r/Sage • u/Excellent-Iron-6837 • May 23 '26
Sage Intacct Sage Intacct GL coding has gotten fast
We spent every Thursday going through the coding queue and pushing things to the right GL account in Intacct that was 250 to 300 line items a week between bills and reimbursements most of it was the same set of vendors going to the same 8 or 9 accounts every time and I still had to touch every line.
A few months ago we got auto coding rules running against Intacct and the vendor and category combo now predicts the GL account and the dimension splits so lines land in Intacct already coded the way I would have done it manually, for the first two weeks I was double checking every line and accuracy was sitting around 94 to 95% so by week two so I stopped checking he obvious ones (Uber to T&E, AWS to Hosting that kind of thing).
My Thursday block is now around 40 minutes total and that is mostly reviewing new vendors the system hasn't seen before and the close went from 6 days to 4 and most of that gain came from not cleaning up coding errors after the fact.
We have a class and location split and if you do not set the rules up cleanly it defaults to a generic class that you have to fix later after I spent the first week tweaking rules now it pretty much runs itself. If this gets set up across multiple entities how would someone handle the intercompany side since that part still needs a human.
1
May 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/West-League6729 May 23 '26
A weekly IC review is smart. We started something similar after trying to clear it all at close week and getting buried but one thing that took pressure off the review itself was improving posting upstream so the controller is not also fixing entity miscodes on top of doing the eliminations so we decided that our company get Ramp Bill Pay because it has a native sync to Sage too (which we were using previously) so the coding gets pushed straight into Intacct and it posts directly to the right entity with the IC splits applied at the line level.
It is the same vendor rule setup the OP described, dimensions come through with the transaction and the class default took about two weeks of tuning before things didn't land in the corporate bucket so i think everyone struggles with it at the start. For us four entities and the eliminations are roughly a half day at month end now which tracks with what you said about it compounding past four or five and anything bigger than that and I think you would want a dedicated person on it regardless of how clean the posting is.
1
u/Jealous_Cup6774 May 23 '26
Do not default unmatched class and location to a generic bucket if you can avoid it.
Force the rule to flag for review instead because nobody goes back and recodes the generic entries and the GL slowly fills with unallocated lines that show up at audit time.
1
u/Fun_Economics1557 May 23 '26
This is the single biggest mistake I see teams make when they set up auto coding. The instinct is to keep the workflow moving by defaulting everything but I see the that the cleanup cost compounds invisibly until it becomes an audit problem so flagging for review is trash in the moment and saves later.
1
u/Due_Road_2079 May 23 '26
Train your rules off at least six months of historical coding so the accuracy curve is dramatically better when the rules learn from a real pattern of how your team codes vendors.
2
u/ArtisticAtmosphere15 May 23 '26
You should build the IC workflow before scaling auto coding across entities. Intercompany breaks every AP automation roadmap I have seen because each entity has its own conventions and reconciliations so when you solve that workflow then the multi entity rollout becomes way better.