MB5B difference in opening stock and opening value

[former_member332424]

Dear,

When i look at MB5B is see some strange things. This screenshot is from 2019 but for 2020 the same is happening.

Can you explain why there is no opening stock but there is an opening value? Next to that in one case the stock is positive but the value negative????

Also the sum of the MB5B does not match the GL stock account. Any ideas how this could occur?

Thanks a million!

Mark

[former_member332424]

Sorry, here the screenshot

[TammyPowlas]

Hi Mark - we still do not see a screen shot.

[sanilbhandari · Accepted solution]

Hi

You should look at the explanation in OSS note below

https://launchpad.support.sap.com/#/notes/209629

This could be one of the reason for the differences. Also check if in 2019, the GL Account has any manual postings.

Thanks & Regards

Sanil Bhandari

[former_member332424 · Accepted solution]

Thanks Sanil,

I'll check it!

KR,

Mark

[former_member332424 · Accepted solution]

screenshot-stock-card-for-accounting.png

Hi Sanil,

the price change postings in a previous period are responsible for a part of the differences but not for all.

As you can see in the attachment (stock card for accounting) in the report Bijay mentioned (S_P00_07000139) the same material for the same period has 0 as opening value where it has a negative opening value in MB5B (screenshot-mb5b.png).

Its the 7th line from the bottom with the negative opening value - 39.058,23. Stock is 0.

You mention manual postings on the stock account. Is this the only other possible reason for this to happen?

Finance department is not satisfied with the answer to run S_P00_07000139 instead of MB5B, since MB5B always worked perfectly. They wonder what could've happened.

Thanks in advance!

KR.

Mark

[sanilbhandari · Accepted solution]

Hi

The reasons for this could be one of the following, but not restricted to:

1) MR21 related price change on the material

2) Manual postings on the GL Account

Thanks & Regards

Sanil Bhandari

[BijayKumarBarik]

You should find root cause but if no issue with report S_P00_07000139 and MB5B report is an concern for you, then you should go for Note/s implementation based on system behaviors.

[BijayKumarBarik]

Stock ZERO with negative value....

Check material price change happened with MR21 or Subsequent Credit/Subsequent Debit posted for that Material PO in MIRO

[former_member332424]

Thanks Bijay,

the material was created half 2019 and the first stock booking was in November. Then it already had the negative stock value even without having stock at all. I don't know how to check this. Any ideas? Transaction codes please.

Appreciated.

Mark

[former_member332424]

I think maybe we should implement note 2963312 (Wrong calculation of beginning stock value/quantity) and maybe 2985242 (Posting GR/GI in the previous closed period) although i don't think the second one would help.

[BijayKumarBarik]

Can check all with again movement types...

Cross check with similar report* in S_P00_07000139 with movements details for material/s and compare with MB5B

* For negative result( in case negative stock activated) you too can track material movement with movement type, if any!

[former_member332424]

Thanks Bijay,

First i will check whether Sanil's remark is the key to the solution, if not, i'll check yours.

Thanks

Mark

[former_member332424]

Hi Bijay,

I replied to Sanil as well with this comment. Maybe you have an explanation what could've happened.

the price change postings in a previous period are responsible for a part of the differences but not for all.

As you can see in the attachment (stock card for accounting)screenshot-stock-card-for-accounting.png in the report S_P00_07000139 the same material for the same period has 0 as opening value where it has a negative opening value in MB5B (screenshot-mb5b.png).

Its the 7th line from the bottom with the negative opening value - 39.058,23. Stock is 0.

Sanil mentions manual postings on the stock account. Is this the only other possible reason for this to happen?

Finance department is not satisfied with the answer to run S_P00_07000139 instead of MB5B, since MB5B always worked perfectly. They wonder what could've happened. They did implement enhancement- and supportpackages last year since a long time. Could this have anything to do with it you think?

Thanks in advance!

KR.

Mark

[former_member332424]

Again screenshotscreenshot-mb5b.png