Skip to Content
0

Tr. F9HL for IHC

Jan 21, 2017 at 12:53 PM

33

avatar image
Former Member

Hello IHC experts,

As of Tr. F9HL is the GL transfer used for BCA which has originally the logic of banking applications, I´m struggling with GL transfer logic of IHC payment orders.

E.g. for an internal payment order generated with IHC1IP;

- Credited (vendor ) which is considered as + in the BCA system

- Debited (customer) which is considered as - in the BCA system

This is correct from the perspective of IHC current accounts. So far so good...

But the moment we are considering Tr. F9HL, the GL postings show the opposite sense;

- Credited (vendor) which is considered as - in the BCA system

- Debited (customer) which is considered as + in the BCA system

This logic should be correct from the perspective of a bank; a credit in current accounts represent liability for a bank. But this perspective is not applicable to IHC; a vendor cannot have a 'liability' posting sense for the credit it has in the BCA...

See attached the screenshotstrf9i7-f9hl-i.pngtrf9i7-f9hl-ii.png. I tried with the OSS but I only got a 'that´s how F9HL works in the BCA...' I didn´t find out the correct way to reach the proper GL posting sense for IHC.

Any guidance?

Thanks a lot and best regards.

trf9i7-f9hl-i.png (106.2 kB)
trf9i7-f9hl-ii.png (194.3 kB)
ihc
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded
* Please Login or Register to Answer, Follow or Comment.

0 Answers