Flagging Taxable Items

Instead of flagging if a product has tax each time you add it to an invoice, is there no way to flag which products are taxable and which aren’t and have it automatically add the tax based on that?

I don’t think that feature exists, although I agree it makes sense and would be quite nice to have.

Seems like a simple customization, though - just add the field “Default tax” in “Products” module and use it in Line items edit view, if present.

This is easier to do in Core than to do as a custom development, and is of general interest, so I suggest that if you do it (or pay somebody to do it for you), add it as a core feature on Github.

using a custom ⁨modules⁩/AOS_Products_Quotes⁩/lines_items.js file, and setting a custom field in each product to be either taxable or not, the functions in lines_items.js can handle this customisation.

It looks like the Javascript only is loading field values from the AOS_Products table. Instead of adding a custom field to the AOS_Products_cstm table and then making the JS modification much more complicated, I was thinking of using the pre-existing ‘maincode’ field in the AOS_Products table which is a dropdown (product_code_dom) with values XXXX and YYYY so appears to not being used. I could change it to Yes/No for taxable status.

Or would it be easy for someone with advanced JS skills and knowledge of Sugar/Suite to pull the cstm values in from the JS code? I’m 100% sure I’d never need to actually use maincode field for a main product code designation (assuming that’s what it does)

I don’t see much of a problem in using an existing field to avoid fetching cstm table.

It is also possible to add a custom field directly in the main table. The pros seem do some things differently from “standard” for other cases (relationships, for example)

As long as you know what you’re doing and understand the consequences (is it upgrade-safe?), go ahead :slight_smile:

Yes I noticed a Quickbooks module I loaded and removed a long time ago the fields from the module with _c in the field name are still in the main table, so you must be correct in that I could manually add fields to the main table myself as all insert statements in Suite mus have corresponding field names I assume so there is no field count mismatch on an insert.