>Re: Rev Can Audit
>Posted by: HMah (AC5-Webproxy46.direcpc.com)
>Date: September 12, 2005 03:04PM
>The problem with PRREPORT is that it prints the actual information for
>the date ranges recorded in the various accounts.
I’m not sure how a report that prints ‘actual information’ can be construed as a ‘problem’, but let’s continue …
>For example if you voided several pay cheques after remitting than
>those cheques would no longer be included in the PRREPORT, and
>therefore the printout would not match the actual remittance figures.
Well, they would be included in any report printed *before* you voided the checks and (obviously) not be included in a report printed *after* voiding them. The 1st report would match the remittance and the 2nd would not. The same would be true for any other remittance report you could think of once you start changing/deleting transactions dated in the past.
The solution seems clear: Don’t void pay checks, use reversing entries instead (dated in the current period.)
>The next remittance would deduct for the voided cheques and again
>PRREPORT would not reflect the difference for that pay period.
Using reversing entries would solve that.
>My question regarding nv2 was “is there a method to print the actual employee >cheque detail which make up specific remittances (regardless of when you print the >report, at the time or twelve months later).
In the scenario you describe, this is impossible. You can’t print a report showing deductions & contributions that matches an actual remittance, void some pay checks, then produce a report that somehow includes pay checks that are no longer there.
About the only thing that would be possible is to ‘archive’ a snapshot of the amount details at the time you produce the remittance check. The pay withholdings feature *could* do that – but you run smack into a problem if you edit the remittance amounts before posting the check. In that case the details would not match the remittance and you’re back in the same boat you started in.
Bob
