Commitment reduction by downpayments

Hello experts,
I'm having a problem with commitment reduction by down payment.
We enter downpayments referenced to POs and that is generating available budget that can be incorrectly used by other operations.
We have EA-PS 600. My question is the following: How could we do in order to avoid the commitment reduction in the down payments?
Checking at the note 1001216, I can see that commitment is still reduced by downpayments.
Another mentioned note 1126105 should not be considered because it applies to upd profile 000350 while we are using 000101.
I would really appreciate your help on this matter.
Kind Regards.
Mariano.

Eli, sorry for the inconvenience, let me explain it taking Minghong Ji's example.
Right now our situation is the following:
Budget: $1050
1. Post a PO of $1000:
commitment = $1000 (VT 51);
available budget = $1050 - $1000 = $50
2. Post downpayment $200 (VT 61):
commitment = $1000 - $200 = $800;
available budget = total budget - commitments - actuals = $1050 - $800 - 0 = $250 (overvalued available budget)
We have then two options for the available budget to be correct:
1- The commitment not being reduced by the downpayment (the original question).
2- The downpayment reducing the commitment (VT 51) and also the budget by the real posting (VT61) in the same funds center / commitment item (the second question posted after Minghong Ji's explanation).
How should that be handled?
Kind Regards and thank you for your patience and help.

Similar Messages

Commitment reduction by down payment

Hello experts,
When we enter a down payment request with a purchase order reference, it reduces the commitment until the invoice verification. During this time it is possible that the values decommit be used in other operations. How could we do in order to avoid the commitment reduction in the down payments?
Thanks for your help,
Regards,
Diana

Hello experts,
I'm having the same problem with commitment reduction by down payment.
We enter downpayments referenced to POs and that is generating available budget that can be incorrectly used by other operations.
We have EA-PS 600. My question is the same as Diana's: How could we do in order to avoid the commitment reduction in the down payments?
Checking at the note 1001216, I can see that commitment is still reduced by downpayments.
The other mentioned note 1126105 should not be considered because it applies to upd profile 000350 while we are using 000101.
I would really appreciate your help on this matter.
Kind Regards.
Mariano.

Wrong commitment reduction when clearing down payments

Hi, we are implementing PSM-FM in ERP version 6.0. We have BCS and
online payment update activated.
We are having problems regarding down payment clearings.The commitment
reduction is not working properly.
Detailed explanation:
1. We created a purchase order for a single material. FM Account
assignments to a single funds center for $500.000.(doc number 11000006).
FM integration ok!: a record for value type 51 (purchase orders), value
$500.000 is created.
2. We then create a down paymen request (trx F-47) for $100.000 with
reference to the previous purchase order.
No FM repercussion which is ok!
3. We then pay (via F110) the down payment request. We got a down
payment document for $100.000 (doc 90000008).
FM integration ok!: a record for value type 61 (down payments), value
$100.000 is created. A reduction (amount type 0200) for $100.000 also
is recorded in value type 51 (purchase orders).
4. We then make a partial goods receipt (MIGO) for $ 500.000.
No FM repercussions / postings which is ok.
5. Next, we make a partial invoice receipt (MIRO), for $110.000, total
$134.200, including VAT for $24.200 (doc 300000030).
FM integration ok!: a record for value type 54 (invoices), value
$110.000 is created. A reduction (amount type 0200) for $110.000 also
is recorded in value type 51 (purchase orders).
6. Next we partially clear the down payment against the invoice. We
need only to clear $20.000 from the original $100.000. We use trx F-54
for this. (doc 300000031)
FM integration ok!: a record for value type 61 (down payment), negative
value $20.000 is created. A record (amount type 0200) for $20.000 also
is recorded in value type 51 (purchase orders).
7. We then pay the invoice (via F110), taking into account the credit
for the previous $20.000. (doc 900000016)
FM integration issues:
7a) For value type 54 (invoices) a reduction (amount type 0200) for
value $93.606,56 is recorded.
7b) A "paid" (amount type 0250) for $93.606,56 also is recorded in
value type 57 (payments).
We do not desire nor understand why the system behaves like this. We
are
familiar with previous versions and the desired behavior in a 5.0
system would have been:
The total amount of the paid invoice ($ 110.000) be recorded as
a "paid" (amount type 0250) in value type 57 (payments).
If not, we would never see the total amount of the invoice as "paid".
Please, can you help me?
Regards,

Hi Diego,
I suggest you to review note 400924 since all existing critical business cases (already defined for RFFMS200) remain valid also for payment online update. I also suggest you to check the documentation using the F1 help in transaction OF29.
Make sure notes 1150182, 1166048 and 1224438 are applied in your system.
You can find information about the down payment functionality in consulting note 1279351 and also in its related notes 1001216, 532725. Also make sure your customizing is in accordance with the payment update online manual.
I hope the information above helps you.
Regards, Mateus

Service PO commitment assigned to statistical IO is not get reduced.

