Nevermind. There is only one Account Context for Part. Sorry for that rabbit hole.
On the PO Line there is a Class field. Is it possible the Class is overriding this value?
Not being a finance “guru”, I typically play with the GL Control Codes to see where the value comes from.
I also offer that the “Suspense” account actually be made up of many accounts (like in your case 01-5006## where the ## is 00-99). That makes it easier to find the source and what is driving the result.
Also, I would want to test the result when a receipt is made to see if the COS/WIP is hitting the correct account (despite what is shown on the PO Release).
Here is the account list for the GL control on the AP account
this is where the 01-999000- is coming from.
Wow. That shouldn’t doing it…
I would want to get support on that.
If you try a PO marked as “Inventory” with that part does it choose the inventory account? I think @Jason_Woods is right, I would get support involved. They may be able to shed some light on what’s happening.
- Any posting rule modifications?
- Looks like this is reproduceable, otherwise I’d warn that it does not update when things change (as opposed to an inventory part)
- Have you tried the PE Log Viewer? You can see the breadcrumbs there…
Here is the issue we are having with the GL Account matrix.
We have non stock parts in Epicor that we want to go to a GL account. We just don’t want the whole Part Class to go to that GL Account as we could have multiple GL Accounts within a part class.
How do folks get around this?
Do the Non stock go to the one GL while the stocked ones go to the other (in the same Part Class)?
That is correct. There are multiple GL account locations within the Part Class
The only thing I can think of is to develop a BPM that looks at that logic and changes the GL Account on the release when it is saved.
Darn.
Out of box Epicor is so close…
Yeah, once you click the “Other” on the PO line, it changes the rules.
They typically create mutiple Part Classes. 
Oh, that’s right! Wow you’d think I’d remember that:
Oh, and this was the kicker:
We are buying this part into a different accounting bucket than we are issuing it from
I bet we are still getting burned by that. Oh wow.
sorry to bring up bad memories. lol
No, it’s good. There’s a project I am working on with service contracts (we are a reseller of a service) and when we buy the service, I’ll have to consider that a GL on the part will not help with buying the service.
Perfect timing actually.
I sure do hate this hierarchy setup, though.
Reading through this, a posting rule change would fix it.
It would be rather simple as you are only changing one rule - PUR-UKN.
Then you could pull in the part GL control.
How would this be done?
Thanks
That would work; not arguing with Bruce; he is one of the top experts on Epicor finance.
But to be clear, this would look confusing if you don’t also change the PO Release rule.
So, the Inventory-WIP-Reconciliation-kind of posting rules (like PUR-UKN) fall under COSAndWIP and that would certainly get the money to the right place. (Pic 1 below)
But if you want the PO Release to match the transaction, you might rather modify the PO Release rule (pic 2) and let the PUR-UKN flow from there (i.e. do not modify COSandWIP).
I mean, otherwise, you are prohibiting people from overriding the GL account on the PO in any circumstance, right?
(Green markup is my customization)
