MIS reconciliation reports in BOFC

[Former Member]

Hi Friends,

Can any one of you help me in creating MIS intercompany reconciliation reports in BOFC.

I have created reconciliation definition and created a reported as per the rule, but i couldn't see any results When i run the schedule.

I strongly feel there is something wrong in the schedule.

can any one help me with how to create MIS intercompany reconciliation or if possible can you share sample reports on MIS intercompany reconciliation reports?

Thanks in advance!

Regards,

Anitha.V

[olivier_gentile · Accepted solution]

Hello Anitha,

The creation of intercompany reports in BOFC can be tricky.

Please find below two screenshots of a basic P&L reconciliation report.

Please note that for the selection tab you need to move the data source selection in columns (Action, Data Source, Column).

Second, you need to select intercompany reconciliation amounts items in "Other data sources" and not the regular "Amount data sources" that are package, preconsolidation or consolidation data.

Usually the report is initialized with "Conversion Difference" item in Schedule axis, and with "Buyer amount in local currency", "Seller amount in local currency", "Converted buyer amount", "Converted seller amount" in column axis. At the very end of the report the "Conversion difference" is selected to display the expected I/C differences.

In row axis you have to select the specific I/C reconciliation dimensions in the dimension palette that are located under "Intercompany réconciliations" entry. Dimensions "Reconciliation rule", "Buyer" and "Seller" are mandatory as all are generated by reconciliation rules. Additionnaly the regular partner dimension is also mandataory has all amounts are stored with partner detail.

The layout can be time consuming too until you reach the final version. Once you get correct amounts in your report it is all about trial and error regarding subtotals and formatting until you get familiar with these particular reports.

Hope this helps.

Regards.

Olivier

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Olivier,

Thanks for your reply.

I do get the results for BFC system but not for MIS system. Please look into below screenshot of my design for MIS Intercompany reconciliation report.

In MIS [Management Information system] we have Profit center and PMU. Our data is based on the profit center wise . so I am trying to extract the amounts profit center wise. you can see that in the below screenshot I have selected PMU and PC-H.

If you required for any other setting details such as Intercompany definition and rule configuration I will be providing you.

Could you Please help me in intercompany reconciliation settings and in report design for MIS.

It is really very urgent to update the status of the report to my client by this Monday.

Regards,

Anitha.V

[olivier_gentile · Accepted solution]

Dear Anitha,

Your report seems OK. It may be retrieving unnecessary data but not missing the ones your are looking for (you could just select "Agregated" on Partner dimension in columns in order to avoid future column expansion).

I will therefore do the following checks :

- no hitlist on your row block

- your intercompany test data are input in the packages at Partner/PMU/PC-H dimensions crossing

- packages containing your test data have been integrated before the consolidation ran

- both declaring entity and counterparty are consolidated at closing in the scope of the consolidation definition

- consolidation definition is correct (reporting ID corresonding to test data, scope with both entities)

- consolidation ran before intercompany reconciliation

- intercompany reconciliation definition is correct (source consolidation, set of reconciliation rules containing your TESTELIM rule or specific reconciliation rule equal to TESTELIM)

It may be also related to the setup of your TESTELIM reconciliation (selection of PMU/PC-H dimensions, seller accounts in line with seller-ENTIY dimension and buyer accounts in line with buyer-PARTNER dimension, missing FLOW dimension, etc.). If you could attached a screenshot of your reconciliation rule, I could check if it is correct.

Regards,

Olivier

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Olivier,

Thanks for your reply.

I am attaching the screenshot of our reconciliation rule "TEST ELIM".

Please look into below screenshot and Explanation of the each selection.

Seller- reporting unit : All Amounts

Buyer - Partner       : All Amounts

Flow: Utilisation - PL

Seller:                                                                         Buyer:

Account: Rule selection – ELIM51399        Account: Rule selection – ELIM62199

M41109 – Gross Sales Intercompany                  M62199 – I/C charges (corporate)

M42209 – Sales deductions Intercompany           M62198 – I/C charges (R&D) type 2

M51399 – I/C Purchases                                    M52199 – I/C charges (cost 1)

                                                                         M52299 – I/C charges (cost 2)

                                                                         M53199 – I/C charges (sales and marketing)

                                                                        M53299 - I/C charges (Administration)

                                                                        M53397 - I/C charges (R&D) type I

                                                                        M53398 - I/C charges (R&D) patents cost

                                                                        M53399 - I/C charges (R&D) others

                                                                        M53599 - I/C charges others

                                                                        M61199 - I/C charges (PMU)

                                                                        M41209 – other revenue Intercompany

In PMU and PC-H Dimension It is not mention any property.( I think this might also be a reason)

For your Information: As MIS system is a production system  I am scared to touch on rules or to make any changes.

Your Checks:

- no hitlist on your row block - "I dint get you on this line" what is hitlist you meant ?

- your intercompany test data are input in the packages at Partner/PMU/PC-H dimensions crossing - "Ya, Data is available at all these dimensions crossing"

- packages containing your test data have been integrated before the consolidation ran - " It is Integrated"

- both declaring entity and counterparty are consolidated at closing in the scope of the consolidation definition - "I do get the results when i run the same report at consolidated data and consolidated amount level without choosing reconciliation intercompany"

- consolidation definition is correct (reporting ID corresonding to test data, scope with both entities) -  "Consolidation definition is correct"

- consolidation ran before intercompany reconciliation - "Yes, this is also done"

- intercompany reconciliation definition is correct (source consolidation, set of reconciliation rules containing your TESTELIM rule or specific reconciliation rule equal to TESTELIM) - "I Need to make Sure on this also"

It may be also related to the setup of your TESTELIM reconciliation (selection of PMU/PC-H dimensions, seller accounts in line with seller-ENTIY dimension and buyer accounts in line with buyer-PARTNER dimension, missing FLOW dimension, etc.). - "Please Go through the screenshot and correct me if i had made worng".

Thanks in advance!

Regards,

Anitha.V

[olivier_gentile · Accepted solution]

Anitha,

Your problem is most probably linked to an incorrect selection of interco amounts in your reconciliation rule.

Indeed if your package inputs are done on Partner x PMU x PC-H crossing and no agregation is done at Partner level, your data will never be selected by your interconciliation rule wihtout adding PMU and PC-H dimensions in the method selection.

As non mandatory dimensions, if you don't specifiy them in the rule, the system will ignore the amounts stored on their crossing.

To fix your issue you need to specify a filter in Method column in front of PMU and PC-H rows. Both filters will have to select all values for each dimension (except if you want to exclude specific members). This fix is assuming that your reconciliation business principles are not pairing specific PMU and/or PC-H values together like you did with your set of seller/buyer accounts (it is rather all vs. all PMU/PC-H values).

Regards.

Olivier

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Olivier,

Many Thanks for your reply.

I will check on this and get back to you.

Regards,

Anitha.V

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Olivier,

Thanks you so much. you helped me a lot.

I got the results.

I am very Thank full to your valuable suggestions and support.

Have a nice weekend!

Regards,

Anitha.V