## TL;DR
The filing report is built from taxable sales documents; the GL payable account is built from postings. They disagree by 611.08 when sales were recorded outside the tax logic (manual invoices, marketplace sales, journals straight to the payable account) or when tax codes map to different GL accounts than the report expects. Rebuild the comparison by jurisdiction and tax code, not as one global number: for each jurisdiction, report tax versus GL movement for the quarter, and the 611.08 will sit in one or two cells. Trace the documents in the differing cell, correct the coding or record the missing tax through the sales path, and never plug the payable account to the report, because the next filing inherits the plug as a false opening position.

```text
sales tax payable GL balance does not match the filing report total for the quarter by 611.08
```

## Use this when
- Quarter-end sales tax payable in the GL differs from the tax filing report by a named amount, here 611.08.
- Sales flow through more than one channel: ERP invoices, e-commerce, marketplace facilitators.
- Manual journals have ever been posted to the tax payable account.

## Not for this skill when
- The question is what rate or nexus applies. That is a tax determination matter, not a reconciliation break.
- The report itself is known to be wrong because of a filing software defect. Fix the report source first.

## Steps
1. Produce the filing report by jurisdiction and tax code for the quarter and the GL payable movements analysed the same way. Verify: both sides are cut identically so cells can be compared one to one
2. Subtract report from GL per cell and total the differing cells against 611.08. Verify: the difference localises to named jurisdictions or codes
3. List the sales documents and journals in the differing cells and find those recorded outside the tax engine or coded direct to payable. Verify: the documents composing the difference are identified individually
4. Correct through the proper path: amend the document tax coding, or reverse the direct journal and record the tax via a sales document or tax-only entry the report picks up. Verify: corrections appear in both the GL and the report population
5. Re-run the cell comparison, confirm agreement by jurisdiction, and file the reconciliation with the return workpapers. Verify: payable and report tie per jurisdiction and the evidence is filed

## Variant phrasings
### sales tax payable GL does not match filing report quarter difference
The quarter-end mismatch symptom.
### sales tax reconciliation by jurisdiction tax code GL vs report
The structured method phrasing.
### marketplace sales tax recorded outside tax engine payable break
A frequent channel cause.

Compatibility: Sales tax reporting in Avalara, Vertex, Sovos and native ERP tax reporting, reconciled to GL tax payable accounts across US jurisdictions and VAT regimes.

## Why it happens
The report and the ledger are two extractions over different data. The report reads tax determinations on sales documents, the ledger reads accounting postings. Any sales channel that posts accounting without passing its documents through the same tax determination - marketplace imports summarised in journals, manual invoices with tax typed into a price field - moves one extraction without the other. Jurisdiction-level comparison works because these bypasses are channel-specific, and channels map to jurisdictions.

## Edge cases / pitfalls
- Marketplace facilitator tax collected by the platform must be excluded from both sides consistently; inconsistent exclusion is a classic 611-sized gap.
- Use tax accruals on purchases belong in the comparison for jurisdictions where the return combines sales and use tax.
- Filing amendments for prior quarters change report history; reconcile to the as-filed figures, not to a regenerated report.

## Provenance

Resolved from the public thread: https://vectle.com/posts/pst_I8qvx02rEyvEY3p52CoI9g