openerp-community team mailing list archive

[David Arnold - El Alemán <david@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

So *please, anyone, *tag this conversation as relevant for such talks!!!! ;)


 ----------------------
*David Arnold B.A. HSG*
*Gerente*

+57 315 304 1368
david@xxxxxxxxxxx
www.elaleman.co

​El Alemán S.A.S, Carrera 13 # 93 - 40 P4, Bogotá D.C, Colombia


2014-06-02 12:09 GMT-05:00 Marcelo Bello <marcelo.bello@xxxxxxxxx>:

> David, just a heads up, there is a focus on accounting and changes to
> allow for greater tax flexibility for v9, I think on OpenDays there will be
> a talk just on that. May be good to get to know how SA is thinking about
> this.
>  On 2 Jun 2014 12:54, "David Arnold - El Alemán" <david@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>> To sum it up in a kind of to do list for Colombia tax project (containing
>> additional items):
>>
>> - widen concept of fiscal position to be allocation (and not only
>> replacement tables)
>> - allow for n allocation tables, n product attributes and n partner
>> attributes (ideally grouped around tax domains), which steer behaviour of
>> fiscal position roules (tax controller)
>> - reframe fiscal classification to match the requirements of being a n
>> product attribute
>> - prepare for generic granularity (now via individual XML reports) - >
>> maybe pentaho integration
>> - allow tax precision be independent of account precision (blame OpenERP
>> SA R&D for not being able to solve this since 2011 despite several bug
>> reports and fierce discussion)
>> - allow tax chart queries for an individualized set of periods (not just
>> one) - in case reporting periods differ on different concepts
>>
>> Anything to add? Further comments?
>>
>> *Best,* David
>>
>>
>> ----------------------
>> *David Arnold B.A. HSG*
>> *Gerente*
>>
>> +57 315 304 1368
>> david@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> www.elaleman.co
>>
>> ​El Alemán S.A.S, Carrera 13 # 93 - 40 P4, Bogotá D.C, Colombia
>>
>>
>> 2014-06-02 10:32 GMT-05:00 David Arnold - El Alemán <david@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>>> *Hello Marcelo, Hello Gustavo*
>>>
>>> I hope that at least during World Championship, Brazilian accountants
>>> might find some spare time to watch some games... ;)
>>>
>>> I think the kind of flexibilzation proposed, could get you generically
>>> covered on everything which are attributes of partners and products. It is
>>> true that the invoice line itself, in other words: the specific
>>> characteristics of a particular sale  (which are not attributed to partner
>>> or product) are somewhat difficult.
>>>
>>> The Tax Include /Base Amount Include topic I also noticed. The *Core
>>> here seems utterly buggy *afaik, Akretion completely overwrote it to
>>> make it somewhat intelligent. See a pull request, i made recently: https://
>>> github.com/odoo/odoo/pull/219
>>> (I think I'm not the first one to notice, that bugs/pull requests are
>>> handled very inefficiently at the moment? A perceived lack of respect.
>>> Other projects do that way better. Hint!)
>>>
>>> I got the AHA moments. ;) I think probably the tax break logic can be
>>> kind of a generic use case. In some countries of the world, there are a lot
>>> of Free Trade Zones and probably special tax brakes. But I'm not sure, if
>>> this should be calculated on the invoice or even line-item granularity.
>>> My best guess is rather that it is more appropriate to account for such
>>> situation at an accounting level.
>>>
>>> As to *Argentina* it seems, the that tax system is very parallel to the
>>> Colombian one. I'm not sure about the "activity", because in fact this is
>>> kind of an aggregate product classification. In case of Colombia we are
>>> talking about CIIU (ISIC: http://unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/isic-4.asp),
>>> which can be mapped for example to product classification CPC (http://
>>> unstats.un.org/unsd/cr/registry/regcst.asp?Cl=25&Lg=1). So in fact
>>> "activity" refers to kind of a simplified product classification, which
>>> is trying to cover the standard case, where one company is dedicated to
>>> one or few activities. But caution! A company can pursue multiple
>>> activities depending on the specific product it is producing. So this
>>> way, the CIIU is a *product * attribute.
