FI Invoice Posting - Wrong Value Type is being picked.

[Former Member]

Dear Experts

When we are posting the FI Vendor Invoice through transaction code F-43 or FB01, FI and FM Documents are generated.

But in the FM Document, Value Type 66 is picking instead of 54.

Kindly let us know why the wrong Value Type is being picked.

Thank you for your support.

Thanks and Regards

PVSRG

[mar_novalbos]

Hello

This is normally due to the combination of financial transactions associated to the commitment items involved.

Normally , the system determines a value type 54 from an invoce if the vendor item has FT 60 and the expenses item has FT 30.

Value type 66 occurs when the combination is 30-30 (transfer posting)

Please turn the trace of FMDERIVE on, and post a new invoice. then see what commitment items and financial transactions are involved.

Alternatively you can run report RFFMS009 with an already posted invoice, so that you can see what FT's were used in the posting.

A 30-30 combination is translated into value type 66 in FM.

Hope this helps

Kind regards

Mar

[Former Member]

Dear Mar Novalbos

Thank you very much for your reply.

In our organisaton we want to give the Budget for our Balance Sheet G/L Accounts also.

Then which 'Financial Transaction' and 'Commitment Item Category' need to be used for for Balance Sheet Commitment Items???

We request you to provide your valuable inputs.

Thanks and Regards

PVSRG

[Former Member]

Hi, depends on which balance account you use and how do you want to reflect these transaction.

Eg if you use FT=30 and 90 then you have value type 54(invoice) and 57(payment)

Also read this http://help.sap.com/saphelp_erp60_sp/helpdata/en/9f/9a082c576611d295960000e835339d/content.htm

Edited by: Aleksey Tkachenko on Nov 15, 2011 8:24 AM

[mar_novalbos]

Hi

This note is helpful too:

[Note 1466979 - FM Financial transactions to be used in FI line items|https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/1466979]

b/r

Mar

[Former Member]

Dear Mar Novalbos

Thank you for your reply and valuable inputs. We have gone through SNote.

We request your kind inputs on below points:

1. In our case FM Document was crerated with Value Type 66 instead of 54 since we had Commitment Item with FT '30'/CI Category '2'. Because of which, please let us know the other impacts if any like in Report etc.,

2. We had already created some Commitment Items for our Balance Sheet G/L Accounts with different 'Financial Transaction' not as mentioned in the standard list which you have provided in mentioned SNote. Is there any impact?? And how to correct the same, because system is not allowing to change as transactions had already been posted.

We request your kind reply on above.

Thanks and Regards

PVSRG

[mar_novalbos]

Hi,

1) the impact is that the system interprets the posted document as an expense/revenue transfer instead of an invoice. As such,

you will see in reporting that the budget consumption decreased in one side and increased on the other side.

And for instance, as such document is not an invoice, you will not see payment records in FM when that document will be cleared (if ever)

2) You might reverse the document and create it again with valid account assignment. See this thread:

[;

kind regards

Mar

[Former Member]

Dear Mar Novalbos

Thank you for your valuable inputs/advice.

As per our business requirement, Budget need to be uploaded for all Balance Sheet nature Commitment Items, hence we need to give 'Financial Transaction 30' for all the B/S Commitment Items.

Kindly suggest if we follow above process is correct or not???

Thanks and Regards

PVSRG

[mar_novalbos]

Hi

ok. And what FT do you have in the vendor line? you should have a financial transaction 60 if you wish to achieve a value type 54.

please check that

regards

Mar

[Former Member]

Dear Mar Novalbos

Thank you for your reply.

In Vendor line Commitment Item, we have the Financial Transaction 30.

As you suggested, if we put FT 60, we can not upload the Budget for that Commitment Item. As per our business requirement we need to give the budget for that Commitment Item.

Please advice.

Thanks and Regards

PVSRG

[Former Member]

Hi, I advise you to read some info about updates in FM.

For value type 54, you need 2 items-eg

Dr P/L account CI with FT=30

Cr vendor CI with FT=60. In this case you have budget consumption for CI with FT=30 and value type=54

[Former Member]

Dear Expert

Thank you for information.

As you suggested we have gone through the respective information from SAP Help.

Since our business has now decided NOT to provide/create the budget for all Balance Sheet Commitment Items, we are planning to use 'Financial Transaction' '50' or '60' for all B/s Commitment Items.

If we follow like above, please let us know the implications if any.

Thanks and Regards

PVSRG

[Former Member]

Hi, depends on how you'll build derivation strategy.You need to investigate reversing old document, herecould be issues with budget consumption, eg if new CI will updated.

For future transaction I don't see any issues. But you need to verify you available budget, because it could be consumend incorrectly

[Former Member]

Hi

If your busiess does not want to upload budget for Balance Sheet Commitments and also if AVC check is not required then, you can create Balance Sheet Commitments by giving FT other than 30 ( say example 60 or 50 ).

But if you create first time balance sheet commitment items before postings being happened then it is ok.

In case if you had already created B/S CI by using FC 30 and also some posting were happened ,now if u want to change FT in the balance sheet commitment items, system will not allow for chaning FT.

Only you need to create new commitment items and derivarion rules. In this case the iformation has provided by Mr. Aleksey Tkachenko.

Regards

Rao

[Former Member]

Dear Aleksey Tkachenko

We request you to provide your further inputs on our doubts.

Thanks and Regards

PVSRG

[Former Member]

Hi, check Commitment item in both items in fi doc, seems they have bus.transaction 30

Oh,just saw Mar's answer

Edited by: Aleksey Tkachenko on Nov 14, 2011 3:01 PM