PO is created with Account assigned to Internal Order stastically and Cost center as real cost object. Wih PO creation we check commitment in system
According to standard SAP, at creation of PO, system creates commitment & while doing GR/IR, system should reduce PO commitment and increase actual by that amount. Service PO is created for amount 239200 USD with Account Assigned Category K, Item category D, Account assigned to Cost Center & Statistical Orders (9 orders by approximate 11% ) So, initially there is commitment of 26000 USD on each service order. However from March 2009 onward business has done GR and IR for this PO approximate 50000 USD but nor commitment have reduced neither any commitment line item were posted in system.
As a result of it, business actual budget is fully consumed by (Commitment + Actual) and while doing IR budget deficient errors is received.
Here main problem is, non reduction of Service PO commitment while doing GR and IR.
Tried below approch so far.
CoAr / Order type Comitment acitive, Costcenter updates commitment and GL is valid on delivery date. Service PO order unit is JOB and commitment reduction is based on value match with PO details.
In order to test really probelm is with Commitment updation or reporting. I checked COOI and COSP with reference to object no.
but there is only one posting in line item of original PO amount and at total level there are two posting one is origiona one and seocind is with zero amount. but in both total line item for one of the peiod quantity is incomplete even after clicking Final Invoice.
Even after final Invoice ticked thre is not commitment line item gets posted in system. Even I run RKANBU01 program.
This is quite strange, if some one can give me other suggestion to proceed further.
With Regards
Nitin P.

1.on Statstical IO there is only one PO commitment which posted when PO originally created. After that once you do GR/IR with refrence to that PO system should reduce that original commitment and post actuals. So, I mean here while doing GR/ IR "Nor commitment is reduced neither any commitment line item were posted in system"
2. I mean here on ticking Final Invoice button system should ideally close original commitment of that PO, with this tick in system only original PO amount commitment line item is there and no any addtional line itme gets posted with values.
"Even after final Invoice ticked thre is not commitment line item gets posted in system"
I hope this would be clear. I due restrication in accss and Master data relevant issue, I am not able to replicate exact scenario in other environment. Let me know any one else have different opinion / understanding this will helps.
With Regards
Nitin P.

Service PO Commitment with reference to statistical IO is not get reduced.

PO is created with Account assigned to Internal Order stastically and Cost center as real cost object. Wih PO creation we check commitment in system
According to standard SAP, at creation of PO, system creates commitment & while doing GR/IR, system should reduce PO commitment and increase actual by that amount. Service PO is created for amount 239200 USD with Account Assigned Category K, Item category D, Account assigned to Cost Center & Statistical Orders (9 orders by approximate 11% ) So, initially there is commitment of 26000 USD on each service order. However from March 2009 onward business has done GR and IR for this PO approximate 50000 USD but nor commitment have reduced neither any commitment line item were posted in system.
As a result of it, business actual budget is fully consumed by (Commitment + Actual) and while doing IR budget deficient errors is received.
Here main problem is, non reduction of Service PO commitment while doing GR and IR.
Tried below approch so far.
CoAr / Order type Comitment acitive, Costcenter updates commitment and GL is valid on delivery date. Service PO order unit is JOB and commitment reduction is based on value match with PO details.
In order to test really probelm is with Commitment updation or reporting. I checked COOI and COSP with reference to object no.
but there is only one posting in line item of original PO amount and at total level there are two posting one is origiona one and seocind is with zero amount. but in both total line item for one of the peiod quantity is incomplete even after clicking Final Invoice.
Even after final Invoice ticked thre is not commitment line item gets posted in system. Even I run RKANBU01 program.
This is quite strange, if some one can give me other suggestion to proceed further.
With Regards
Nitin P.

