Cons Group Changes & Divestiture with Equity Holdings

In the scenario with cons unit hierarchy below, company A is the parent of company B and B is the parent of C and D. B is accounted for using purchase method, while C and D are equity method.
Cons Group A
     Cons unit A
     Cons group B
          Cons unit B
          Cons unit C
          Cons unit D
Company B is sold, along with its subsidiaries C and D. In periods previous to the divestiture, there are intercompany transactions between B, C and D, for which eliminations are recorded at posting level 20. For standard reporting these eliminations are ignored for both cons groups A and B due to C and D using equity method.
In Cons of Investment settings, Posting level 20 records are not included in location of values, calculation base.
In the period of divestiture, the cons group changes for posting level 22 are created. However, these are recorded directly to cons group B, and are therefore also included in reporting for cons group A. This is causing a problem because the reports exclude the level 20 records but include the offsetting level 22 records.
Has anyone dealt with this and if so how?
Am I missing something?
Thanks for any experiences relating to this and/or suggestions!
Dan

Just extending the same point,
system will generate the 22 PL records where in both
consolidation unit  and partner unit of the group participating
in eliminations follow purchase method.
In your case  B (parent company ) is following purchase
method and investee are following equity method.
so 22 PL records are not expected.
since it happened other way , some wild idea may be to check
whether there is any method change during consolidation
interval.

Similar Messages

  • BCS Virtual Cube Cons Group Change

    Hi,
    We have a number of Bex reports that read from the BCS virtual cube for our month end reporting.
    Quite recently, we prerfomed some Cons Group changes in the BCS application which has impacted our Bex reports via the virtual cube.
    If we check the contents of the virtual cube with Cons Group displayed in the output, we see it is missing data (period blank) and this is the data that is being extracted to our Bex report.
    If however we check the contents of the virtual cube without diplaying Cons Group, then we get our disired result.
    Has anyone experienced anything similiar? Is it possible to get Bex to read the data we require?
    Thanks in advance.

    It is suggested you read the SAP BCS help for cons group changes.
    In most cases the cons units should not be removed from the "divesting" cons group when adding it to another cons group. The cons group master data for the "divesting" cons group should simply be updated for these units with a period/year of divestiture - the period of change.
    Additionally the cons group changes tasks move the balance sheet items from the "divesting" cons group to the "acquiring" group with posting level 02. 12 and 22 records to allow for reporting of pre- and post- change reporting on these cons groups.

  • Change of Company code from one Cons Group to another Cons Group.

    Dear All,
    Please advise on change of company code from one Cons Group to another Cons Group , we have Cons Structure - at present few companies are in one cons group and as a policy we have to move the companies to another cons group. So please advise me what will be the case if we move int he following senarios:
    1. if till period 012 year 2008,  company A is in Cons Group AA and we want  the same to Cons Group BB. How it  will move to Cons Group BB in a Company code with the opening balances? 
    2. if there is no data in SEM BCS total Cube - and we want to move the Company A from Cons Group AA to Cons Group BB.
    What will be the effect in both the scenarios.  How to do this? if you can specify some steps then I will try to analyze the situation.
    Thanks in advance

    The changes are not complicated but company A must be placed in cons group BB as of period 12 2008 and in the master data of the cons group it should be indicated that the first consolidation is at the end of the period (EOP). Likewise in cons group AA must continue to include company A but in the cons group master data it must be indicated that the period of divestiture is 12 2008 EOP.
    The cons group changes tasks must be executed to move the balances in period 12 2008.
    If there is not data for company A in the totals infocube you may simply drag-and-drop company A from cons group AA to cons group BB without any concerns.
    The affect in each scenario is different because if there is data that is to be reported as part of cons group AA company A must be included in cons group AA.

  • SEM-BCS Preparation for Consolidation Group Changes

    Hi All,
    Is the task "Preparation for Consolidation Group Changes" only implemented when Consolidation of Investments has also been implemented?
    Does "Preparation for Consolidation Group Changes" have any value on its own?
    Any comments, replies or suggestions most welcome.