>>>
>>> I think as to the base done, we have great modules like Fiscal
>>> Classification and Fiscal Position Rule available, however these must
>>> be altered, to reflect an adaptable high level logic. (The ones mentioned
>>> by Pedro and Raphael) Fiscal Position Rule already allows for a logic
>>> depending on State, Country (all three: Issuer Address, Delivery or
>>> Invoice Address) But what it does lack is to account for other fiscal
>>> attributes of the partner and the product.
>>>
>>> On the partner side, there can be applied for example in the case of the
>>> domain of a specific national tax a *retention *depending on issuer *and
>>> * buyer characteristics. This actually is not an available attribute in
>>> Fiscal Position Rule. On the other Hand, *fiscal classification * is a
>>> module to provide tax-sets on products. If we dismantle this concept,
>>> it comprises a classification + an actual allocation (two in one).
>>> Additionally, it is single-dimension. So there is only one possible
>>> classification available at the moment.
>>>
>>> The Brazilian localization from Akretion (credits!) tackle this issues
>>> in a very country specific and "hard coded" way. But it's readily available
>>> for *"genericalization" *If you think then the Fiscal Position module
>>> as an extensible controller logic, you probably could cover all Argentinian/
>>> Venezuelan/etc. tax cases.
>>>
>>> Such a common framework would then also be easier to adapt at those
>>> Brazilian specialties (such that line order attributes are important).
>>>
>>> I value your ideas, of abstracting taxes further. Actually when having
>>> dinner yesterday with the localization team we ran about the idea of an
>>> completely independent tax enginge with an API to provide for south
>>> America's ERP, to outsource the headache of tax calculation to a
>>> central company. (Hint for smart entrepreneurs!) There are some US
>>> companies for a possible exit strategy on such a project. I think, such
>>> ideas are probably outside the focus of OpenERP (I know, the culture is
>>> somewhat let's copy/reinvent the wheel in some cases, but you probably
>>> already know my opinion on that).
>>>
>>> However some aspects, I see, can be covered by the localization
>>> *templates* (not the updating aspect). You can define tax accounts on
>>> the general ledger an allocate taxes to, etc. To abstract this, I'm not
>>> sure, if that wouldn't be too specific, as you would have map your accounts
>>> to a set of tax-concepts (kind of tax api), but this set of concepts can be
>>> very dynamic as per jurisdiction. So this mapping effort would have to be
>>> done also in case of an update in the mapping structure.
>>>
>>> A side note on aggregating granularity to obtain tax statements: I
>>> think that the Odoo way of displaying taxes (Chart of Taxes will in the
>>> near future become deprecated as concepts such as XBRL (http://es.
>>> wikipedia.org/wiki/XBRL) win ground. Basicially you take a xml-tag of
>>> the official or national "taxonomy", then you define which data has to be
>>> aggregated around that specific tag, then you file via XML to your
>>> authorities) This granularity approach will certainly be necessary for a
>>> lot of countries (also for statistical reporting, which can be tied to
>>> taxes or not). So I think at least we wouldn't have to bother to much about
>>> in which tax account to strategically allocate a tax perspectively.
>>> (Maybe the whole concept of tax accounts will get deprecated, as
>>> granularity advances, as it's basically replicated information and a
>>> violation of the DRY principle)
>>>
>>> I think, it would be very helpful if you could publish your code on
>>> github, in order to be able to analyze it and look for parallel
>>> concepts. Maybe the multicompany-management approach can be refactored
>>> as a compatible delta module in the future?
>>>
>>> The Colombian one lives at: https://github.com/odoo-colombia/odoo-
>>> colombia
>>>
>>> @ Ana: Europe gratefully in't the sad standard of tax complexity. The
>>> only tax retention to be known in Germany is in construction (as a sector
>>> which has a lot of tax evasion).