Hi Nitin,
When in the purchasing document, the indicator goods receipt
non-valuated is NOT set, the commitments will take into account the
information from the GOODS RECEIPT booked against the purchasing
document in order to reduce the commitments. In this case
the commitment can be reduced fully by setting the final delivery
indicator in the PO item (EKPO-ELIKZ).
When the indicator for non-valuated goods receipt is set, then system
will use the invoice information in order to reduce the commitments.
In this case EKPO-EREKZ can reduce the commitment to 0.
For positions that are using quantity-based commitments (Customizing ->
General settings -> Check unit of measurement), the commitments will be
reduced based on the quantity invoiced and not in the value. In transaction CUNI, the unit of measurements used at PO ITEM
level must be set to value based commitment.
For the commitments reduction the base value used is always the local
amount. The commitments will be reduced according with the actual posted
amount in local currency and in order to reduce the committed value in
the foreign currency, system converts the actual amount in local
currency using the exchange rate from the purchasing document.
In transaction OKKP, the commitment management indicator must be
active for the given controlling area in the current fiscal year.
Cost centers: In transaction KS02, in register "Control", the
commitment update indicator must NOT be set.
Check also the attached notes carefully in order to solve
your problem:
735404    Delivery completed indicator, final entry sheet indicator
634298    FAQ: Commitment update in the service
772206    Commitment Update in Service Purchase Orders
639523    Commitments reduction behavior for Purchasing documents
534993    Short instructions RKANBU01
459509    FAQ: Commitments in purchasing
433597    Commitment update for services or invoicing plan
339264    IR plan:commts reductn for invoicing plan (net doc)
303610    Invoicing plan: commitments only reduced for period
204376    Commitments - valuated GR with value-based commitmt
165823    Incompl.reduct.PO commts in Cash Mgmt/Forecast
152571    Composite SAP note: Missing or incorrect commitments
Regards,
Edit

Service PO Commitment with refrence to stasticall Internal Order is not get

PO is created with Account assigned to Internal Order stastically and Cost center as real cost object. Wih PO creation we check commitment in system
According to standard SAP, at creation of PO, system creates commitment & while doing GR/IR, system should reduce PO commitment and increase actual by that amount. Service PO is created for amount 239200 USD with Account Assigned Category K, Item category D, Account assigned to Cost Center & Statistical Orders (9 orders by approximate 11% ) So, initially there is commitment of 26000 USD on each service order. However from March 2009 onward business has done GR and IR for this PO approximate 50000 USD but nor commitment have reduced neither any commitment line item were posted in system.
As a result of it, business actual budget is fully consumed by (Commitment + Actual) and while doing IR budget deficient errors is received.
Here main problem is, non reduction of Service PO commitment while doing GR and IR.
Tried below approch so far.
CoAr / Order type Comitment acitive, Costcenter updates commitment and GL is valid on delivery date. Service PO order unit is JOB and commitment reduction is based on value match with PO details.
In order to test really probelm is with Commitment updation or reporting. I checked COOI and COSP with reference to object no.
but there is only one posting in line item of original PO amount and at total level there are two posting one is origiona one and seocind is with zero amount. but in both total line item for one of the peiod quantity is incomplete even after clicking Final Invoice.
Even after final Invoice ticked thre is not commitment line item gets posted in system. Even I run RKANBU01 program.
This is quite strange, if some one can give me other suggestion to proceed further.
With Regards
Nitin P.

This issue got resolved with OSS. There is technical glitch when you upgrade to EH4.0 and use valuated GR with multiple account assignment. Below is list of notes required to be apply in sequence. (1492317,
1491430, 1505733 & 1484993)
With Regards
Nitin P.

Commitment-update based on periodic base, based on delivery date. FI_E008

Hi gurus:
In our system, we are using profile update 000350.
The purchase orders consume budget based on delivery date.
When posting an invoice, it is necessary that the commitment reduction
(amount type 0200) is posted with the invoice posting date and not the
delivery date of the purchase order.
This requires defining that value type 51 takes commitment update based
on periods.
By selecting the commitment update based on periods, it is not possible
to determine the period by the delivery date. System displays an error
message FI_E008.
We need commitment-update to be based on periodic base, based on the
delivery date.
Could you help me. Thanks

Hi,
I don't think it's possible: PBET implies using posting date as basis date in the most cases. Tthere are some exceptions, but they don't apply to purchase orders (v.type 51).
Regards,
Eli

Commitment in Purchase contracts and purchase order

Hi,
We are loading contract through LSMW. As account assignment we are just passing the cost center and the account is configure in OKB9. However for some contract the flag is set in items affect commitments and the wrong account is determine. I want to know if this behavior is normal and why? How do you know how commitment is set up in the system?
I have also seen that for some purchase order there are commitment lines that have been created in table COOI. Those pruchase order has been created through idoc and here again we do set the commitment flag.
Thank you for your help

