TL;DR
Multi currency equipment spend goes wrong long before anybody books an exchange rate. It goes wrong at the quote, where a dollar sign with no currency code, a regional pricing page and an unlabelled billing period can each change the real number by a wide margin. Normalise the quote first. Worry about the rate second.
- A dollar sign is not a currency. Several real currencies use it and vendors often omit the code.
- Regional pricing pages serve different numbers for the same product to different visitors.
- An unlabelled figure beside a monthly and yearly toggle is not a price you can compare.
- Normalise every quote to one currency, one period and one device count before comparing.
- Decide who carries the rate movement between quote, invoice and payment, and write it down.
- Duty and local taxes land on the invoice and are usually outside the quoted rate.
A dollar sign is not a currency
Start with the smallest problem, because it causes the largest errors.
A good number of suppliers publish a price with a symbol and no code. ChromeOS Enterprise Upgrade is listed at $4.17 per device per month as a recommended price, with no currency code anywhere near it. RemoAsset’s own subscription plan reads “Starts @ $1,499/year” on the same terms.
Best tools for Device Management
Neither is being evasive. It is simply how most pricing pages are written. The problem arrives when you put three such quotes in one spreadsheet and treat the symbols as equivalent.
ISO 4217, the standard that assigns three letter currency codes exists precisely because symbols are ambiguous. More than one currency uses the dollar sign, and several use it with very different values. A quote that does not name its code is a quote you have to confirm.
The regional page trap
The same product can carry different published numbers depending on which regional page you land on. Google’s Australian page shows a per-device annual figure for the Enterprise Upgrade, while the page served elsewhere shows a per-device monthly figure. Same product, two numbers, two currencies, no contradiction.
If you are comparing suppliers from different countries, somebody on your team is looking at a different page from the one you are reading. Record the URL alongside the figure and the problem disappears.
The unlabelled billing period
The second trap is harder to spot because the number looks complete.
Dots publishes a Pro plan showing $3,500 and $300 together, with a monthly and yearly toggle and a note about saving per year. The page does not say which figure belongs to which period. A reader can reasonably guess, and a reasonable guess is not a procurement input.
This is the same defect as the missing currency code in a different coat. The figure is real. The label is missing. Without the label, the annual commitment could be out by a factor of ten.
What to extract before anything else
- The currency code, not the symbol, confirmed in writing.
- The billing period, and whether the displayed figure is the monthly equivalent of an annual commitment.
- The unit, meaning per device, per user, per workspace or flat.
- The minimum, in devices, seats or term.
- What is excluded, which is usually shipping, duty and local taxes.
Five answers. Until you have all five from every supplier, you do not have comparable quotes, and no amount of exchange rate work will make them comparable.
Normalising multi currency equipment spend
Disclosure: RemoAsset, named below, is owned by the same people who publish HROpsLab. Its own published pricing is used here as an example of the same labelling problem found at other suppliers. This site takes no vendor money.
Once the five answers are in, the comparison is arithmetic. Pick one currency, one period and one device count, and restate everything into them.
| What the quote says | What to record | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Symbol only | Three letter code | Several currencies share a symbol |
| Per month | Annual equivalent | Monthly display often hides an annual commitment |
| Per device | Cost at your real count | Per unit rates hide minimums and tiers |
| Starts at | The configuration priced | An entry rate rarely matches your setup |
| Excludes shipping | Shipping as a separate line | It lands on the invoice either way |
Use one published reference rate for the conversion and say which one you used. the European Central Bank reference rates is a common choice because the rates are published daily and anybody can check them. The point is not accuracy to the cent. The point is that two people doing the comparison get the same answer.
Where a supplier publishes nothing at all, write quote-based in the cell rather than estimating. An estimate in a comparison table becomes a fact the moment somebody copies the table into a deck.
Who carries the rate movement
Now the part finance cares about. A rate can be fixed at three different moments, and the contract decides which.
At the quote. The supplier commits to a figure in your currency for a stated window. You know the number. The supplier carries the movement, and usually prices that in.
At the invoice. The supplier bills in their currency and converts on the invoice date. You carry the movement between agreeing and being billed.
At payment. You are billed in the supplier’s currency and your bank converts when you pay. You carry the movement and the bank’s spread, and the spread is often the larger of the two.
None of these is wrong. What causes trouble is not knowing which one applies until the first invoice disagrees with the budget.
The accounting side
Differences between the rate at which a liability is recorded and the rate at which it is settled do not vanish. They land in the accounts. IAS 21, the accounting standard for foreign exchange differences is the standard that sets out how those differences are treated under IFRS, and your finance team will already have a policy for it.
What they usually will not have is a view on equipment specifically, because equipment spend is small relative to payroll and arrives irregularly. Ask them once, record the answer, and stop rediscovering it each quarter.
Duty and local taxes sit outside the quoted rate
A per-device rate almost never includes what it costs to land the device.
Import duty, local sales taxes and clearance charges are assessed where the device arrives, on a value declared at the border. They are not part of a software-style per-device rate and they are frequently not part of a hardware quote either.