>>>
>>> *Best,* David
>>>
>>>
>>> ----------------------
>>> *David Arnold B.A. HSG*
>>> *Gerente*
>>>
>>> +57 315 304 1368
>>> david@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>> www.elaleman.co
>>>
>>> ​El Alemán S.A.S, Carrera 13 # 93 - 40 P4, Bogotá D.C, Colombia
>>>
>>>
>>> 2014-06-02 9:11 GMT-05:00 Gustavo Adrian Marino <gamarino@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>>
>>> Let me add some considerations for Argentina: In our country is very
>>>> clear that the taxes to be applied are dependant on:
>>>>
>>>>    - The issuer company, and the possibility to act as a retention
>>>>    agent for some taxes
>>>>    - The issuer activity
>>>>    - The fiscal address: one set of taxes could be potentially applied
>>>>    based on city, federal state and country
>>>>    - The product
>>>>    - The buyers activity
>>>>    - The buyers fiscal address
>>>>
>>>> If you are trying to define a new way to treat taxes, for sure the idea
>>>> of redefining the tax structure per company (as today in Odoo) and "fixing"
>>>> via a simple table is simply not reflecting reality nor the common use
>>>> pattern of any real customer
>>>>
>>>> I have started developing a module to redefine taxes accounts as
>>>> properties per company and assigning a set of taxes to federal states and
>>>> countries. This set of taxes should be applied depending on issuing
>>>> companies fiscal federal_state and country.
>>>>
>>>> This arrangement allows us to deliver an incremental set of taxes
>>>> covering first the country level and then federal state taxes as needed.
>>>> This taxes could be configured AFTER the company account plan is set for
>>>> the company set needed, and thus allowing to adapt the DB to changes in
>>>> taxes without having to do manual editing on every company in the database.
>>>>
>>>> Of course a set of company specific taxes is also provided
>>>>
>>>> Additionally, due to the fact now taxes are global (not company
>>>> specific), you can define taxes on products without be worried to point to
>>>> the exact account on each company, and avoiding to rely on obscure access
>>>> rules to manage taxes.
>>>>
>>>> Under the new scenario, accounts could be only visible to the company
>>>> they are defined on, reflecting the fact they are strongly tied to
>>>> company's account plan.
>>>>
>>>> Under this schema, the need of fiscal positions for customers is
>>>> strongly reduced to some simple cases, reflecting just special cases for
>>>> some customers, and thus using the simple standard approach is enough in
>>>> most cases.
>>>>
>>>> The module is still not in production. If you think this approach could
>>>> be used as a common strategy, I have no problem publishing it
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Gustavo Adrian Marino
>>>>
>>>> Mobile: +54 911 5498 2515
>>>>
>>>> Email: gamarino@xxxxxxxxx
>>>>
>>>> Skype: gustavo.adrian.marino
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2014-06-02 10:14 GMT-03:00 Marcelo Bello <marcelo.bello@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>>>
>>>> David, my 2cents as an user of the Brazilian localization (I am not
>>>>> aware of all the technical challenges, I am just speaking from an end user
>>>>> PoV).
>>>>>
>>>>>    The idea of an application instead of replacement table sounds good
>>>>> to me. Usability-wise I always found strange that by default a product
>>>>> would have dozens of taxes pre-applied to it only for most to be filtered
>>>>> out later in the process. Again, I am sure there are design decisions to
>>>>> justify that, but usability-wise it is not ideal.
>>>>>
>>>>>    Regarding what you say about the flexibility of the current
>>>>> implementation, I agree with you that some pieces might be missing, but at
>>>>> least in the context of the Brazilian tax legislation what you propose will
>>>>> still not cover the full range of possibilities that need to be taken into
>>>>> account.
>>>>>
>>>>>     At least in the case of Brazil, the taxation of a sale needs to
>>>>> take into account information from:
>>>>>
>>>>> - The buyer/partner;
>>>>>
>>>>> - The product itself;
>>>>>
>>>>> - The seller (the company selling, in the case of a company with
>>>>> multiple branches - like my company - this is extremely relevant because
>>>>> some of my branches are on special trade zones which change the tax
>>>>> calculation significantly);
>>>>>
>>>>> *- The order.line: *for example, a product in Brazil is taxed
>>>>> differently depending on whether the buyer plans to resell the item or if
>>>>> it is going to consume it (or add it to its assets).
