VAT 2010 - The Real Story - Part 2

Ok, so let's have a look first at the work Microsoft has done and what all the noize is about.

I have not looked at all countries, so I might be wrong, but I looked at NL and BE.

This is a 4.0 SP3 BE compare. Microsoft changed 5 objects and this is what beyond compare finds...

It fits on one screen!

I'll translate it for you.

2 tables have one new field. 2 forms have one new column and one new line of code in codeunit 12.

WOW!

So why?

This I am not yet sure of, since I am still convinced there is NO NEED for change in the application!

In NL and BE we only need to change the VAT Statement Setup as I will explain in my one of my next posts.

My guess is that the new column, EU Service is only created to make the ICP report easier to create with two columns. But you may still require two VAT Product Groups, one for products, one for Services.

But it is still a guess since Microsoft has not yet released the reports.

Next step for me is to merge all this $#%@&! into a 2.60 BE database...

Stick out tongue

Comment List
  • I don't have blog and probably never will have, not that kind of personality :)

    But, if you are curious, please look on 5.01 SP1 FP1 release for Eastern and Central Europe.

    You will see, that in this release, EU Sales and EU Purchases are marked using flags in VAT Posting Setup table. If we add another flag for EU Services, it means that reporting of those is just filtering of VAT Entries.

    Probably it is difference between NL, BE and other countries, where, as I believe, you report only EU Sales, but it is common for Eastern and Central Europe EU countries to have to report both sales and purchases of goods and from New Year, also sales of services.

    Having those info as flags makes creation of reports much easier, althougt I have to admit, that personally going to have own made report which will use product posting groups for filtering to do not make too much merge on older installations.

    But for new installation, method used by Microsoft is much more coherent with other VAT setup.

  • Tomasz, can you please give some more information on what problems you have in your country?

    Maybe write a blogpost about that as well so the information is more complete.

    I am not claiming in any way that I know it all, but I am very curious. (As always).

  • Yes indeed, the challenge is not for us partners updating our customers' databases and adapting their setup if any, but it is for customers to handle all their open transactions on top of their regular end/beginning of year processes.

  • Key words in your post are: "in NL and BE".

    The problem is that for other countries it can be (and is) not so easy, and possibility to mark suitable combination of VAT posting groups as EU Service and pass this information to VAT Entry makes this solution more versatile and makes further reporting easier.

  • Key words in your post are: "in NL and BE".

    The problem is that for other countries it can be (and is) not so easy, and possibility to mark suitable combination of VAT posting groups as EU Service and pass this information to VAT Entry makes this solution more versatile and makes further reporting easier.

  • Yes, that is what I said right?

    I assume the ICP report which has the columns will be using this report.

    The normal VAT report AFAIK does not have columns and for normal VAT reporting my guess is that you won't need this new field.

  • Don't forget a number of reports is coming up as well, which will probably use that field...

Related
Recommended