Skip to main content
Solved

Changed depreciation rates and added value to asset


Forum|alt.badge.img

Good day Community 

I have a client who has been calculating their depreciation on a spreadsheet for years and now want to use Acumatica. 

Here is my challenge - in 2021 they changed the useful life of the assets from 25 to 40 years. In 2023 they increased the value of the assets. I imported the assets in the current financial year in initialization mode, including the YTD Accumulated Depreciation. Most assets have been depreciating for about 5 years, 2 years @ 25 years and 3 @ 40 years. 

I am really struggling to assign them useful life years that would calculate at the correct rate.  If I use 40 years, it reverses a portion of the Accum. Depr so that the remaining amount is over 40 years from day 1. If I use 35 years and amend the start date to the current year, the calculation is correct by month going forward, but it amends the Accumulated Depreciation YTD that was imported.

Any advice as to how I could get the system to calculate the correct amount going forward without changing the take-on balances?

Many thanks in advance for any help.

Barbara

Best answer by meganfriesen37

Have you taken a look at the Remaining Value depreciation method?  It sounds like this might be the best option for this scenario:


Predefined Depreciation Methods

Remaining Value Calculation Method

 

The Remaining Value calculation method is similar to the Straight-Line method. The difference between the two methods is that the remaining value method always depreciates the asset by the end of its useful life, so that the depreciable basis minus the accumulated depreciation will be zero.

The remaining value calculation method is used if, for example, the useful life of an asset will end earlier than had been planned. Regardless of which depreciation method was used to depreciate the asset, the user can switch the method to the Remaining Value method at any time. As a result, the asset will be fully depreciated to the amount of zero by the end of its useful life.

To configure the depreciation method based on this calculation method, you need to select Remaining Value in the Calculation Method box on the Depreciation Methods (FA202500) form.

View original
Did this topic help you find an answer to your question?

4 replies

Forum|alt.badge.img

Hi Community - I don’t see any replies to my request so I am going to try another way.

Does anyone have any idea how I can freeze the Accumulated Depreciation at take on so I can recalculate the remainder of life correctly, without affecting the take-on balances?

Any advice would be gratefully received.

Regards

Barbara 


meganfriesen37
Captain II
Forum|alt.badge.img+11

Have you taken a look at the Remaining Value depreciation method?  It sounds like this might be the best option for this scenario:


Predefined Depreciation Methods

Remaining Value Calculation Method

 

The Remaining Value calculation method is similar to the Straight-Line method. The difference between the two methods is that the remaining value method always depreciates the asset by the end of its useful life, so that the depreciable basis minus the accumulated depreciation will be zero.

The remaining value calculation method is used if, for example, the useful life of an asset will end earlier than had been planned. Regardless of which depreciation method was used to depreciate the asset, the user can switch the method to the Remaining Value method at any time. As a result, the asset will be fully depreciated to the amount of zero by the end of its useful life.

To configure the depreciation method based on this calculation method, you need to select Remaining Value in the Calculation Method box on the Depreciation Methods (FA202500) form.


Forum|alt.badge.img

Thank you so much Megan - this solution seems to work. I have tested a few items and the result looks promising.

I’m very grateful as I’ve been working on this for ages.

Regards

Barbara


meganfriesen37
Captain II
Forum|alt.badge.img+11

No problem Barbara.  I had a similar experience at another client during implementation and the RV option was the only thing that worked :)


Reply


Cookie policy

We use cookies to enhance and personalize your experience. If you accept you agree to our full cookie policy. Learn more about our cookies.

 
Cookie settings