Hi,
Please consider that purchasing documents which do not have facility of GR, can not create commitment, hence commitment is not available for contracts.
In case you want PR commitment to be adjusted against PO, please ensure that along with contract, PR number should also be filled in PO.Here I mean for EKPO-BANFN should be filled in PO then commitment would not be double.
Case 1 with contract:
When you post Purchase requisition.
- Purchase requisition updates commitment.
- You see purchase requisition amount in the report S_ALR_87013558.
When you post Contract with reference to the Purchase Requistion:
- Purchase requistion commitment stays as it is.
- Contract doesn't update the commitment.
- You see purchase requisition in the reprot S_ALR_87013558.
When you post a purchase order with reference to contract:
- Purchase requistion commitment stays as it is.
- Contract doesn't update the commitment,
When PO posted with reference to contract, there is no commitment reduction for the contract either.
- Purchase Order commitment is updated.
- You see purchase requisition and order in the report S_ALR_87013558.
Case 2 without contract:
When you post Purchase requisition.
- Purchase requisition updates commitment.
- You see purchase requisition amount in the reprot S_ALR_87013558.
When you post a purchase order with reference to requisition:
- Purchase requistion commitment is reduced by PO posting
- purchase order commitment is updated.
- You see only the purchase order amount in the report S_ALR_87013558.
The attached note 151451 describes also the system behaviour.
regards
Waman

PR commitment becomes zero while PO is in hold in EHP4

In ECC6 while PO was in hold mode PR value was not reduced. But in EHP4 upgradation PR value/ commitment reduced while PO is in Hold. So the budget is being available to user to create another PR and while going to save the old PO system asked for budget if available budget is less than PO value for which PR already created / linked.
Plz help to stop this PR commitment reduction while PO is in Hold.
Thanx
P K Sahoo

Hi Jurgen,
Yes I am working in a public sector. The note - 1071578 was already suggested by SAP OSS support team and advised us to run T code-RKANBU01 after that. The same has been applied but no result is comming up. Further they have suggested for note 1616873, but the same was not compatable our EHP4, so it has informed to SAP OSS team.
Plz suggest if any other way is open for it.
Thanx.
Sahoo

In PO deletion , system asking budget, more than PO value.

Hi Team,
We have Created PR in 2013 with the value of 60,00,000 INR and PO with reference to PR with value of 23,00,000 INR in same fiscal Year.
When we are trying to delete PO , system showing Error as below snap shot.
PR value - 6000000
PO value – 2337000
Available Budget In FY 2013 is 2900000
PO value snap
Regards
Raheem

Hi,
First, note that PR>PO reductions are normally done on a quantity-basis (Unless these are Service documents and you use value-based commitment reduction set up in tcode ML91)
It means that, if you create a PR by Quantity 1 x Price 1000,00 and a PO by Quantity 1 x Price 800,00, the PR is fully reduced by quantity and the PR-PO price difference is "returned" to the available amount for other expenses.
During PO deletion, the PR quantity is reopen again (you can see this warning in the error log).
That means an extra consumption (original PR quantity x Price). If the budget is not sufficient, you will get an AVC error.
BR
Mar

Invoice Plan and Quantity Discrepancy

I'm not sure if this belongs on this forem or the financial forum but since it involves POs and an MM transaction(MIRO) I decided to post it here.
We have an IR Only Purchase Order with multiple line items. The PO Order Quantity varies from 1 EA up to 6 EA on 34 different line items. An invoice plan manual invoice plan sing "Sample Partial Invoice Plan(20) as the Invoice Plan Type. The payments are split 30% - 30% - 30% - 10% with each payment due on a specific date.
So here is the problem:
When the first invoice was processed for 30% it assigned a "quantity of 1" on each line item in the invioce. This is affecting the Commitment dollars left on the order. For example for the line item with 4 EA in the PO quantity, the commitment dollars only dropped 25% of the 30% total for that line. So let's say the line item wa for $100,000 it should have reduced the commitment amount by $30,000. Instead since the invoice quantity defaulted to 1 it only reduced the commitment amount by $7,500.
This same ratio type posting occurred on each line item that had more than 1 EA on the PO. It appears that when processing the MIRO it will not allow one to change the quantity to the PO Order Quantity. Does anyone know how to change the quantity on the Invoice or is there a way to get the whole line item quantity to default onto the invoice when a payment is due?
Thanks in advance for your help,
Dan

Hi Dan,
If the unit of measurement was set up as relevant for value based commitment reduction in transaction
CUNI, then the commitment reduction will be the same as the invoice amount.
If the unit of measurement was set up as relevant for quantity based commitment reduction in transaction
CUNI, then the commitment reduction is always according the to invoice quantity, which could lead to differences in the commitment values - which you have described.
Regards,
Edit

Commitments showing wrong in COOI table

If I have a PO with 1 line and total amount is $5000.
Now this line is split between 2 WBS elements, 1st is WBS 1 and 2nd is WBS2.
For WBS1 we have $2000 and WBS2 we have $3000.
Now while doing servie entry I charged full $5000 to WBS1.
After this, I checked C001 report and see that WBS1 got no commitments and WBS2 got $3000.
Why WBS2 have commitments of $3000? There is no open amount in PO and the commitment should be zero.
Please advice.
Thanks,