>>>>>
>>>>> *- The product unit being sold* - yes, some pieces of legislation
>>>>> requires us in Brazil to keep track of individual units so that they are
>>>>> sold the same way they were bought. Sometimes this do not impact the tax
>>>>> rate, but do impact the tax codes we need to use to fill eInvoicing,
>>>>> sometimes it affects both. For instance, in Brazil if I buy an imported
>>>>> product from a distributor, the goods I purchased from that distributor
>>>>> will use a specific CST code, but if I import it myself I will have to sell
>>>>> them with another CST code. In a few cases even the tax rate changes. For a
>>>>> company like mine, we sometimes buy locally, sometimes import and this kind
>>>>> of "lot-number-like" control is very difficult to handle without an ERP
>>>>> system. Our localization still can't handle this.
>>>>>
>>>>>       Think about it and check if in your country you do not have
>>>>> cases where you need info from order.line (or even just the order itself),
>>>>> and/or if you need to do the lot-number-like tracking I mentioned in some
>>>>> cases. Of course, these two last items account for a smaller % of total
>>>>> transactions in my country, but they are relevant for a large number of
>>>>> organizations (they happen often enough that one wishes it were handled by
>>>>> their ERP system).
>>>>>
>>>>> *A few more things to consider before you get your hands dirt:*
>>>>>
>>>>> - As far as I know, today the tax calculation does not work well as an
>>>>> independent tax-engine. Therefore, it is hard to make Odoo provide the
>>>>> sales agent a table like the one below (showing taxes as a function of sale
>>>>> location). This is useful for companies that are trying to optimize their
>>>>> taxation, avoiding taxes when possible. Companies usually achieve this by
>>>>> setting up factories or branches in special tax locations so it is
>>>>> interesting if the system can be made easy to offer tax simulations like I
>>>>> show in the table below, so that a sales agent can place the order in the
>>>>> best possible way.
>>>>>
>>>>>              Product Cost     Tax A     Tax B     Tax C        Total
>>>>>
>>>>> Location A       X              X         X         X            X
>>>>>
>>>>> Location B       X              X         X         X            X
>>>>>
>>>>> - At least in Brazil, taxes have an hierarchy. Taxes must be
>>>>> calculated on top of a base value. Such base value sometimes is the value
>>>>> of the goods being sold but sometimes, for some taxes, it is the value of
>>>>> the goods PLUS the value of another tax (so tax applies over other tax, in
>>>>> cascading style). Maybe this is an exclusivity of the crazy Brazilian tax
>>>>> legislation, maybe not, but one needs to consider it for the tax engine to
>>>>> work well.
>>>>>
>>>>> - Taxes may or may not be part of the product price. In Brazil usually
>>>>> the price list is inclusive of some taxes so the total price to be paid by
>>>>> the client will not change if some taxes (that are included in the price)
>>>>> change;
>>>>>
>>>>> - It would be wise if the system had three fields for each tax rate:
>>>>> (a) tax_rate_for_display: the tax rate % used for display purposes;
>>>>> (b) tax_rate_for_invoice_calculation: the tax rate % used for
>>>>> calculating the tax used for invoicing;
>>>>> (c) tax_rate_for_effective_payment: the tax rate % that will actually
>>>>> be paid to the government
>>>>>
>>>>>         Usually a=b=c, but not ALWAYS!
>>>>>
>>>>> (b) is for when you have a tax that is not applied in the usual
>>>>> TAX_AMOUNT=BASE_VALUE*TAX_RATE way. Hence you need to convert the way the
>>>>> tax must actually be calculated so that it will work when calculated in the
>>>>> standard TAX_AMOUNT=BASE_VALUE*TAX_RATE. We have one such case in Brazil,
>>>>> where the tax called ICMS must be calculated in a way that the tax_rate is
>>>>> applied over the value of the goods PLUS the value of the ICMS tax itself!
