Expenses always "unbilled"


C

Chips

Using contractor '06.

When you enter payments in as an expense instead of as an Item, it always
leaves that transaction tagged as "unbilled".

So later if you run a report of unbilled, you have these transactions that
are marked unbilled that you cannot change to unbillable.

Has this been changed in later versions?

Greg Chapp
 
Ad

Advertisements

H

Haskel LaPort

Chips said:
Using contractor '06.

When you enter payments in as an expense instead of as an Item, it always
leaves that transaction tagged as "unbilled".

So later if you run a report of unbilled, you have these transactions that
are marked unbilled that you cannot change to unbillable.

Has this been changed in later versions?

Greg Chapp
If you enter a transation that is associated with a customer and check off
the billable column or remove the X off the billable column in version 2006
it will show up as unbilled on the unbilled costs by job report until such
time that you actually bill the customer for that expense. If you go back to
to the transaction and remove the billable check mark, the transaction will
no longer appear on the report. The ability to change the original
transation from billable to nonbillable is certainly available in versions
2006 through 2008.

Starting with version 2007 the billable column actually says "Billable?"
instead of having an icon that is not that self explanatory.
 
C

Chips

Haskel LaPort said:
If you enter a transation that is associated with a customer and check off
the billable column or remove the X off the billable column in version
2006 it will show up as unbilled on the unbilled costs by job report until
such time that you actually bill the customer for that expense. If you go
back to to the transaction and remove the billable check mark, the
transaction will no longer appear on the report. The ability to change the
original transation from billable to nonbillable is certainly available in
versions 2006 through 2008.

Starting with version 2007 the billable column actually says "Billable?"
instead of having an icon that is not that self explanatory.
Yes, I know.

It's just that this column doesn't work when you enter a transaction as an
"expense" instead of an "item". If you enter a transaction as an "expense"
it defaults to "billable" and cannot be changed except by actually billing
it. You cannot set it to unbillable.

Greg Chapp
 
H

Haskel LaPort

Chips said:
Yes, I know.

It's just that this column doesn't work when you enter a transaction as an
"expense" instead of an "item". If you enter a transaction as an "expense"
it defaults to "billable" and cannot be changed except by actually billing
it. You cannot set it to unbillable.

Greg Chapp
All evidence to the contrary. I have a workstation with version 2006
installed on it and I can toggle billable on and off without any problems
when entering a payment for an expense.
 
C

Chips

Haskel LaPort said:
All evidence to the contrary. I have a workstation with version 2006
installed on it and I can toggle billable on and off without any problems
when entering a payment for an expense.

I'm not sure we are understanding each other, as words like "expense" can
have different meanings.

When you are entering a transaction where you spent money from a bank
account or credit card (an "expense" as I think you are using the term), you
have the choice of entering it as an expense (expenses tab) or as an item
(items tab).

When you enter it under the expenses tab, the billable column is there, but
does not work. It defaults to billable and cannot be changed.

When you enter the transaction under the items tab, the billable column is
there, and under this tab it works. You can set the transaction to
unbillable if you wish.

At least that is how it works on every computer I have used. I have also
verified this behavior with Intuit.

I discussed this subject with you a year ago or so in this NG, with your
alter ego Allain Martin. You asked "What's an item?"

"Item" is a basic term used a lot in QB, and in any study of QB you come
across the meaning and useage of this term (as used in QB).

So I'm not really sure how familliar you are with this software, even though
you post here so much. That just seemed like an odd question to me from
somebody who posts so much in a QB forum.

Maybe you are an accountant or something and don't use it much for
bookkeeping type data entry, and never really have a use for "items".

I don't mean to offend, I'm just curious.

But anyway, I called Intuit yesterday and got my question answered, they
have not changed this odd behavior in newer versions. They seem to have just
added window dressing and not really addressed any working issues in the
database (IMHO).

Greg Chapp
 
D

dpb

Chips wrote:
....
But anyway, I called Intuit yesterday and got my question answered, they
have not changed this odd behavior in newer versions. They seem to have just
added window dressing and not really addressed any working issues in the
database (IMHO).
....
That's pretty much my impression as well...if it weren't for expiring
support on existing versions and other licensing gimmicks, Intuit would
have minimal way to sell new product it seems. :(

--
 
Ad

Advertisements

C

Chips

Haskel LaPort,

Regarding my reference to you being Allain Martin and your apparent
knowledge of QB, I think I was a bit hasty.

Whether you are a reincarnation of AM or not I don't really care.

It's been awhile since I have perused this NG, and previously when I was,
the responses from AM were very often sarcastic, caustic, and demeaning to
the OPs. Also very often not helpful at all.

Today in browsing through postings, it seems that your responses do express
an intention to be helpful, rather than demeaning. Also your postings seem
to demonstrate a thorough knowledge of the workings of QB.

So anyway, I apologise for assuming you were who I thought you were, or any
other incorrect assumptions.

Greg Chapp
 
H

Haskel LaPort

Chips said:
I'm not sure we are understanding each other, as words like "expense" can
have different meanings.

When you are entering a transaction where you spent money from a bank
account or credit card (an "expense" as I think you are using the term),
you have the choice of entering it as an expense (expenses tab) or as an
item (items tab).

I to am refering to the Expense Tab.

When you enter it under the expenses tab, the billable column is there,
but does not work. It defaults to billable and cannot be changed.
I have versions 2006, 2007 and 2008 installed in my office. In each version
I can toggle the check mark on and off in the billable column.


When you enter the transaction under the items tab, the billable column is
there, and under this tab it works. You can set the transaction to
unbillable if you wish.

At least that is how it works on every computer I have used. I have also
verified this behavior with Intuit.
There you go, if both you and Intuit say it is so then I must be seeing
things. When I can go to the billable column on the expense tab and click
it, a check mark either appears or gets removed I will have to tell myself
that this is only an illusion.
I discussed this subject with you a year ago or so in this NG, with your
alter ego Allain Martin. You asked "What's an item?"
I could never fit in the man's shoes.
 
L

L

Chips said:
Using contractor '06.

When you enter payments in as an expense instead of as an Item, it always
leaves that transaction tagged as "unbilled".

So later if you run a report of unbilled, you have these transactions that
are marked unbilled that you cannot change to unbillable.
Not sure what you are doing, but in my version of contractor 06, the
billable column was able to be toggled on/off --- and yes, it toggles in the
expense tab as well as the item tab.

The toggle is also available and works in the 2007 contractor edition.

Have you updated QB lately? Sounds like you have a bad install.
 
L

L

But anyway, I called Intuit yesterday and got my question answered,
now THAT would be newsworthy.

they
have not changed this odd behavior in newer versions.
No, they haven't. It worked in 06 and it works in 07 as well. Why fix what
isn't broke?
They seem to have just added window dressing and not really addressed any
working issues in the database (IMHO).
/agreed
 
Ad

Advertisements

H

Haskel LaPort

L said:
now THAT would be newsworthy.

they

No, they haven't. It worked in 06 and it works in 07 as well. Why fix what
isn't broke?
It also works in 2008 and 2009. I believe the OP expressed his question
incorrectly.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top