    Hi,
    I think that prep for cons group changes is independent (but supplementary to) from CoI.
    See what is said in help:
    "When in the middle of a fiscal year a consolidation unit is either acquired by a consolidation group (acquisition), divested from a consolidation group (divestiture), or <b>changes its accounting technique</b> (method change), the following data must be adjusted:
    - Reported financial data
    - Standardized financial data
    - Consolidated data with posting level 20"
    As you can see, not only consolidated data are to be changed, but also Standardized and Reported.
    Moreover, as is seen above, changes of accounting technique will also trigger such activities.
    So, my answers:
    1. No
    2. Yes.
    Best regards,
    Eugene

  • Consolidation Group Changes

    Dear Team,
    Through support I can resolve Issues ASAP, Once again Thanks a lot.
    I need Information, in my client Cons Unit Hierarchy Structure as under:
    For Example:
    We have the following Structure
    Cons Group Q1  ---> Cons Unit A, B
    Cons Group Q2 --> Cons Unit C, F
    Cons Group Q3  --> Cons unit D and Cons Unit E
    In current Period Cons unit E removed from Cons Group Q3 and added in Cons Group Q2 and also need not maintain Cons Group Q3, and assign Cons Unit D to Cons Group Q1
    Expected Hierarchy:
    Cons Group Q1 ---> Cons Unit A, B and D
    Cons Group Q2 ---> Cons Unit C, F and E
    I suggest to run Task Cons Group Change, and there is no COI in my client. Give me suggestion what procedure I have to follow for this either Acquisition, Divestiture for the above.
    Thanks & Regards
    madhu

    To move cons unit E from Group Q3 to Cons group Q2, add E to cons group Q2 without removing it from Q3. Then in the cons group master data for cons group Q3 indicate the period of divestiture for cons unit E. For the cons group Q2 master data should automatically include cons unit E with period of first consolidation per the period when it was added.

  • Consolidation Group Change and Consolidation Activity

    Hi Experts,
    I am new in SAP consolidation, I have a question regarding the difference between the function "consolidation group change" and "consolidation activity".
    If I read in the sap library, these 2 functions are separated, but if I look at the content, I saw some similarity where the consolidation group change also included the investment activity like acquisition and divestiture.
    Could anyone explain what are the difference between these 2 function?
    When I was a user, if the group acquiered a new cons unit, I just add a new cons unit in the consolidation group hierarchy, assign consolidation method, add the additional financial data for the ownership percentage (activity = first consolidation), enter the reported financial data, run CI function and add one more column in my report painter.
    When I read SAP library, I saw the "consolidation group change" function talking about the consolidation activity, now I wonder, what are the difference? What is the business scenario for using the "normal" CI activity and the "consolidation group change"? Please anyone advise. Thank you.
    regards,

    Normal C/I is a regular acquisition or divestiture.  Cons Group Change could be movement of a company from one consolidation group to another (i.e., parent A sells company 1 to parent B).  Or you own a company 20% and purchase an additional 60% and must switch accounting technique from Equity to Purchase.  BCS will need to book Cons Group Change entries to account for the acct technique change.  (In the past, at 20%, you would only book equity pickup, or equitization entries, to the parent as PL30 adjustments in the CoI.  Now you must bring in the complete balances of the company due to purchase method of consolidation.  BCS books consolidation-group specific adjustments to do this.)
    Example....
    "Normal C/I activity"
    New company A needs be consolidated in Cons Group 1 starting in 03/2007.  Add the company to the Cons Group master data, set the accounting technique, update additional financial data w/ activity First consolidation and load data for the new company.  Run COI
    "Cons Group Change"
    Company A is consolidated in Cons Group 1, but starting in 06/2007 they will be sold to a parent in Cons Group 2.  Update the Cons Group master data...setting company A to divest in 06/2007 from CG1 and to First Consolidate in CG2 starting in 06/2007.  If using Org Change logic, create an Org Change number and define a sender/receiver relationship for CG1 --> CG2.  In additional financial data, create a total transfer activity w/ org change logic from CG1 to CG2.  Run Org Change task and BCS will zero out balance sheet related to company A in CG1 on posting level 02/12/22.  In CG2, similar postings will book "catch up" entries in 06/2007 to bring full balance sheet into CG2.  In CoI, company will be transferred to new parent.
    Hopefully that makes sense...
    Chris