>>>>> Yes, the tax applies over itself (this is usually the AHA moment, when
>>>>> foreigners realize how fucked up our tax system is in Brazil). So ICMS has
>>>>> a tax rate of 25%,18%,17%,12%,7%,4% or 0% depending on a number of
>>>>> variables. When you need to print the tax rate applied you must write 18%,
>>>>> but the tax rate you actually use to calculate the tax is given by the
>>>>> formula TAX_AMOUNT = BASE_VALUE * [1/(1-TAX_RATE)-1]. Hence the need for
>>>>> the field (b) tax_rate_for_invoice_calculation, one would write (a) = 0.18,
>>>>> (b) = 0.21951219512 in this example.
>>>>>
>>>>> (c) is for when a company has a tax incentive that is not reflected on
>>>>> the invoices (which is very often in Brazil). So for instance, I may have a
>>>>> tax break and instead of paying 10% tax I effectively pay only 5%. But the
>>>>> government still requires me to issue my eInvoices with the 10% rate like
>>>>> everyone else and I am given a rebate at the end of the month. So for
>>>>> accounting purposes, in this example we would have (b) = 0.10, (c) =0.05.
>>>>>
>>>>>         So one can actually have a situation where all three fields
>>>>> are different. Not sure you have a similar case in Colombia.
>>>>>
>>>>>         I wanted to point out all these use cases so that if there is
>>>>> a coordinated effort to standardize across the "tax calculation engine"
>>>>> some of these items could be taken into account (not all of them I am
>>>>> sure).
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Marcelo
>>>>> On 2 Jun 2014 02:54, "David Arnold - El Alemán" <david@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> *Hello Raphael*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> we are going forth with Colombia following your example.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At this stage I already can make my comments on the logic of the
>>>>>> mentioned set of modules, as they do not (yet) solve our problem, as
>>>>>> initially stated.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lets rename some of the concepts as mapped hereafter for better
>>>>>> understanding (speaking names at the right abstraction level):
>>>>>> fiscal position = replecement set (this is historically, but wrongly,
>>>>>> directly attached to the partner, because it can be equally dependent on
>>>>>> product caracteristics)
>>>>>> fiscal classification = fiscal attribute of product
>>>>>> fiscal position rule = replacement table controller
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So what we are missing, and what you missed in barzilian localization
>>>>>> is a custom "fiscal attribute of partner", which then is taken by the
>>>>>> "replacement table controller" and funneled into the application of a
>>>>>> "replecement set" in the very moment that all relvant factors (fiscal
>>>>>> attributes of product, and fiscal attributes of partner) are available.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So we would have:
>>>>>> "replacement sets", which are controlled by the "replacement table
>>>>>> controller", which draws on "fiscal attributes of products" and "fiscal
>>>>>> attributes of partners" to determin the application of such sets.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now given, that in south american countries there are various fiscal
>>>>>> concepts which - in the case of colombia - amount to 8 different taxation
>>>>>> concepts on a product (retentions included). This being said, in the world
>>>>>> of a one dimensional application of attributes (product and partner) and
>>>>>> sets, this actually amounts to the statistical combination of cases in each
>>>>>> concept (tax) domain. Lets say illustratively 5x2x4x5x12x5x8=96000
>>>>>> combinations. This is not the way to go! What we need therefore is a
>>>>>> flexibilisation by using the already built in tax domain concept to gather
>>>>>> taxes arround a specific domain - say VAT.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So the idea is, that partner and product each get an attribute per
>>>>>> every domain. (So if there are 8 domains, a partner or a product can have 8
>>>>>> respective attributes) And that each set of attributes is processed by the
>>>>>> replacement table controller to allocate a flexible set of replacement
>>>>>> tables, which are executed according to a specified sequence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Even the creation of Tax domains, and the definition of domain items
>>>>>> in the respective tables should be dynamic, allowing for further
>>>>>> flexibilisation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think even some concepts of brazilian tax structure have some more
>>>>>> generic cousins that you might have thought at the time of programming.
