One challenge I have always had with the way Workfront treats Expenses is that everything is the same type of expense, it is merely a matter of which fields have data in them or not. This often creates challenges that things are not distinct, but rather "mashed" together. I feel Workfront would be better off creating different Expense Types (Budgeted, Planned, and Actual/Invoice) with the ability to have relationships between them. We run into a lot of use cases where a Budget number is given for a certain Expense Category (we correspond these to our Accounting Codes) but when we actually go out and obtain quotes, the Planned start falling into other areas. For example, we Budget $1,000 for servers in Account #123. But, that number is really more like $900 for hardware and $200 for support (Account #345) when we start shopping around, so I have to create a new Planned for $200 in Account #345 with a Budget of $0. Then we get invoiced in 2 installments on the hardware, so I have to create 2 new Expenses to record the 2 different Actual totals that have come in with their Invoice numbers. As a result, I have a whole bunch of expenses floating around that may or may not be tied together via an account number without a great way to show connections. As a result, setting up Custom Views to parse the data can be frustrating. While it all makes sense and is technically correct, I don't feel like it "tells the story" of the expenses for that project. Everything becomes disjointed.
Does anyone else feel the Expense section is a little too basic or limited to track things fully?