  • Can Cons Group and Cons Unit hierarchies be used together?

    We have Consolidation Group hierarchy defined in our BCS system.  However, this hierarchy is not used for Budget data.  Would it be possible to create a Consolidation Unit hierarchy in addition to the Consolidation Group hierarchy, to be used for Budget?  Consolidation Group hierarchy already consists of Consolidation Units, so I wasn't sure if this was going to be possible.
    I am a BW developer and have never done any development in BCS.  I am asking this on behalf of a BCS user.  I apologize if this question is too simple for this forum, but I would really appreciate it if someone could give me a quick answer to my question.
    Thank you.
    Nadia

    I agree with Eugene that you can have different hierarchies for different purposes.
    However one caution is that if you are using consolidation of investments and/or cons group changes tasks the result will differ between the hierarchies overall unless these tasks are executed separately for each hierarchy.

  • BCS  "Prep aration for Group Change"

    Has anyone used this functionality?  We are having issues with set-up & execution by only using the SAP help documentation.  We are not currently using any of the COI functionality and the documentation is pointing us at this for prep for group change.
    If anyone has this functioning and can point us at better documentation of can help answer some questions, please let me know.  Thanks.

    I have only used this in conjunction with COI functionality. Hence if you are not using COI, my suggestion is to not use Con Group Changes.

  • COI not reading equity data after consolidation group change

    Dear experts,
    I am running the consolidation of investments task for a new group that has been created on 012.2009. This new group CG2 is a child of an existing one CG1, and all the consolidation units that I have in 012.2009 under CG2 were in 012.2008 under the CG1.
    In my new group GC2 all the units have as first consolidation period 012.2009 and on the parent group they have as last consolidation period 012.2009.
    The problem is that when I run the COI task the system does not read the equity data for these consolidation units. I have both, equity data and Investment data defined to be read from additional financial data.  The system reads correctly the investment data for the parent consolidation unit, and tries to eliminate it, but as it does not read the equity data of the child so it takes the value to consolidation a difference, that is incorrect.
    Does anyone know what I am missing?
    Thanks in advance.
    Kind regards,
    Sónia

    Hi Sonia
    i dont want to confuse you as Dan is guiding so far. let me put my thoughts some here.
    CG1  12/2008
       - CU - A    Parent    12/2008 to 999/9999
       - CU- B                   12/2008  to 999/9999
       - CU - C                  12/2008 to 999/9999
    do you have any another sub node for CU-B and CU-C? as B has investment in C
    New Group: 12/2009
      CG1
       - CU -A    12/08 to 999/9999
       - CU - B    12/08 to 12/9999
       - CU - C     12/08 to 12/2009
       CG2 group supose to be like this
      CG1
        -CU-A
        -CU-B
           I---  CG2
                 CU - B   Parent  12/09  to 999/9999
                 CU - C                12/09 to 999/9999
         - CU-C 
    Now with above scenario you can invest in C from B and system will treate as FIRST CONSOLIDATION  based on AFD Investments/Equity
    How did you maintain B investments in C at CG1 12/08 level?
    and or    as per Dan
    You have to run PREP for CONSOLIDATION GROUP CHANGE  task  before CT task and after Elim Taks but before COI task
    thx

