[Home] [Help]
87: -- depreciate to this new basis amount even if it is greater than the asset's
88: -- cost. This brings up an important point with regard to the code. The
89: -- Polish asset's adjusted_cost and adjusted_recoverable cost that it uses
90: -- to determine the depreciation basis are the ones in fa_books. Instead, I
91: -- currently use polish_deprn_basis in fa_books_summary for adjusted_cost and
92: -- polish_adj_rec_cost in fa_books_summary for adjusted_recoverable_cost.
93: -- The reason for this is that I treat the values in fa_books as the baseline.
94: -- For example, when the user changes the cost from 20,000 to 12,000, the
95: -- value of adjusted_cost and adjusted_recoverable_cost are both 12,000 in
88: -- cost. This brings up an important point with regard to the code. The
89: -- Polish asset's adjusted_cost and adjusted_recoverable cost that it uses
90: -- to determine the depreciation basis are the ones in fa_books. Instead, I
91: -- currently use polish_deprn_basis in fa_books_summary for adjusted_cost and
92: -- polish_adj_rec_cost in fa_books_summary for adjusted_recoverable_cost.
93: -- The reason for this is that I treat the values in fa_books as the baseline.
94: -- For example, when the user changes the cost from 20,000 to 12,000, the
95: -- value of adjusted_cost and adjusted_recoverable_cost are both 12,000 in
96: -- fa_books. However, since we need to run negative adjustments through a
191: -- only need to be calculated at the end of the year, and at times
192: -- when a transaction occurs. However, I calculate the switch
193: -- during every period regardless. Theoretically, in the middle of a
194: -- year w/ no transactions, I could take a look at the switch_code in
195: -- fa_books_summary, and just use that for the current period. If
196: -- performance improvements need to be made, that can be one of the
197: -- first places to look. One of the reasons that I didn't do this
198: -- was that I wanted to make the code as generic as possible. That is,
199: -- when transactions occur, you do need to do the switch mid-year on
198: -- was that I wanted to make the code as generic as possible. That is,
199: -- when transactions occur, you do need to do the switch mid-year on
200: -- occasion. When backdated adjustments happen, you might need to do
201: -- this over a range of periods, and here the switch_code in
202: -- fa_books_summary may not give you the value that you are looking
203: -- for anymore since that was the switch value at the time of that
204: -- period, but now that the backdated adjustment has occurred, it's
205: -- obsolete. To try to avoid these complexities, I just do the
206: -- switch all the time even though there are performance drawbacks.
802: select polish_deprn_basis,
803: polish_adj_rec_cost
804: into l_prev_year_adjusted_cost,
805: l_prev_year_adj_rec_cost
806: from fa_books_summary
807: where book_type_code = p_Book_Type_Code
808: and asset_id = p_Asset_Id
809: and period_counter = l_prev_year_period_counter;
810:
1642: select polish_deprn_basis,
1643: polish_adj_rec_cost
1644: into x_prev_basis,
1645: x_prev_adj_rec_cost
1646: from fa_books_summary
1647: where book_type_code = p_Book_Type_Code
1648: and asset_id = p_Asset_Id
1649: and period_counter = x_bef_trxn_period_counter;
1650:
1899: select polish_deprn_basis,
1900: polish_adj_rec_cost
1901: into x_prev_basis,
1902: x_prev_adj_rec_cost
1903: from fa_books_summary
1904: where book_type_code = p_Book_Type_Code
1905: and asset_id = p_Asset_Id
1906: and period_counter = x_bef_trxn_period_counter;
1907:
2144:
2145: begin
2146: select nvl(switch_code, 'XX')
2147: into x_switch_code
2148: from fa_books_summary
2149: where book_type_code = p_book_type_code
2150: and asset_id = p_asset_id
2151: and period_counter = p_period_counter;
2152: exception
2176:
2177: begin
2178: select nvl(switch_code, 'XX')
2179: into l_prev_switch_code
2180: from fa_books_summary
2181: where book_type_code = p_book_type_code
2182: and asset_id = p_asset_id
2183: and period_counter = p_period_counter - 1;
2184: exception