Hi, everybody:
I have maintained a trasaction type with category of opening balance, but I could not start this transaction type in maintain transaction tfgld1101m000, can anybody tell me that which session can I use to start up the transaction with category of opening balance ?

Regards:

usually this get generated automatically when you run the Close Year session for a particular financial year.

Yes, it is normally generated automatically by year-end close, but it should also be possible to enter manual Opening Balance Transactions. The most common use would be to establish opening balances in a new company when migrating from a legacy system.

I don't remember encountering any issues when using tfgld1101m000 to start a transaction type of category Opening Balance. I don't remember if it was the same Transaction Type used to post year-end balances, although that shouldn't make a difference.

What error message do you get? Also, what fiscal period is the batch?

Scott

Sorry, I should have completed the last train of thought.

I don't have access to a test system right now, but I think that a Transaction Type with category Opening Balance can only be entered in fiscal period #1.

Scott

Thanks , Scott & Maria
I have try to change the fiscal period to 2003, 01 period, but this is still shows error message:
like category of transaction type must be 'sales invoice' or 'sales credit notes'.
I maintain a transaction type 'r30', with category opening balance in form 1, and set the main session to 'tfacr1110m000' and 'tfacr1111m000' of sub session in form 2 of tfgld0111m000.
Is it wrong ?

regards

Yes, that is incorrect! The sessions you linked to the transaction type ('tfacr1110m000' and 'tfacr1111m000') are Accounts Receivable (ACR) sessions.

Incorrect session numbers in Maintain Transaction Types is your problem. I'm embarrassed to say that I can't quote the GLD session numbers without looking them up. I believe the main session is tfgld1105s000, no subsession.

Once you have linked the correct session nos to the transaction type, you should be able to process.

Scott

Hello,

Indeed this transaction type is being used during the year-end procedure. The transaction type is defined in the company parameters. You cannot use this transaction type for any other purpose. During the year-end it will balance your profit and loss accounts.

Hope this helps

Regards
Otto

Hi all,

In Baan IV, I believe that that the Transaction Type of category “Opening Balance” that is used during the year-end close procedure to establish opening balances for the next year is specified in the session Close Year (tfgld6203m000), not in the Company Parameters.

Again, I apologize that I don’t have a test system or program script in front of me. The last time I remember needing to test manual OBP transactions carefully was in Baan IVb-something.

If other [more recent?] Baan IV versions prevent the manual use of an Opening Balance Transaction Type that was used during the close year procedure, it should still be possible to manually adjust opening balances via Maintain Transactions (tfgld1101m000) by simply defining another Transaction Type of category “Opening Balance”.

Scott

Hi, scott
I have tried again following your guidance. Yes, we can manually maintain a transaction type with category of opening balance, and manually adjust opening balance of year.
But I guess that the setting of the transaction type with category of opening balance , whose main session is maitain sales invoice is useful for year end process to balance the account receivable?
Sorry I do not involve in the BaaN finance implemetation.

Regards

RE: But I guess that the setting of the transaction type with category of opening balance , whose main session is maitain sales invoice is useful for year end process to balance the account receivable?”

Armstrong,

Unfortunately, the answer is “no.” The year end close process only effects and balances general ledger accounts and the Opening Balance transaction serves only to create the ledger opening balances for the new fiscal year. There is no “balancing” of accounts receivable or accounts payable as such.

Transactions Types are defined in Maintain Transaction Types (tfgld0111m000). In that session, as you noted, each Transaction Type code is assigned a transaction category, a main session, a sub-session, and information about the document series numbers.

The combination of main session tfacr1110s000 and sub-session tfacr1111s000 must, as your error message indicated, belong to category Sales Invoices or Sales Credit Notes if it is to work. However, the session Maintain Transaction Types does not validate whether the session and subsession that you enter are functionally correct. So you are able to create a transaction type that does not work.

FYI, the sessions that you were attempting to use are Accounts Receivable sessions that are used to create “manual” sales invoices. That is, sales invoices that do not result from logistic processes and do not require a printed sales invoice. Their functions are as follows:

Maintain Sales Invoices (tfacr1110s000)
Sales invoices entered by this session are registered as accounts receivable items but no sales invoices are printed. The invoice header that is entered in tfacr1110s000 includes the customer and total invoice amount.

Maintain Sales Invoice Transactions (tfacr1111s000)
The individual transaction lines for the sales invoice are entered in this session, allowing the total invoice amount to be posted over multiple ledger accounts and dimensions.

Scott

HI,

For what purpose do you need this kind of opening balance transaction ?

Moshe

The most common use is to migrate opening balances. For example:
· Migrating opening ledger balances from a legacy system to Baan.
· Consolidating opening balances from a legacy system into an existing Baan company.
· Migrating opening balances from one Baan company to another and/or consolidating opening balances from two Baan finance companies into one company.

In the last example, if the Baan companies are linked in a multisite environment, you can make a very strong argument that the “transfer”, “migration” or “merge” of balances from one company to another should be handled by inter-company or inter-group transactions because using balanced transactions provides a more substantial audit trail.

The other scenario I can think of when a manual opening balance transaction might be appropriate is to make corrections. Suppose that after finally closing the prior fiscal year, an audit uncovers material errors that would change your operating results and hence the closing/opening balances.

There should be no problem (other than heads rolling) in producing corrected financial statements, regardless of whether your statements are prepared using Baan FST, Hyperion or another package. But because the prior year has been finally closed, standard functionality will not let you reopen the last period, post the results, recalculate closing balances and create revised opening balances.

One solution is to make corrections via manual opening balance transactions. Another would be to post corrections using standard transactions in the current fiscal year and simply adjust the opening balances and current accounts when preparing financial statements. The disadvantage to this is that the adjusting transactions will be reflected in standard inquiries and reports as current year activity.

One final note worth mentioning is that manual opening balance transactions cannot be used to modify the opening balance of a control account.

And by the way, throughout these postings, I’ve been wondering what Armstrong is trying to accomplish with opening balance transactions. So maybe he’ll tell us?

Scott

Indeed I was wrong,
I was thinking about the automatic balancing batch.....
guess I was not awake anymore.

Regards
Otto

Otto,

Not a problem! As I stated in several of the earlier posts, I didn't have system access to review this quickly. After your note, I dug back into my documentation, manuals, client notes and IV-vs-V differences to be sure that I was awake before sticking my foot any further into my mouth. That review exercise alone was worth its weight in gold. (Well, actually, I'd prefer the gold to the exercise, but...)

Scott