Hello everybody,
after some struggle, I’m more and more uncertain whether it was a good idea to choose the German “minimal account table” (“Minimaler Kontenplan”) instead of the German standard account table (SKR03).
What is the recommended strategy for a very small company which only needs a good handfull of accounts? - My idea was that it would be easier to enhance the minimal table to my specific needs instead of having dozens of unused accounts which would later on create more mistakes in booking.
But now, it’s very difficult to find out how to do simple bookings. I cannot decide, is the reason
that I simply dont know how to do it?
Or that the minimal account table is missing most of the necessary relations, entries and other presets, which may be predefined in SKR03 ?
Could the unused accounts (in SKR03) easily be deleted - or am I in risk to destroy essentials when doing so?
I will always recomend using the local chart of accounts instead of the minimal one.
This is because the chart of accounts normally also include the taxes (which are not included on the minimal one).
Once you’ve setup the default accounts for parties and product categories tryton can do much of the accounting entries without worring about the details.
Another point in favor of the local account is thinking in future. If you already have your local accounts you may use them in the future, while if you created the minimal chart and you want to start using the localized chart you will need to create a new chart and setup everything another time.
Thank you. I went back to a quite early backup and started over with SKR03. Looks promising, I suppose this is the right approach.
A better question might be:
The SKR03 are sheer hundreds of accounts, most of them more confusing than useful to me. Can they be made invisible? - In case - how do I do that?
It may be my lack of experience and knowledge - but my girl friend, who is a business economist, recommended to use as little accounts as possible and to extend the selection when necessary. In Germany (maybe in other countries as well), we have code numbers to explicitly identify them, so talking with accountants should be doable.
At the moment, this strategy seem not do be possible in tryton.
I cannot decide whether it’s possible to extend the background framework of the minimal account table that it could become possible in future. But certainly, this is not the most important workplace.
I think things may be different in Germany.
In France indeed, we have a universal chart with some industry specific adaptations, but accountants expect to find the same everywhere. They don’t care about empty accounts but in reports.
Many countries have less formal history, and probably consider useful accounts only.
yeah, almost. Where I am working, I only manipulate 3 differents charts of accounts (a shop, an association, a farm). The global structure is the same, but some parts differs.
the french chart of account in Tryton is the expanded version, and it is a bit a shame.
Question is if you are an accountant or not. If you can do bookkeeping yourself, SKR03 is probably the best option. If you cant, go for minimal chart of account and outsource the accounting (and tax) part to a tax agent. Esp in Germany a considerable option (which I use for my business…)
it seems to me that to close it, I need to first override it.
and for simplify upgrade, I prefer to keep the number of overrided templates minimal (as it needs manual review if something change on the original template)
If you are not going to use it there is no problem to override it.
If you reopen them latter you can uncheck the template override so any template configuration will be updated when running the process to update the chart of accounts.