I'm have a MS SQL database for storing raw data on utility usage (electric, water, and gas), which I have implemented to compile data from four disparate automated collection systems. The ultimate goal is to generate invoices from this data.
Different customers have one of a dozen different rate structures, which all may-or-may-not use a non-linear function to calculate cost per usage based on peak demand and total usage.
It is not unheard of for a particular customer to change from one rate structure to another, or for the rate calculation for a particular rate class to change from year to year, so I would like to put these formulas into new tables within my database where they can be easily referenced and modified.
Ideally, I would want to run one of these dynamic functions as part of a query without relying on the front-end having to do them, but I have no idea how that would work.
By request, an example formula of the type I am talking about:
All current customer with Electricity Rate Structure A pay $0.005/kW-hr for the first 2,000 kW-hr consumed, $0.004/kW-hr for 2,000-15,000 kW-hr, and $0.003/kW-hr for all consumption above 15,000kW-hr. Additionally, any customer who has higher than 50kW demand will be subject to a $0.002/kW-hr surcharge on all consumption. The values for these coefficients, thresholds, the number of thresholds, and whether or not the customer even gets charged for peak demand can and do change from year to year and from rate structure to rate structure.
The formula for this (if I was programming it) would be:
min(sum(usage),2000)*.005+min(min(sum(usage)-2000,0),15000)*.004 + min(sum(usage)-15000,0)*.002 + (max(usage)>50)*sum(usage)*.002
I have hear from the some where the char of account is used based on the different country it means that the char of account used based on different different country and analytical account is used as in service type of products.
I don't know am i right or wrong.
Please clarify me in depth which situation we are using the chart of account and which is not and which situation we are using the analytical account in ODOO (Formally) and which is not.
In principle, accounts that made up the chart of accounts are taken into general ledger posting i.e used to prepare BS, P/L etc, while the analytical accounting are mainly used only for companies internal use and doesn't affect anything in real accounting.
The general accounting system is a legal obligation. It must conform to certain accounting principles and must represent a fair picture of the financial situation of the company by producing a balance sheet and a profit and loss statement. Its foundation is the Chart of Accounts, made up of eight classes. Classes 1-5 are balance sheet accounts and classes 6 and 7 (expenses and revenues) are used for the profit and loss statement. All journals and accounts post to the General Ledger.
The second accounting system used in some countries is called Analytical Accounting. Its main purpose is to track expense and revenue accounts by categories in order to derive profit and loss by activity. Its foundation is a separate Chart of Accounts made up of a single class (class 9). Its journals and accounts post to a separate ledger (the Analytical Ledger.)
Some European countries use two types of accounting systems. (The United States and most other countries use only one.)
The chart of accounting will differ from country to country. For example US uses Account receivable and Account payable accounts which is equal to Debtors and Creditors accounts in Indian accounting. So Odoo keeps the chart of account based on the country.
Chart of Accounts are real accounts used for legal Purpose but Analytic Accounts are Just like same but only for Analysis Purpose like Budget Management Purpose etc.
I am designing a database for an app to sell parking spot use. Customer can order n number of uses of parking spot uses or pay a flat rate and use it for monthly/weekly or yearly. They can do mix of those also. Like they can buy 9 parking spot uses and later decide they will pay for the whole month - in which case their charges are kind of pro-rated.
For this, I have a Customer table, an Order Table and then an order type table. However, I am having a slightly hard time with the order-type table.
Can some one please shed light on how to model the rate and get available spot-uses for a customer?
I want to have a table that will track all the commissions we are due from our wireless sales. Each plan pays a different Commission, not a problem. We do our reconciliation as sometimes the carriers don't pay (they may miss a line or 2).
The problem occurs when the carriers change how much they pay for the commissions. We want to be able to go back and see that there was 4 lines not paid for in January at commission rate x. but Feb the same types of plans were sold but their commission rates were x-10.
If I change the rate in the commission table for the plan, when i go back to pull the data from the January report I will get incorrect commission rates.
I have a table for sales set up with a date stamp so I was thinking i can cross reference that somehow.
