OK, found a way to clear the balances correctly by using an ICJE to move the funds from the parent sub bank account to the child sub bank account and using the undeposited funds account to offset, which clears the decks, but my cash sale still has status 'Undeposited'..does it just have to stay like this or am I overcomplicating things?

i.e. a temporary holding one.

instead of leaving them in undeposited funds

not in undeposited funds

wait. let me try that explanation again

So if I'm understanding you correctly - the cash sale is on Sub B in it's "undeposited funds" currently, correct?

but the real deposit when into bank account A on Sub A

and then you transfer from Bank A on Sub A to Bank B on Sub B

The issue is that you are missing an appropriate due to /from transaction in Sub B when the Cash sale is created

It's hitting undeposited funds instead

Also - this is what you need to be doing instead

message has been deleted

Or this

message has been deleted

Or you could get really "creative" and create a bank account called Due To/From Sub A - but you'd have to do some rearranging on financial statements to go with it

message has been deleted

NOTE - your current approach is missing something

so if you just deposit the values currently outstanding your ICJE is probably not "right"

If you do the first image - you're missing one half of the "due to/from" exercise

Ha. Okay @KevinJ of Kansas. Back to this mess. merchant accounts by subsidiary didn't fly, but the client has suggested another option that appears to work but I'm not sure if there's a hole I can't see. Would appreciate your thoughts

message has been deleted

The idea here is to use the CashBack tab on the deposit record but actually set it to Undeposited Funds, resulting in a $0 Deposit, applied against the Cash Sale. It does clear it, but I'm concerned about the audit trail of the gradual accumulation of hundreds of $0 deposits that use the CashBack tab for a purpose OTHER than design. I also don't love using Undeposited Funds for this because it muddles it with other business but the client is really pushing for a "simple" solution so the only reason to deny them this option is if there's a technical flaw in the logic, and I can't see one. Am I missing anything? Thanks!

When the Subsidiary A accepts the Cash - what's the other side of what's hitting it? (I'll give you a hint, it's not undeposited funds) So when you bring in the Cash via merchant account it probably looks something like this:

Sub A
Debit Undeposited Funds
Credit ??? (I would suggest "Due to Subsidiary B")

Then you deposit it into the bank account in Sub A

Sub A
Debit Cash
Credit Undeposited Funds

Then you Transfer the Cash from Sub A to Sub B

Sub A
Debit ??? (I would Suggest Due to Subsdiary B)
Credit Cash

Sub B
Debit Cash
Credit ??? (I would suggest Due from Subsidiary A)

Accepting Cash Sale

Sub B
Debit Undeposited Funds
Credit Revenue

Depositing Cash Sale

Credit Undeposited Funds
Debit Cash (I would suggest a "fake" bank account)

Now, at this point you have a double cash hit - but that's probably ok, because you're missing the due from Sub A.

Credit Cash ("Fake" account from last step)
Debit ??? (Due from Subsidiary A)

Now your accounting is complete, also - there's enough of an audit trail to figure out what the heck happened if something goes wrong and someone typoes something while entering it (it will happen, and you'll spend hours trying to figure it out even with a full audit trail)

With the method they suggest as well - you're going to have to do the deposits on both subsidiaries anyways - so that transaction will still exist (it'll just be a zero dollar deposit in sub A offsetting both undeposited funds amounts), so the only difference with my method from a "number of transactions standpoint" is that they are recording the correct "first" transaction - which is to create the payable to subsidiary B.

Now, the accepting of the cash sale into sub B, depositing it, and pushing it into the due from, and the cash into Sub A can happen at the same time. You could probably even cut a step out by having the cash sale immediately deposted into the fake bake account (instead of recording it to undeposited funds)

If you were really adventurous, you could do a custom GL impact on your cash sales in Sub B to unwind it and drop it into the Due from Sub A.

if I were working with my app dev team, I'd expect to do it in 20-40 hours (we do a lot of documentation/quality control stuff) a less thorough developer could probably do it in less, but you might hit unexpected snags later.

That said, if it's low volume and doesn't take someone you're paying $16-20 an hour to do more than a few hours, you're talking years to recover the cost.