downside.
The issue being if you use the standard Vendor Approval template as the basis of your Workflow, the user has to request that the new Vendor is approved, otherwise the Workflow is skipped. Obviously this gives this functionality massive drawbacks as users can go ahead and create Vendors and never click the “Request Approval” button.
In this blog I’ll explain how I’ve managed to get around this by adding conditions and changing the Vendor Approval Workflow.
** Please note there’s also one caveat in the at the end of the post 🙂
Vendor Approval Workflow from the Template
To demonstrate the problem with the Vendor Approval Workflow created via the Template let’s add a new one.
To do this search for “Workflows” and then on the Workflows page click “New > New Workflow from Template” and select “Vendor Approval Workflow” as per below:
This opens up a new Vendor Approval Workflow based on the template. However as you can see the first event in the approval sequence is “Approval of a vendor is requested”
This means for the Workflow to start the user must click “Request Approval” after creating the new Vendor.
Therefore no matter what conditions we add, and complex approval hierarchy’s we implement, if a user forgets to request approvals the approval workflow will never start.
So the obvious question is how can we get around this restriction? Can we force the system to automatically send approvals when users create new Vendors.
Changing the Vendor Approval to Force Approval
For this to work we have to get a little creative with its setup and conditions.
Firstly, after adding the Vendor Approval you can edit the default events and sequence. So rather than start with “Approval of a vendor is requested” lets change this to “A vendor record is changed”.
You can do this by clicking the ellipse button next to “Approval of a vendor is requested”
Then select “A vendor record is changed”
The workflow will now look like this:
As this stands the Workflow will trigger whenever a Vendor record is changed, however this isn’t exactly what we want. We only want this to trigger for new Vendors, therefore we need to add some conditions.
Now lets click the <Always> condition so we can filter down when the Workflow will be triggered.
This will open the “Edit – Event Conditions” page where we can add the following conditions:
Let’s break down what the conditions are saying:
The first condition is – “Inv. Amounts (LCY):0”. This means the Workflow will only trigger if the Vendor has never had any Invoices posted onto it.
The next condition is – Only trigger when the No. is Changed: This means the Workflow will only trigger when the Vendor No. is changed.
Therefore the Workflow will only trigger if the Vendor has had no activity AND the Vendor No. is changed (which happens when a new one is added).
Hopefully this captures all new Vendors although it will also trigger if someone changes the Vendor No. and the Vendor has never had any invoices posted. (hopefully this will be unusual unless there was a mistake setting up the Vendor)
Let’s test the Workflow
Now to test if this works 🙂
First go to “Vendors” and click “New”
Therefore we have successfully forced the Workflow approval to trigger automatically when a new Vendor has been created 🙂
Although I’ve found this to be a great way to configure automatic approvals for new Vendors it does have one disadvantage :(.
Unfortunately you can only have one Workflow which starts with the same event. Therefore if I wanted to create another approval that started with “A vendor record has changed” the system would prevent this as per below
Just something to bear in mind if you wanted to implement this solution 🙂