Skip to Content
0

Project System MIRO problem budget exceeded

Aug 08, 2017 at 03:14 PM

139

avatar image

Hi guys,

I'm getting the below message while trying to post an invoice thru MIRO

I've already tried CJBN and CJEN, but without any luck.

Below a print screen from S_ALR_87013558

The budget is indeed exceeded, but business says it should not be. Any idea why this might happen?

Might there be some pending PO's that consume the budget?

Any idea or suggestion where to check would be greatly appreciated. Do let me know if you need any other information.

Regards,

Nick

gcqwe.png (24.0 kB)
fqaf7.png (16.4 kB)
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded
* Please Login or Register to Answer, Follow or Comment.

2 Answers

Maria Terence Aug 09, 2017 at 09:16 AM
0

Hi Nick,

Budget is exceeded by some amount.

You can compare CJI1 - Budget Line items, check whether how much it was posted.

CJI3 - Get the Actuals

CJI5 - Get the Commitments

These reports will confirm the amount it was posted, business has to confirm whether any posting was made incorrect. Rather thinking about technical issue, this looks like consulting.

Also check on the deletion items, whether the posting has taken into account, which will be a inconsistency.

*558 report has technical issues, in case if these values didn't match, then we need a correction in SAP notes.

Regards

Terence

Share
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded
Paulo Vitoriano Aug 09, 2017 at 09:08 AM
0

This is not the best report to do analysis on budget availability control, you must run ABAP report from CJ30 transaction. That is important if you have any exceptions and exclude certain costs from the budget control.

As a note you should not have a Not assigned value category for actual cost, it does not impact here, but can impact other places.

Imagine that you have some accruals at month-end that are already accounted for as part of commitments, so that can be one of the illustrations to get misleading data for the budget availability control.

Show 4 Share
10 |10000 characters needed characters left characters exceeded

Hi Paulo,

Thanks for the reply, much appreciated.

Below the screen shot from CJ30


I checked CJV2 transaction and indeed there is a cost element (category 90, so that would be a statistical cost element) that is not assigned to any value category. The cost element is a asset reconciliation account for a asset under construction. This is the receiver from the settlement rule. Should this cost element be assigned to a value category as well? Should it be a value category with the suppress indicator active?

From my understanding, statistical postings do consume budget and should not be considered in the overall budget. Is this correct? This might be affecting the budget artificially and should be eliminated.

Regards,

Nick

screenshot-1.png (55.0 kB)
screenshot-2.png (1.7 kB)
0

Hi Nick,

In CJ30 you need to check from the menu Extras -> Availability control -> Analysis. That will be a line item report that will show you what is included and what is not into availability control.

Normally you would have statistical balance sheet cost elements for project stock (material accounts), and those would be relevant for the budget availability control.

The Asset recon account is normally created as a cost element when you buy some assets using statistical internal order for the purpose of budget control, but in the normal project scenario I do not see the need to have asset accounts as cost elements. But since it is there already you can exclude it from the budget availability control, same as the settlement account that must be already excluded.

For all 90 category I'd say one value category like Statistical Balance Sheet, it still can be updated, but in your scenario I believe it was wrong to create a cost element for asset recon account at first place, unless it is used in other budget control scenarios.

Regards,

Paulo

1

Hi Paulo,

How do I exclude it from the budget availability control?

Thanks,

Nick

0

Transaction OPTK.

1