Bug 14414 - Add field for processing fee for invoices
Summary: Add field for processing fee for invoices
Status: NEW
Alias: None
Product: Koha
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Acquisitions (show other bugs)
Version: Main
Hardware: All All
: P5 - low enhancement
Assignee: Bugs List
QA Contact: Testopia
URL:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2015-06-18 17:47 UTC by Nicole C. Engard
Modified: 2023-10-05 19:03 UTC (History)
8 users (show)

See Also:
Change sponsored?: ---
Patch complexity: ---
Documentation contact:
Documentation submission:
Text to go in the release notes:
Version(s) released in:
Circulation function:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Nicole C. Engard 2015-06-18 17:47:53 UTC
It would be great if there was a way to track the default processing fee per vendor and enter a processing fee and a processing fee fund on the invoice management screen.  So I see 3 new db fields here:

aqbooksellers.processingfee
aqinvoices.processingfee
aqinvoices.processingfee_fund
Comment 1 Jessie Zairo 2017-02-09 17:28:03 UTC
This enhancement would be great for libraries to add processing fees per vendor and enter a processing fee and a processing fee fund on the invoice management screen. Many libraries pay a fee for record and label processing and need a separate line to retain that information.
Comment 2 Katrin Fischer 2020-01-07 22:26:11 UTC
Is this something invoice adjustments could be reused for? Maybe with a default value added to the vendor and an invoice adjustment created automatically? Or would this be better as a specific column in the invoices table?
Comment 3 Jeremy Evans 2021-09-27 08:21:03 UTC
We would support this.
Our vendor charges a servicing fee for covering/labelling etc which is shown in their invoice for each item.  The aggregate servicing fee for the invoice is subtotalled at the end with the item costs.

We currently include this fee in the item invoice cost but it would be useful to be able to record it as a separate servicing fee so we can report on it.
Comment 4 Katrin Fischer 2022-01-20 20:01:19 UTC
(In reply to Jeremy Evans from comment #3)
> We would support this.
> Our vendor charges a servicing fee for covering/labelling etc which is shown
> in their invoice for each item.  The aggregate servicing fee for the invoice
> is subtotalled at the end with the item costs.
> 
> We currently include this fee in the item invoice cost but it would be
> useful to be able to record it as a separate servicing fee so we can report
> on it.

Hi Jeremy, did you see my earlier comment about using the invoice adjustments feature for this? I think that should work for your use case, if not, can you please explain the problems you see a bit?
Comment 5 Jeremy Evans 2022-01-24 12:19:10 UTC
Hi Katrin,
Adjustments would be OK if the amounts coded in the EDI invoices can load in automatically.

Our Book vendor Invoices are now loading in automatically via EDI. I can see the vendor servicing fee amount encoded in the EDI message but Koha isn't doing anything with this.   So we need Koha to be able to load these fees in from the EDI invoices that are imported.

Each item on the invoice has am item-specific servicing fee.

For example, Looking at a recent invoice :

The servicing fee is £0.61 for a specific item : This is coded in the EDI message   RTE+2:0.61'  

The servicing fee total on the whole invoice is £2.44   - coded in the EDI message as  MOA+259:2.44'


The invoice total servicing fee would be the most important so we can report on these. I can't see the net costs excluding the fee in the EDIFACT message (which are shown on the PDF invoices we receive).


Jeremy
Comment 6 Katrin Fischer 2022-01-24 21:21:08 UTC
Hi Jeremy, thx a lot for explaining! 

I don't know that much about the EDIFACT workflows yet sadly to tell if we could sensibly reuse the invoice adjustments for it or if we needed to add new fields to the database first. :(
Comment 7 Felicity Brown 2023-01-19 18:44:49 UTC
We absolutely need this. It would be great if it could handle the quantity of items processed as well (book jackets, barcodes, etc.) for tracking how much is spent for cost/benefit analysis of outsourcing cataloging/processing tasks, as opposed to doing them in house.