Hello, PS,
I think note [772206 "Commitment Update in Service Purchase Orders"|https://websmp230.sap-ag.de/sap(bD1lbiZjPTAwMQ==)/bc/bsp/spn/sapnotes/index2.htm?numm=772206] describes this situation in part "PURCHASE ORDER WITH MULTIPLE ACCOUNT ASSIGNMENTS AT SERVICE LINE"; long story short, once there are commitments created, the system is not able to "redistribute" the commitment reduction between the account assignment lines, and these commitments can be reduced only by setting the "delivery completeted" indicator.
Kind Regards
TomT

Imported PO exchange rate - commitment amount reduction on GR

Hello Experts,
I have created imported PO with account assignment to WBS element and changed the foreign exchange rate (FER) to 50. Since the unit rate was $100 (Foreign Currency) and Qty. was 2 nos., system had increased commitment value by value 10000.
Current FER is 40, which is maintained in currency table.
When GR is taken for Qty.1, system has reduced commitment value by 4000. Hence, system now shows the balance commitment value is equal to 6000. (report S_ALR_87013558)
Ideally, commitment value should have been 5000 only.
Hence, commitment values always shows incorrect picture. Please suggest...how to overcome this problem....
Note: We donot want fixed exchange rate as we want MIGO and MIRO to happen at current rate (not with FE rate maintained at PO).
Regards,
Abhishek

Thanks for your advice Mr. Atif,
My client needs to be changed ER in MIRO level also, same value needs to be paid to vendor. When ever will go to f-53, if will process the open item, it is not matching to actually liability created values.
In this case how to proceed further.
Thanks and Regards

Commitment report for multile a/c PO

Hi all,
Iam running one commitment report (at CJI5).
scenario is as below:-
PO with Item category "D" with one PO line item and two service line items (Item1 - Rs1000, Item2- Rs.1000) having different WBS elements(A1 & A2),then the account assignment tab was showing mutiple account assignment(50% each).
Commitment report shows Rs1000 each aginst A1 & A2 WBS Element.
Now I have made the Service entry for both line items with WBS A1 and when we see the CJI5 report where i observed my commitments "0"(Zero) for both WBS elements.
Now my question is, why the commitment for WBS A2 is reduced?
Thanks& regards,
Batchu

There's no way that the commitment on WBS A2 to be reduced if you have accepted only the service line item 1 (which is assigned to WBS A1)
Are you sure you haven't entered the services for both the line items?
When you copy/accepted the service line items from the PO you should have particulary selected line item 1 and accepted it.
Just check report CJI3 which is project actual line item report, if see the actuals here on both the WBS's i.e, A1 and A2, then it means confirmation for both the items has been done so reduction in commitment is correct.
Regards
Sreenivas

Sale order commitment amount not getting reduced

Dear Experts
Once the Sale order is created the SO committment amount gets updated in reports (commitment Vs Actual report) with"Forecast of Revenue" and Amount type 0100 (Original).
But after creation of Billing document (actuals) the same 'Forecast of Revenue' (commitment amount ) is not getting reduced with Amount type (0200). FM document is generated at the time of Billing document generation and the same is showing in reports from Invoice side.
The same cycle is happening in MM i.e, once PR/PO commitment will get reduced after actuals were happened.
Ex:
Ref doc     Item     Val.type text                       Amt type     Payment bdgt
100000     10     Forecast of Revenue     0100          100
20000     2     Invoices                          0100          100
Why SO commitment is not getting reduced in SD module?. Because of this reports are showing wrong.
Kindly suggest.
Thanks in advance
Rao

Dear Mar
Thanks for the support and tried all the possible ways but not able to find out the reaon:
a. FM Accounts assignments (CI, FC,Fund and BP) are same both Sale order and Billing documents.
b. There is no exits are activated.
c. It is happening all the sale orders and the reduction is completly missing.
d. For your reference please find the below commitment and Actuals report (FMRP_RFFMTO10X ).
Ref doc       Val.type text                    Amount type      CI              FC                Amount
100107       Forecast of Revenue              0100           100           ABC                 100
256487       Invoices                                   0100           100           ABC                 100
    Because of this when we check budget report the consumed amount is showing Rs. 200/-
e. And also we don't have any PGI concept, only after Sale order creation direct billing document will be generated.
Kindly suggest is there any configuration missing issue or something else.
Regarads
Rao

Commitment reduction by downpayments

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for