Hi Arturo
Are you also suggesting to pass a provisional FI Entries???
Im not really sure whether i fully understood your FI Comments, Can you please elaborate on that, what is the concept of having a provisional entries? and what exactly need to be done?
Hi Aravind,
your requirement is not entirely clear, but if it is this:
for each primary cost element on a cost center you want to use the corresponding secondary cost element in the assessment to COPA.
then the solution ist the following:
Go to KSES and define an allocation structure that maps each of your relevant primary cost elements to the corresponding secondary cost element.
In KEU5, in each segment of your cycle, enter the allocation structure you just created and leave the field for Assessment Cost element blank.
This way you will be able to identify the original primary cost elment from the cost centers in your costing based COPA (through the correspondence with the secondary cost element used to post the allocations) which I think your requirement amounts to.
Regards
Nikolas
Hi Mona,
please try these threads. they got the answer.
https://scn.sap.com/thread/1078796
http://scn.sap.com/thread/1522813
Regards,
Nag
Hi..
First, You should remove cost center group from used
lists(ex:allocation cycle, allocation structure, transfer structure, splitting structure, report layout ,etc)
of cost center group.
If cost center group is group of standard hierarchy , you delete or
change cost center group using t-code OKKEN.
If cost center group is group of non-standard hierarchy , you delete or
change cost center group using t-code KSH2.
If cost center group of non-standard hierarchy have
group of standard hierarchy as lower group, you remove standard
hierarchy group from non-standard hierarchy group and delete
non-standard hierarchy group and delete Standard hierarchy group.
Hi..
Refer to below picture..
Hi
change manually the percentages in maintenance order as required IW32-extras- settlement rule- percentages
Krishna
Check in KP26 of for the activity in cost center if Activity Price for given period activity for CA02 is exist. If not you need first maintain values for the activity in KP26 for the period and then do ck11n.
Best Regards
Hrusikesh
Dear Anagha
Have u done indirect activity allocation for this activity? Kindly check your Cost component structure, whether this activity type is mapped in your cost component structure?
Regards
Rajneesh Saxena
Hi Dear,
Please check the settings below in Customizing:
Hello Dear,
Kindly please let us know which release ..version ? In the mean time, pls check these Snote-
Note 364624 - MIRO, MR1M: Error message FS217
Note 368376 - MIRO: G/L account postings not relevant for tax
Note 801082 - MIRO: various FI errors with direct posting of material
Thanks,Uday
Hi,
While doing goods receipt from production order against sales order stock it’s generating material document but in display mode there is no accounting documents. In that case we fiend below error
Document Number.........002695
Controlling Area......... xyz
Fiscal Year.............. 2013
Business Transaction..... COIN CO Through-postings from FI
File Description
COBK CO Object: Document Header
COEP CO Object: Line Items (by Period)
COEPL CO Object: Line Items for Activity Types (by Period)
is there anything missing
Thanks
Sampat
Dear Sampat
Please Check whether FG material has costing views or not. Also check your material may not be having Standard Cost at costing 2 tab for the period under consideration. If so reverse GR document then do standard cost estimate for material and redo GR.
Regards
Rajneesh Saxena
Hi Toidi,
I am convinced with Arturo's method of applying the change in price. Just do the price change in the new period before you close the ML period for the previous period. If you do this, there will not be any price differences posted. Please check his blogs for full understanding.
However if you do the price change in the new period after you close the old period, price differences will be captured.
So just remember this rule and change the price of all materials and let us know the outcome. Good luck!
This is not true Venkat, using CKMVFM we cannot exclude price differences to be actualized.
Hi Rudi/Choi,
Thanks for your inputs. In your above steps the following statement may not be true :-
"When you release the new std cost for next period, the difference will be posted in PRD account. Only at the period end closing the actual cost wil be revaluate again with this price difference."
According to Arturo's blogs, you can confirm that as long as you do a price change before the ML close of the previous period, there will not be any price differences posted. So the above statement is not true.
Hi Arturo,
I agree you are the king in this area..Thanks for all your blogs and explanation. I am yet to test it but i think what you are proposing does make sense. Please keep in touch.
Explore Note 214381.
SAP does not recommend posting the COGS to CO-PA during the goods issue since in standard it is posted to CO-PA via the VPRS condition in the billing document.
However in this case the You should think of switching off the VPRS posting to CO-PA during billing to avoid double posting of COGS.
Best Regards
Hrusikesh
Hello Sampat,
This is a normal behavior in case of production order against Sales order Stock. change the Requirement class for costing
see below link
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_470/helpdata/en/90/ba6da4446711d189420000e829fbbd/content.htm
also
You specify the account assignment category D in the requirement class
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_erp60_sp/helpdata/en/a5/6abf04787f11d2b6650000e82d8bd1/content.htm
Best regards
Hrusikesh
Yes i think you can do it. i will love to see what experts are saying on this
be cautious when activating split valuation, see below link for reference.
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_40b/helpdata/EN/1c/1a39516e36d1118b3f0060b03ca329/content.htm
Best Regards
Hrusikesh
Sanjay,
Regardless of in which month you post the price change for the standard, an accounting entry will be generated for the price difference, and this difference will be reallocated to next level materials in the multi-level price determination. There is no way to prevent this from happening. I think if you do price change for the next period before the close of the previous period, then the price difference will be waiting for you to mess up the standards in the following month-end closing. I don't believe this price difference is going to disappear.
Hope you can validate this in your testing. I will only be happy to know that you do succeed, and twice as happy since it is Arturo's idea.
Cheers,
TD