← Back to team overview

openerp-community team mailing list archive

Re: Multiple fiscal positions on partners


+1 for gustavo... Let's not be sheeps.. ;) (http://goo.gl/UISRs5)

*David Arnold B.A. HSG*

+57 315 304 1368

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

2014-06-02 13:07 GMT-05:00 Gustavo Adrian Marino <gamarino@xxxxxxxxx>:

> I hope that what Odoo is going to present is the start of a community
> discussion and not as usual what they decided we should think.
> We know how hard is to adapt the vision of OpenERP to the real needs we
> face in our markets. Even if what they propose as new features is aligned
> with our needs, v9 means we are talking about something 12/18 months ahead.
> It is too far away for any real solution.
> We already know what to expect from OpenERP S.A. and v8. Let's work to
> make our work a little bit easier. Do not expect too much from Odoo.
> A common criteria on taxes treatment is a desirable goal, and something it
> could save us real work.
> Best regards
> Gustavo Adrian Marino
> Mobile: +54 911 5498 2515
> Email: gamarino@xxxxxxxxx
> Skype: gustavo.adrian.marino
> 2014-06-02 14:42 GMT-03:00 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

Follow ups