>>>>>> (but honestly, that's just an educated guess)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As leagel requirements in many jurisdiction, I think this should go
>>>>>> into core as "advanced taxes" some day...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *How is the situation in Thailand about those topics? Seems that
>>>>>> Thailand is quite similar to Colombia.*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Nhomar,* have you checked the brazilian concepts? Might there be
>>>>>> room for convergence with venezuela and mexico? (maybe appling the above
>>>>>> said)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> When we start to override, where should we merge the generic portions
>>>>>> of code? I'd like to see that built in into the relevant Akretion modules...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Best*, David
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----------------------
>>>>>> *David Arnold B.A. HSG*
>>>>>> *Gerente*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +57 315 304 1368
>>>>>> david@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> www.elaleman.co
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ​El Alemán S.A.S, Carrera 13 # 93 - 40 P4, Bogotá D.C, Colombia
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2014-05-29 9:10 GMT-05:00 Raphael Valyi <rvalyi@xxxxxxxxx>:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello David,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> double check but this OCA project may help you:
>>>>>>> https://launchpad.net/openerp-fiscal-rules
>>>>>>> And this is how we override it for Brazil for instance:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://github.com/openerpbrasil/l10n_br_core/blob/develop/l10n_br_account/account_fiscal_position_rule.py
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> as far as I know this is also used in international commerce in
>>>>>>> Europe, in Canada and may be Italy or Spain.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The idea is that the partner don't carry the fiscal position anymore
>>>>>>> exactly but instead we have that extensible intermediary flat decision
>>>>>>> table that will determine, depending on many extensible parameters
>>>>>>> (countries, states, fiscal types etc..) which fiscal position will apply
>>>>>>> exactly. That table can be large eventually.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think there is room to improve thee compatibility of these module
>>>>>>> for v8 using the new OCA web_context_tunnel module to avoid creating
>>>>>>> signature incompatibilities with existing on_changes until the new API will
>>>>>>> be used everywhere in the addons (probably v9 only).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please let us know if these modules can help you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Raphaël Valyi
>>>>>>> Founder and consultant
>>>>>>> http://twitter.com/rvalyi <http://twitter.com/#!/rvalyi>
>>>>>>> +55 21 3942-2434
>>>>>>> www.akretion.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 9:50 AM, David Arnold - El Alemán <
>>>>>>> david@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Hello Fellows*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  in Colombia we (some) are trying to adapt to local legislations by
>>>>>>>> following a concept of introducing multiple fiscal positions per parnter.
>>>>>>>> This sould only involve quite minimal code change, maybe same 30-50 lines
>>>>>>>> of code in total...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The idea is to cluster fiscal positions under certain domains (such
>>>>>>>> as one tax1, tax2, tax3, tax4, tax5, etc.) and to be able to assing to a
>>>>>>>> partner an infinite number of fiscal postiones ordered by domains.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If we don't introduce this multidimensionality of fiscal postitons,
>>>>>>>> we would have to multiply out (is this the corect term?) the matrix and get
>>>>>>>> some 5x5x5x5 (=4 domains with 5 cases each) fiscal positions... Not cool.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Would this be a feature eligible for core aknowledging it's very
>>>>>>>> small code impact (using existing concepts) and its usefullness in more
>>>>>>>> complicated jurisdictions worldwide?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Point two, is there some kind of classification flield on product
>>>>>>>> known, which can serve to prepare for granularity when it comes to concepts
>>>>>>>> such as BI and XBRL. We would like to link taxes and reporting requirements
>>>>>>>> to such product classification fields here in colombia. (there are about
>>>>>>>> 5000-6000 thousend different concepts of municipality tax, differing from
>>>>>>>> municipality to municipality - which are based on such a product - or
>>>>>>>> "activity " - classification)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Freundliche Grüsse*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>  ----------------------
>>>>>>>> *David Arnold B.A. HSG*
>>>>>>>> *Gerente*
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +57 315 304 1368
>>>>>>>> david@xxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>>> www.elaleman.co
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ​El Alemán S.A.S, Carrera 13 # 93 - 40 P4, Bogotá D.C, Colombia
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>>>>>>>> Post to     : openerp-community@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>>>>>>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>>>>>> Post to     : openerp-community@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>>>>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>>>>> Post to     : openerp-community@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openerp-community
>>>>> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>