This matters most when the same model goes to several countries. One rate, several landed costs, and the spread between them can be wide enough to change which specification you buy.
Two practical habits help. Ask every supplier whether the quoted figure is landed or pre-landed, in those words. And ask who acts as importer, because that determines who is liable for the charges and who reclaims any recoverable tax.
Where a single supplier handles buying and delivery across markets, those charges are usually quoted as part of the service rather than appearing later, which is the practical appeal of procurement handled country by country. Worth stating the limit: consolidating the quote does not remove the duty, it moves who deals with it and when you find out.
The decision table
| Situation | Scale | Setup | Primary pain | Recommended starting point |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| First overseas hire | Under 50 | One currency so far | No comparison method | Record currency code and period on every quote |
| Quotes will not reconcile | 50 to 200 | Several suppliers | Figures not comparable | Normalise to one currency, period and count |
| Invoices beat the budget | Any | Billed in supplier currency | Rate moves after agreement | Settle where the rate is fixed, in the contract |
| Same model, many countries | Distributed | Local buying | Landed cost varies widely | Ask landed or pre-landed on every quote |
| Finance asks for a forecast | Any | Irregular spend | No stated policy | Agree one reference rate and reuse it |
What to write down once and reuse
The reason this keeps costing time is that the answers live in people’s heads and get rediscovered every purchase. Five lines in a document fix most of it.
Name the reporting currency you compare in, and the reference rate source you use to get there. Anybody producing a comparison then produces the same numbers.
State where the rate is fixed by default, and what you will accept instead. If your position is that suppliers quote in your currency, say so before the negotiation rather than during it.
Say what the quoted figure must include. Landed or pre-landed, shipping in or out, taxes stated separately. Put it in the request, not the evaluation.
Record the URL and date for every published price you rely on. Pricing pages change and regional pages differ, and a dated link settles arguments that would otherwise take an afternoon.
Decide who reconciles the first invoice against the quote, and make it a named person. This is the control that catches everything above, and it is the one most often skipped.
When consolidating suppliers is the real answer
If the comparison work is heavy because you hold a different supplier in each market, the normalisation will never get easier. You are not comparing prices, you are translating between five pricing models.
Consolidating to one supplier replaces that with a single rate card and one currency, which is a genuine reduction in work rather than a cosmetic one. A single lifecycle supplier covering several countries is the usual shape. The honest caveat is that one supplier is rarely the cheapest in every individual market, so you are trading some unit cost for comparability and less administration.
For the contract terms that decide what the rate actually buys, see our guide to equipment vendor pricing models.
See how one rate card across markets works with country by country laptop procurement, or read our guide to equipment vendor pricing models.
Frequently asked questions
Why is multi currency equipment spend so hard to compare?
Because the quotes differ in more ways than the currency. A published figure can omit the currency code, show a monthly number for an annual commitment, price per device when your minimum is per seat, or exclude the duty and taxes that land on the invoice. Fixing the exchange rate solves one of those and leaves the other four. Normalise currency, period, unit, minimum and exclusions first, and the comparison becomes arithmetic.
Is a dollar sign enough to identify the currency?
No. Several currencies use the dollar sign and their values differ substantially, which is why ISO 4217 assigns three letter codes. Pricing pages routinely show the symbol alone, including ChromeOS Enterprise Upgrade at $4.17 per device per month and RemoAsset’s own subscription at Starts @ $1,499 a year. Neither is hiding anything, but neither tells you the code, so confirm it in writing before the figure enters a comparison.
Where should the exchange rate be fixed?
At the quote, at the invoice or at payment, and the contract decides. Fixing at the quote puts the movement on the supplier, who will usually price for it. Fixing at invoice or payment puts it on you, and payment also adds your bank’s spread, which is often the larger cost. No option is wrong. The failure is not knowing which applies until an invoice disagrees with the budget.
Do quoted device rates include import duty?
Usually not. Duty, local sales taxes and clearance charges are assessed where the device arrives, against a value declared at the border, and they sit outside most per-device rates. Ask every supplier whether the figure is landed or pre-landed in exactly those words, and ask who acts as importer, because that decides who is liable and who can reclaim anything recoverable.
What reference rate should we use for comparisons?
Any published daily rate works as long as you name it and use it consistently. The European Central Bank publishes reference rates that anybody can check, which makes them a common choice. Precision to the cent is not the point. The point is that two colleagues building the same comparison arrive at the same answer, and that a supplier can see how you got there.
Should we consolidate to one supplier to avoid this?
It helps if the comparison work is heavy because you hold a different supplier in each market. One supplier means one rate card, one currency and one set of exclusions, which is a real reduction in administration. The trade is that a single supplier is rarely cheapest in every individual market, so you are buying comparability with some unit cost. Price both before deciding.
What should we record about a published price?
The figure, the currency code, the billing period, the unit, the minimum, the exclusions, the exact URL and the date you read it. Pricing pages change without notice and regional versions show different numbers for the same product, so a dated link is what settles a disagreement later. Without it you are arguing from memory about a page that has since been updated.
