MB-310 Practice Question: Implement and Manage Accounts Payable and Expenses
A shared-services accounts payable team is preparing to run a weekly vendor payment proposal for 400 vendors. The team wants the proposal to consider only invoices that are due within the next ten days and only for vendors assigned to the 'Domestic' vendor group, and to exclude any invoice that is already in a payment hold. Which TWO parameters or filters must the team configure on the Vendor payment proposal to achieve this? (Choose two.)
⚠ Common exam trap
A common mix-up: candidates confuse invoice payment holds with the proposal's payment status field, which governs proposal-line approval rather than invoice eligibility.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Set the 'From date' and 'To date' fields on the proposal to the ten-day due-date window.
The payment proposal is driven by a query, and the two controls that shape its selection are the due-date range and vendor-level filters such as vendor group. Setting the from and to dates confines the proposal to the ten-day window, and filtering on the Domestic vendor group restricts it to the intended vendors. Payment status, on-hold inclusion, and payment schedules do not produce the requested selection.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Set the 'Payment status' field on the proposal to 'Approved'.
Why it's wrong here
Payment status on the proposal relates to whether a proposed payment line is approved within the proposal workflow, not to invoice-level payment holds. Selecting Approved would only show lines that have already been approved for payment, which is not the same as excluding invoices on hold. It would also omit newly generated lines that have not yet been reviewed, so it does not achieve the team's goal.
- ✗
Configure a payment schedule on each vendor's payment terms to spread the invoices across the ten days.
Why it's wrong here
Payment schedules control how a single invoice amount is split into installments over time; they do not filter which invoices enter a payment proposal. Setting up a schedule on the payment terms would change how individual invoices are paid but would not restrict the proposal by due date or vendor group. It is therefore unrelated to the two filtering requirements the team is trying to satisfy.
- ✓
Set the 'From date' and 'To date' fields on the proposal to the ten-day due-date window.
Why this is correct
The Vendor payment proposal includes date range criteria that limit which invoices are selected based on their due date. Entering the appropriate from and to dates restricts the proposal to invoices due within the next ten days, which is exactly what the team needs. Without this filter the proposal would sweep in all eligible open invoices regardless of due date, so this setting is required to meet the stated requirement.
- ✗
Enable the 'Include invoices on hold' parameter so those invoices appear in the proposal and can be reviewed.
Why it's wrong here
Enabling inclusion of on-hold invoices does the opposite of what the team wants. The requirement is to exclude invoices already in a payment hold, not to surface them for review. Turning this parameter on would add those invoices to the proposal and increase the risk of paying a vendor whose invoices are deliberately blocked, so it is definitively wrong for this scenario.
- ✓
Add a vendor group filter on the proposal query so only the 'Domestic' vendor group is included.
Why this is correct
The payment proposal query can be modified to include vendor-level criteria such as vendor group. Filtering on the Domestic vendor group ensures only invoices belonging to those vendors are proposed, which matches the team's requirement. This filter operates on the vendor record joined to the open transactions, so it is the correct way to restrict the proposal by vendor classification without changing each vendor record or the payment terms.
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every MB-310 question from scratch — 211 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official Microsoft exam blueprint
This MB-310 practice question is part of Courseiva's free Microsoft certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the MB-310 exam.