on 06-27-2008 3:49 PM
Hi all,
We have a classic AUC acquisition process : through MM with IO allocation.
My question is = is it possible to automatically affect one VAT code relating to fixed asset acquisition during purchase order creation? (and not VAT relating to goods and services acquisition, we have to distinguish both with french rules).
The person in charge of PO creation don't have to choice between VAT codes, this is the reason why VAT code has to be affected automatically.
Thanks in advance for your answer.
Best Regards
Hi Horst,
Yes i'm OK with your example.
But, please can you say me in which field AS91 did we have to post Accm.ord.deprec 70.809,18 ?
This manual adjustement had been posted in Ordinary dep field, and after the first run, SAP reverse this amount.
Did we have to post it in "unplaned dep" field ?
How is it possible to correct it now?
Many thanks.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi Ocean,
if you use as91 you have to enter as followed:
Cum.acquis.val. 120.242,00 <- enter
Cum.down paymts
Cum.reval.of RV
Cum.invst.grant
Accm.ord.deprec 70.809,18 <- enter
Cum.Spec.dep.
Cum.unplnd.dep.
Cum.reserves
Cum.reval.O.dep
Net book value 49.432,82 <- calculated automatically
Cum. interest
Reval. posted
Ord.dep.posted 3.340,06 <- enter
Pstd.spec.dep.
Pstd.unpl.dep. 0,00
Res.posted
Of course SAP reverses the amount because it is entered as ord dep. posted (this means current fiscal year!!!) insted of accm. ord. depr. (depr. up to 31.12.2007)
The cum. depreciation up to 31.12.2007 has to be enterend in ACCM. ord. deprec.
The cum and posted depreciation from the current year has to entered in ORD.DEP.Posted, pls. have a look at my calculation.
How to correct the fields Ord.-dep. posted and Accm ord. dep? This depends on many parameters:
Have you carried out the datantransfer already in the P-System????
Any other postings for SAP AM already carried out
How many assets have to be changed.
You can reset the Companycode in AM (only recommendable if deprun is not posted and no other postings - retirements, aquisitions transfers have been entered). Then start a new upload
Even lsmw and a BI-recording as92 with the last screen could be a solution.
At least if you have only a few assets - correct them manually - it's not worth the effort to create a BIR and a LSMW - the user is faster.
Best regards
Horst
Hi Ocean,
sorry, maybe you have one of the following scenarios...
If the adjustment has not been posted in the old system:
-
Enter aquisition costs and cum. dep. up to 31.12.2007
Cum.acquis.val. 120.242,00 <- enter
Net book value 120.242,00 <- calculated automatically
Ord.dep.posted 3.340,06 <- enter
Pstd.unpl.dep. 0,00 <- enter
- Reconcile values with asset history sheet
- Post adjustment with ABMA or ABAA
If the adjustment has been posted in the old system in this year:
-
Cum.acquis.val. 120.242,00 <- enter
Net book value 120.242,00 <- calculated automatically
Ord.dep.posted 3.340,06 <- enter
Pstd.unpl.dep. 70.809,18 <- enter
Best regards
Horst
Hi HorstRn
Did you have time to have a look on my topic? Do you need some precisions?
Many thanks in advance for your help.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi HorstRn,
in your precedent answer, you said:
-
"If the adjustment has been posted in the old system in this year:
AS91 :
Cum.acquis.val. 120.242,00 <- enter
Net book value 120.242,00 <- calculated automatically
Ord.dep.posted 3.340,06 <- enter
Pstd.unpl.dep. 70.809,18 <- enter"
-
This is the right context we have. I follow procedure described above, but during the first depreciation run in SAP (period of may), SAP reverse the allocation posted in "Pstd.unpl.dep. 70.809,18"
Do you know why SAP reverse this posting, and how to do to avoid this reverse?
Thanks a lot for your assistance.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi Horst
in your last mail, you described the right context we have.
But when we post in "Pstd.unpl.dep." (through AS91), SAP wrtie-off this amount.
Do you know why ?
thanks
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi Horst,
Regarding VAT, i understand that the only possibility to affect the right VAT code is to check during invoice verification (MIRO). According to my client, i understand that they have some difficulties to recognise what is asset (capex) and what is expense (opex) during invoice verification step. I don't know why yet. I have to clarify this situation.
With your help, i understand that there is no possibility to automatically affect this VAT code (even with substitution rule linked?). So it's helpfull for me, because now i have to search after one process solution and not after customizing solution.
Regarding legacy adjustement, the issue is always open. where we have to put in manual adjustements during data transfer (regardin previous years), and how to correct actual situation.
Thanks in advance for your help.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hello Ocean,
regarding legacy transfer, pls. check:
120242,00 180
monthly = 668,01
year mo yearly
1999 10 6.680,11
2000 12 8.016,13
2001 12 8.016,13
2002 12 8.016,13
2003 12 8.016,13
2004 12 8.016,13
2005 12 8.016,13
2006 12 8.016,13
2007 12 8.016,13
cum 70.809,18 31.12.2007
p2008 amt. cum dep 08 total cum dep
1 668,01
2 668,01 1.336,02 72.145,20
3 668,01 2.004,03 72.813,21
4 668,01 2.672,04 73.481,22
5 668,01 3.340,06 74.149,23
6 668,01 4.008,07 74.817,24
Cum.acquis.val. 120.242,00
Accm.ord.deprec 70.809,18
Net book value 49.432,82
Ord.dep.posted 3.340,06
Best regards
Horst
Hello ocean,
both problems solved?
Best regards
Horst
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hello Ocean,
it is not possible to allocate a special VAT code only for Assets through the Purchasing process.
This depends on the inforecord MM. Therefore you have to take care - latest at the invoice verification - which taxcode is used.
Best regards
Horst
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
User | Count |
---|---|
110 | |
12 | |
11 | |
6 | |
5 | |
4 | |
4 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 |
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.