Two Ways to Link Purchase Cost to a Special Sales Order

MB-330 By islever Editorial Last updated

Manage inventory pricing and costing Create and manage products

Short answer

AB Use FIFO with marking, supported by a purchase order created from the sales order, to tie the special order's cost of sales to its specific purchase.

Question

You need to address the inventory costing requirements.
What are two possible ways to achieve the goal? Each answer represents a complete solution.
NOTE: Each correct selection is worth one point.
  1. Use FIFO with marking. Correct Answer
  2. Create purchase orders from sales orders. Correct Answer
  3. Set up commodity pricing.
  4. Create a costing version.
  5. Set up a costing sheet.

Key Takeaways

It tests whether you can distinguish receipt-to-issue cost linkage (marking) from standard-cost setup artifacts such as costing versions and costing sheets.

This MB-330 costing question asks how to guarantee that a special order carries its own purchase cost, and the two valid methods are FIFO with marking combined with a purchase order created from the sales order (A and B).

Common mistake: Choosing D and E, because a costing version and a costing sheet both look like 'costing' features, but they configure standard cost rather than linking a specific purchase receipt to a sales issue.

Expert Analysis

The mechanism at work The scenario turns on a specific demand (a rush or special order) whose cost of sales must reflect the actual cost of the exact purchase that supplies it, rather than whatever the FIFO queue happens to hand out next. Trace the flow: a purchase order receipt posts inventory into the on-hand pool and FIFO cost layer sequence; when the sales order issues the item, the issue cost is normally taken from the next layer in that sequence. That is the step where the requirement can fail.

Why A is correct Marking is applied on the sales order line and links that specific issue to a specific receipt (a particular purchase order line). At issue posting, Dynamics 365 therefore values the sales line at the marked receipt's actual cost instead of the FIFO sequence position. FIFO with marking is precisely the combination that guarantees the special order carries its own purchase cost.

Why B is correct Creating the purchase order from the sales order builds supply that is dedicated to that demand line, giving you a receipt that can be reserved and then marked against the sales line. It is the procurement-side step of the same solution, and comments on this question note that "both marking and a purchase order created from a sales order guarantee that cost of sales is linked to the PO."

Why C, D and E are wrong Option D (a costing version) and option E (a costing sheet) are standard-cost constructs: a costing version stores standard cost records and effective dates, while a costing sheet defines the calculation structure and indirect-cost elements. Option C (commodity pricing) prices raw materials by commodity index. As one comment puts it, "D is standard cost... C is for raw material, so A and B" — none of them links an individual purchase receipt to a sales issue.

Official Reference

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics365/supply-chain/cost-management/cost-management-home-page

This link opens the official vendor documentation in a new tab.

Exam Strategy

When a question asks for two ways to meet a costing requirement, first decide whether the requirement is about valuing an individual receipt-issue pair or about setting up a costing model. Wording such as 'its own cost', 'specific order' or 'rush order' points to marking; wording about effective dates, overhead or calculation structures points to standard-cost artefacts. Then eliminate in pairs: costing versions, costing sheets and commodity pricing form one standard-cost cluster, so if two selections are required and that cluster cannot supply both, the remaining operational pair is your answer.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does marking do to the cost of a sales order issue in FIFO?

Marking links a specific inventory receipt, such as a purchase order line, to a specific issue line. The issue is then costed at that receipt's actual cost instead of the next cost layer in the FIFO sequence.

Why is a costing version not the answer for this inventory costing requirement?

A costing version stores standard cost records, their effective dates and activation states. It supports a standard cost model and cannot tie an individual purchase receipt to a particular sales issue.

How does creating a purchase order from a sales order help the costing goal?

It creates supply dedicated to the sales demand, giving you a receipt that can be reserved and marked against that sales line so its cost flows through to cost of sales.

More MB-330 FAQ →

Community Votes

A
50%
B
50%

50% of anonymous learners picked answer A. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.

Discussion 6 contributions

Compiled from public community threads and reader submissions, lightly edited for clarity. Handles and vote tallies are shown as recorded, and comments reflect the views of individual contributors.

From public community threads 6

  1. T3nnaM 👍 5
    Sorry D is standard cost, so using the method of elimination: D and E are standard cost. C is for raw material, so A and B.
  2. Lilliam 👍 3
    By process of elimination C/E relates to standard costing and commodity items. Only A&B would makes sense.
  3. AntoonvM 👍 2
    According to docs both marking an a purchase order created from a sales order guarantee that cost of sales is linked to the PO.
  4. Gemami 👍 1
    Correct answers: A and B Why? - A. FIFO with marking: Marking links a specific purchase receipt to a sales issue, ensuring the special rush order uses its actual purchase cost rather than the normal FIFO sequence. - B. Create purchase orders from sales orders: Supports direct procurement for Customer2's special order and can establish the supply-to-demand marking needed to preserve its specific cost. Why not the others? - C. Commodity pricing: Used for pricing based on commodity market values, not isolating transaction costs. - D. Costing version: Maintains planned or standard costs, not specific FIFO receipt-to-issue settlements. - E. Costing sheet: Calculates cost breakdowns and indirect costs, not FIFO transaction matching.
  5. PrzemoK 👍 1
    All goods must be reserved against physical inventory, and all goods are FIFO. So A,B
Show 1 more comment
  1. T3nnaM 👍 1
    This can't be right. I'd say A and D?

Reader comments & corrections

No reader corrections yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.

Log in to comment, report an error, or add a note about this question.

Configure Asset Management for Fuel and Maintenance in Dynamics 365

S-grade

Configuring ABC Model Codes in Dynamics 365 SCM

S-grade

Dynamics 365 SCM Maintenance Round vs Plan

S-grade

Configuring Exporter Reporting for Shipments in D365 SCM

S-grade

← Back to MB-330 Study Guide