-
Posts
-
I’ve emailed Bob regarding this matter, however, others may have comments.
When calculating payroll cheques with PAYRUN, there is an option to “Not Delete a Negative calculation” (Ctrl F6). This would happen if one receives Advances (or other deductions) which are more than the employees earnings.
The problem is that you can still print the cheque (which gives the employee an amount rather than deducting the amount), and the employee in fact gets another advance.
I’ve asked Bob if he can modify or add an option which will generate a Zero cheque if the calculation is Negative, rather than just Delete the calculation. An offset entry would have to be added for the difference (and this may be the problem, since the program will not know where to code the difference, however it could prompt for a code).
That is a tough one, but I can see it’s importance.
I tackled this a few yeards ago for Quebec. They have a rule where in cases where the employee’s deductions exceeded their gross pay (tipped employees, generally) then the payroll must reduce Quebec tax, QPP, EI, and Federal tax (not necessarily in that order) until the net cheque reaches 0.00.
This was difficult, because you have to recalculate the taxes as you are doing it (QPP & EI are factors in the Federal tax calc.) but it worked.
I would be reluctant to open the hood of the DOS payroll to attempt this – my time would be better spent adding it to the NV2 payroll (IMHO).
Bob
Hmm
I don’t think issuing a ZERO cheque is an option. It would give audit problems. However – skipping ZERO or less (or a softcoded amount), maybe be the solution ?
It may be possible to stick a few lines of code into the template to do exactly this. – but then every time the template is parsed – the code would have to be added again.
It could be added / done with the @PRC(FixPay) procedure
The zero cheque (even though No Cheque is actually printed) comes into play when an employee has received Advances which (or the Deductions) exceed their Net Income. In these situations they want to provide the employee with a printout of the payroll detail (earnings & deductions), while the balance (if the cheque does not work out to zero) to be applied back the the Advance account or to an AR account.
An auditor would not have a problem with a so called zero cheque, especially since it does reflect that the employee did get paid for the hours worked and the correct allocation is made to Canada Customs.
Under the current options to achieve the above, they use Ctrl F6, which produces a Negative cheque. This entry must then be edited to bring it down to a zero balance.
Hmm,
Yes the ZERO cheque works – but not for the reasons you describe. Or perhaps you / I are suggesting something different?
The Zero cheque can be used – providing the negative amount remains. Then the zero cheque is compliant. However if you issue a zero cheque, and remove the negative amount / the offset to the payroll account is not correct. In this context – I was suggesting the zero cheque is not GAAP
Personally I think it would be much simpler to write a small procedure that allows you to ignore cheques the printing of any cheques – under a certain “pre defined amount” – Do you really want to issue cheques for 0.34 cents ?
Lettmee see if I can come up with something simple on this. Where you can run it after parsing the cheque template where you could predefine a minimum amount or else the printing is skipped.
It should take only a few lines of code.
David
David:
“The Zero cheque can be used – providing the negative amount remains. Then the zero cheque is compliant. However if you issue a zero cheque, and remove the negative amount / the offset to the payroll account is not correct. In this context – I was suggesting the zero cheque is not GAAP”There is no change made to the Original payroll distribution entries. An new line is added to Add Back an amount so the distribution is brought to a zero balance. The cheque line is Zero’d out since NO cheque is actually printed or issued.
There are many transactions where GAAP is not followed to the letter, but the clients are not accountants. They want the figures to reflect things they understand. If someone is overpaid then they want to show the person he did get paid for the hours worked, and they want the balance outstanding to show up on the AR or Advance account (to be deducted off the next cheque).
Post Edited (04-22-04 22:13)
I agree – and Yes, many things from clients are not GAAP –
When things are automated – they should follow GAAP Rules to the letter – or at least that’s how I design my programs.
Then if the client – wants to deviate – its their books !
Regards
DavidHenry,
Near as I can tell – if you are using the PRTPAY Proc, then the Amount Variable is 106. First Parse the Template (~PAY1.TPL) and then add this line of code to be the first line of the template.
I STRESS Parse First – many NV Printing Templates are called directly from the Library, and not the Template Proc.
If you are using PRTPAY then please insert this line to first in the template
@if<= 106,"0" @then @mov 8="0 0" @eop @ret @end If you are using PRTCHKS then please insert this line to first in the template
@if<= 91,"0" @then @mov 8="0 0" @eop @ret @end This will prevent the Print template from actually printing when the AMOUNT is ZERO or Less
The Variable number for AMOUNT changes from Procedure to procedure, but not within a “group of templates” – so the line of code could be used for any PRTPAY Template.But you should TEST – TEST – TEST
Regards
David
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
