Sage 100

Man, I'm full of questions today! Client is running Sage 100 Advanced version 2014 PU 3. Client entered an AP invoice dated 2/16/2015 and posted it to the GL as of 3/1/2015. They then issued a check to pay the invoice on 2/21/2015. All worked well. When they run the AP Trail Balance, the vendor is not included in the report and the AP Trail Balance does not reconcile with the GL balance by the amount of the payment. This looks like a bug to me. I hung up waiting of the phone for support with Sage after 20 minutes and opened a service ticket through the Sage Portal. (May be a major mistake). I thought I would post this here in case anyone else had seen this before.

Shawn, what date are they running the report? I am assuming it is the end of Feb, and that actually makes sense to me. The payment was posted to the GL in Feb but the Invoice wasn't posted to the GL until March. I don't know why the vendor doesn't show up on the AP Trial Balance report, but the GL being off definitely makes sense to me.

@BrianKelly you are absolutely correct. From a GL perspective, the Check posted in February and the Invoice posted in March. Therefore, the check should be included in the AP Trail Balances as a debit balance on the 2/28/15 AP Trial Balance. In this case, the GL is correct. The AP Trial Balance is wrong.

The invoice is included on the trial balance only if the ""invoice"" transaction date is less than or equal to the trial balance ending date, not the ""payment"" date. Same is true in AR. And as far back as I can remember, it has always worked that way.

So @ThereseLogeais are you saying it's WAD? If so, that sucks. I guess I just never noticed it before. It seems so obvious.

The report is assuming users wouldn't pay an invoice BEFORE it's posted. Can't always work around users' carelessness.

It's looking at the open invoice file to select the appropriate invoices and then brings in the transactions that go with those invoices, not the other way around.

In this case, it's not carelessness. The cusotmer receives an invoice for next months rent. They pay it before the end of the month but the expense applies to next month. They have essentially prepaid the rent by a few days.

There are three dates in the system. Actual or calendar date, document date and transaction or posting date. The AP and AR aging run using the document date of the invoice. The AP and AR trail balance run using the transaction date of the invoice. It has always worked this way in the system which is why users that try to compare the aging report(s) to the trial balance for the module will often find they do not agree with each other.

Understood @MoiraGoggin that's why we were using the AP Trial balance rather than the aging. If I referenced the Aging, I apologize.

Ah, you were clear @ShawnSlavin no apology needed. My comment came from writing again and again the definition of these 3 dates when I worked tech writing at SOTA. Just automatic..I can recite this stuff in my sleep.

If they want to show the expense in the proper month so they get 12 payments for the year and make all reports balance, they could post the AP invoice to an accrual account and then do a monthly journal entry to post to expenses. That way at the end of the year one payment would be in the accrual account showing they paid already for Jan of the next year.

Yes, it is WAD. Frustrating that they couldn't figure out a way for APTB to accommodate difficult transactions like prepayments of rent and insurance. And while they were at it, why not provide for a Manual Check Prepayment transaction like Cash Receipts Prepayments?

This have alway been a major issue. You wonder how the ap trial balance ever matches the GL control. The initial posting date on the invoices is the most important date. It controls the inclusion on the trial balance.

But you came to the right place to get your questions answered, @ShawnSlavin .

Drives me crazy when clients post this way. The old problem of making sure posting dates all match up isn't necessarily solved with the TB.