Hi all, question about CTA on financial reports. ...
# accounting
a
Hi all, question about CTA on financial reports. We're seeing some unexpected numbers when running our end of year financial reports. Specifically, we're looking for ways to add transaction level detail for CTA to reconcile our opening vs. closing balances. The issue I'm having has to do with adding a custom column/formula field comparing Amount and Amount (current rate) to our Balance Sheet and Trial Balance. I'm not sure if this is a system issue or not, but whenever I add the columns and try running I either get a report execution error or the column disappears from the report entirely (even from the customization screen). Has anyone run into a similar issue? Or more broadly, does anyone have a good understanding about how Netsuite calculates and presents CTA? We're aware of the CTA Audit report, but ideal state would be a consolidating the CTA variance into the financial reports we're submitting to the auditors.
c
Hi AB - I'm well versed in CTA calculations, issues and a variety off fixes depending on the specific issue. How can I help?
a
Hey @Cindy Vindasius, appreciate your help! So the main question I'm grappling with right now is if it's possible to show the translation adjustment on the transaction level, or if it can only display per account? For example, I (our admin) have a request from our accountants to provide a GL detail report that includes the CTA for all detail activity. Is this even possible? And then on the account level, it seems like I should be able to customize our financial report to include either the Translation Adjustment column (which doesn't seem to add to what we'd expect) or a formula column comparing the Amount and Amount (current rate), but the latter doesn't display when I run the report. How do you present CTA to your auditors? Is it just through the CTA Audit report?
c
Unfortunately I am not aware of anything that presents transactions supporting CTA calculation as they are only present in consolidations. CTA audit report is what we give the auditors - but your finance team should be familiar with how it works
I believe I have a template that "recalculates the CTA amount if that would be helpful in understanding how it works
I do not understand why you are saying to remove the CTA on consolidated reporting? Do you have subsidiaries with a functional currency different from your reporting?
a
Sorry, I think my questions are as muddled as my understanding of the topic. We'd like to not remove CTA, but rather add the per-account CTA as its own column to our BS, which seems like it should be possible but I haven't been able to get to run. Essentially, the request is to include the information from the CTA Balance Audit report as part of the Balance Sheet itself, removing a layer of opacity for the auditors. It sounds like that isn't your standard procedure and they're able to work with the reports independently? I'd definitely be interested in the template you have!
c
bI have not seen that possible as the CTA balances are calculated each time the report is run. Let me know if you are able to make that work! I did find the template - you can filter the CTA audit report by subsidiary to determine the CTA contribution by entity if that is helpful. Maybe modify the CTA report to give you the balance column by entity that rolls like a consolidating trial balance - similar to the accounting ask but not on the same report.
I will dm you the template. DM me if you need more help
a
Thanks so much, this has been really helpful!
j
We do this for our cashflow (we'd like to know what the "translation" contribution is for each account, to give a more accurate cashflow number) The way we achieve it is with an ODBC query where I'm specifically picking period translation rates for the balance sheet reporting, but in principle it's: • Run a TB in consolidated currency • Run a TB for prior period in consolidated currency • Run TBs in home currency, and translate all net movements at average rate • The difference between the movements is your "fx" effect It's not perfect but it works ok for our purposes and gives us a "sensible" number. Strictly speaking we should also do something with regular fx revaluations too: we have something in the works for that