Hope someone followed this.
I am looking for the best way to structure this.
You should "STAMP" the record with the commission rate. You could either stamp the actual rate into every record... or you could keep a commission ID and put that into each record.
We create point of sale software for the mac, and are looking to revamp our tax engine. It's pretty simple now, with taxes consisting of a name, code and rate that can be applied to every product individually. While this is good enough for some people, we've had lots of requests to handle more advanced situations. Some examples are US City/County sales tax, Canadian compound (stacked) taxes, French ecotax and NYC luxury tax.
We've identified most of the characteristics that these taxes have and are leaning towards a sort of rule-engine based implementation. We don't have to support every case out there, but we want to be able to extend it if needed (to avoid another rewrite).
We're looking for advise from people who built something like this before, or examples of projects that try to solve the same in an elegant way.
My suggestion would be to use database tables for what they are good for (storing values) and rules for what they are good for (business logic). I would certainly not put things like tax rates or lists of jurisdictions in rules - those should be in tables. What I would use a rules engine for is defining the logic that determines which rate to apply to which transactions. So, for instance, if I buy a set of products online from a company based in State X that ships from State Y to three different locations, what tax rates apply to which parts of the transaction?
This combination of rules and database tables is very common - the rules make sure you look up the right things while the tables aid in reporting etc. For instance, the California DMV did this with vehicle registration fees - all the various fees are stored in a database while the rules that determine which fee applies to which car are managed in a rulebase.
If you try and put everything in rules you will not be able to report well and if you try and put everything in database tables you will end up with dozens of tables to manage all the exceptions and corner cases.
JT
I would recommend a set of database tables and joins.
Example:
Jurisdiction: list of states, counties, countries, cities, etc.
Product: obvious
Store: list of locations you sell from
StoreJurisdiction(StoreID, JurisdictionID): the list of Jurisdictions the store is
responsible to collect taxes for
ProductTaxCode(ProductID int, TaxCodeID int): the type of product for the purposes of taxes: basic, luxury, etc.
JurisdictionTaxCodeRate(JurisdictionID, TaxCodeID, InterestRate, RateType): for each applicable combination of Jurisdiction and Tax Code, provide the tax rate to be applied, and the type of rate (compound, simple, etc.).
To find the list of taxes to apply, all you need is an INNER JOIN of the store, its jurisdictions, the jurisdictiontaxcoderates for those Jurisdictions, and the product's tax codes.
You could define ProductTaxCode as a View so all products receive a default TaxCode unless a special one is provided. By abstracting TaxCode, you can have the same metadata about a product ("Food" for instance) apply to different regions in different ways. If a particular jurisdiction has its own definition of "food", you just add a jurisdiction-specific code and apply it to products as needed.
This may require some tweaking for Internet purchases, wholesale purchases, and other situations where the sale is somehow exempt from taxes or the customer is responsible for remitting them. It would also need tweaking for situations where the customer's location, rather than the store, decides the tax rate.
Other tweaks: here in Texas, for instance, we have a "tax-free" weekend where state and local taxes are not collected on some classes of products where the individual item's sale price is less than $100. The idea is to provide cheaper school supplies, clothing, etc. for children heading off to school for a new year. This sort of tweak could be implemented by having a date range table for each JurisdictionTaxCodeRate going off in the future as far as they can be planned.
Here is an example of a "home rule" city in the Denver, CO metropolitan area:
http://www.c3gov.com/pages/about/division_salestax.html
You, as a retailer, may also need to send the tax payments to different locations. For cities that are not "home rule" cities (which is a special term that probably only applies to Colorado, but then probably every state has some equally special term like it), you'll send all the tax payments to the state who will then deal them out to the relevant parties. Colorado has a feature where there are "special tax districts" that are permitted to collect sales taxes for certain benefits (on the example link, RTD is the public transportation district, and "Invesco Field" is the stadium where the Denver Broncos play).
To expand upon Mr Tallent's answer on this thread, you'll need to also include in the Jurisdiction table some way of representing that the taxes may go to different places.