Skip to main content
Question

Cannot enter landed costs documents for Vendors with the "Hold Payments" status

  • September 17, 2026
  • 3 replies
  • 32 views

Forum|alt.badge.img

(Using 26R1) We cannot enter landed cost documents for vendors that have “Hold Payment” status. But we CAN enter AP bills. Which leads me to believe this is a bug on the landed cost documents side.

Any insight into this?

3 replies

Steve Milner
Varsity III
Forum|alt.badge.img+2
  • Varsity III
  • September 17, 2026

@Jonathan Rozanski it's not your setup. It's how the Vendor box on Landed Costs (PO303000) is coded, and I'd report it.

I checked the 26.101 source. Each purchasing document carries its own rule for which vendor statuses the Vendor box accepts. Purchase Orders, Purchase Receipts, and Bills and Adjustments all accept Active, One-Time, and Hold Payments. Landed Costs accepts only Active and One-Time, so a Hold Payments vendor is rejected with "The vendor status is 'Hold Payments'." That rule lives in the field definition. Nothing in Purchase Orders Preferences or on the vendor record changes it.

So you can order from that vendor, receive against them, and bill them, but you can't record their landed cost. Landed Costs is the odd one out. Only Acumatica can tell you whether that's intended, so open a support case and point at the mismatch between PO303000 and AP301000.

If you can't wait on that, it's a small customization. The Bills and Adjustments graph already swaps its vendor field over to the rule that includes Hold Payments, and a developer can do the same swap on the landed cost graph in a few lines. I haven't published that one myself, so run it in a sandbox first.


Forum|alt.badge.img

Thank you Steve! I opened a case with Acumatica. Might also attempt to fix it with a customization.


Steve Milner
Varsity III
Forum|alt.badge.img+2
  • Varsity III
  • September 17, 2026

@Jonathan Rozanski glad it helped. If you do go the customization route and get stuck, post back here or message me and I'll take a look. It'd be worth adding the outcome of the case to this thread too, since the next person with a Hold Payments vendor will land here.