Spanish chart of accounts

First version by Carlos here:

https://bitbucket.org/carlospm/account_es_abbreviated

added type::feature + 1 deleted label

Created the extended chart from carlos code.

You can find it in:

https://bitbucket.org/pokoli/account_es

added 1 deleted label and removed 1 deleted label

Created two modules:

https://bitbucket.org/zikzakmedia/trytond-account_es
(Full Chart of Accounts)

and

https://bitbucket.org/zikzakmedia/trytond-account_es_pyme
(Abreviated Chart of Accounts)

I think we should probably create only one module which contains the two charts of accounts. As the two charts are quite similar, we can create an xslt transformation in order to generate the two charts from a unique template (as it's done on the minimal chart with the languages).


P.S: The updated module links are:

https://bitbucket.org/trytonspain/trytond-account_es
https://bitbucket.org/trytonspain/trytond-account_es_pyme

It is my recommendation since a long time.

But most of the python code should be removed, they do not have their place in a chart of account module.
I'm just wondering about the ROUND_HALF_UP, is it really an obligation?
And where are used the added fields on tax?

About the python code:

1. recargo_equivalencia: Is used to mark some taxes that should be included on a diferent section in the aeat_340 module [1]. We should probably create a tax_group to be able to differentiate this taxes.

2. report_description: In the invoices where they are except to taxes an additional text must be included indicating which law excludes them [2]

3. efective account kind is not used and can be removed.

4. About ROUND_HALF_UP, i don't think it's an obligation, but it's what post spanish user are used to. I don't see any problem about adding it on another module (or create a another issue to allow to customize it)

So for me, the only really required field is the report description.


[1] https://bitbucket.org/trytonspain/trytond-aeat_340/src/957c6f777fc1c66afae585f98b55bf4f6432d05d/invoice.py?at=default&fileviewer=file-view-default#invoice.py-563
[2] http://solofacturas.es/en-el-caso-de-que-se-realice-una-operacion-exenta-iva-por-ejemplo-una-exportacion-o-una-entrega-intracomunitaria-de-bienes-se-tiene-que-hacer-referencia-en-la-factura-la-exencion-o-basta-con/

On 2017-08-10 10:47, Sergi Almacellas Abellana wrote:
> 1. recargo_equivalencia: Is used to mark some taxes that should be
> included on a diferent section in the aeat_340 module [1]. We should
> probably create a tax_group to be able to differentiate this taxes.

I think this has to be evaluated once the VAT reports from
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/tryton/Gc_1ivnZl0U

> 2. report_description: In the invoices where they are except to taxes
> an additional text must be included indicating which law excludes them
> [2]

This should be implemented by #2329 (closed)

> 4. About ROUND_HALF_UP, i don't think it's an obligation, but it's
> what post spanish user are used to. I don't see any problem about
> adding it on another module (or create a another issue to allow to
> customize it)

I think this is really customization.

Ok, so we can remove all the python code.

I have a working module with the xslt script, I will upload the review when once I
can test it a little bit more.

assigned to @pokoli

added 1 deleted label and removed 1 deleted label

New review36541002 at https://codereview.tryton.org/36541002/#ps1

I uploaded a review, for now it requires #2329 (closed) patch in order to be installed

review36541002 updated at https://codereview.tryton.org/36541002/#ps10001

review36541002 updated at https://codereview.tryton.org/36541002/#ps20001

review36541002 updated at https://codereview.tryton.org/36541002/#ps30001

review36541002 updated at https://codereview.tryton.org/36541002/#ps40001

review36541002 updated at https://codereview.tryton.org/36541002/#ps50001

I just realized that the transformation is producing duplicated tax groups.

Currently all the ref="" attributes are suffixed with the chart name (and this causes the duplication of tax groups). To avoid it, I'm thinking about not duplicating all the ref that start with "tax_group". But does not seem a clean solution.

Thoughts?

BTW: I think we are ready for testing now. Just take in account that now also requires #6721 (closed)

added 1 deleted label and removed 1 deleted label