  • Equity Group change: GJEC GJ19 GJCB

    Hello All,
    I have read the following to do at the moment to set up a New Equity Group regading changes on sharing percentages:
    at the beginning of the period, JV1 is owned by equity group EG1. During the period, an expense of $1,000 is booked to cost object JV1_CC1 with a document date of 1/15/97.
    Expenses booked to JVA-related cost objects are assigned to the venture identified on the cost object (in the case of JV1_CC1, JV1) and to the equity group that owns the venture as of the document date. The equity group is identified by the combination of the JV and the equity type, which is also assigned to the cost object.
    In this example, equity type ET1 is specified on cost object JV1_CC1. The combination of joint venture JV1 and equity type ET1 associate the expense with equity group EG1.
    In this example, however, EG2 (also associated with equity type ET1) takes over ownership of JV1 on 1/20/97. If equity change management is not run before Cutback, the original JVA record associating the expense with EG1 will remain intact, and Cutback will assign the expense booked to JV1_CC1 to the partners in equity group EG1. But If equity change management is run before Cutback, the original record will be reversed, the expense will be rebooked with the new venture and equity group assignment, and Cutback will assign the expense booked to JV1_CC1 to the partners of equity group EG2.
    When run in update, equity change management directly updates the JVA summary ledger (4A), but Cutback must be run after equity change management to update FI.
    However, we did not ran GJEC as previous step and ran directly GJ19 to adjust periords and then calculate GJCB.
    How can i manage if i did not run GJEC before run GJ19 and then GJCB?
    I have some differences when i check account into GJRG_5J1B, because there are some postings related to Old Equity Group and from December 2009 when i, in fact, have adjusted from Jan-10 to Nov-10.
    For more details: Old EG Date Creation: Dec-2009
    New EG Date Creation: Dec-2010
    Thanks in advance to who can advice about this.
    Regards.
    Jeremías.

    Hi,
    I am sorry but the scenario that you provided was not clear. I have explained equity change process with
    an example as below. Hope this answers your query.
    1. GJEC is run when equity group change happens and cutback has not been run.
    2. GJ19 is executed when equity group change has happened and also cutback has already run.
    Essentialy GJ19 = GJEC + GJCB
    An example
    EG       VALID FROM
    EG1     15/01/1997
    1. Say a doc. is posted on 20/01/1997. With the above setup of EGs then the JV doc will have EG as EG1.
    2. Say cutback has not been executed and there is a change in EG or partnership as below
    EG       VALID FROM
    EG1     15/01/1997
    EG2     19/01/1997
    3. So now the doc. posted in step1 has wrong EG. The correct EG for that doc. should be EG2 and not EG1.
    4. Insuch a case GJEC should be executed to reclassify doc. posted in step1 to have the new EG i.e EG2.
    5. If in step 2, say cutback has already been run and equity group has changed then insuch a case GJ19 should be used.
    6. Please note that GJEC posts JV docs while GJ19 posts both FI and JV docs.
    Hope this clears your query.
    Rgrds,
    Satyajit

  • Balance carryforward consolidation unit with equity method

    Hi experts,
    One question in relation with balance carryforward in SEM BCS 4.0. Do Additional finantial data of Consolidation unit with equity method must be carried forward to following periods?
    I have a problem with AFD validation for equity method.
    Best regards,
    Beatriz B.

    Thanks Halim,
    I am not using consolidation unit combination. It is only Legal Consolidataion. However, I have fixed the problem by changing the master data of consolidation unit. I have enabled FCEP.
    I have one more question. Do I have to run Consolidation Group Change Task also when I am switching from Equity method to Purchase method for Associate companies?
    When I am changing from Equity to Purchase method all the previous C/I postings are reversed, but the profit of Associates which was already accounted by holding company in the previous period is transfered to Net Income-Method Change and second effect is given to Goodwill (GW is enhanced).
    Hence, post change of method, when I upload TB of Associate, the Net Income is not eliminated to the extent of the profit Adjusted on account of Method change.
    Please suggest,
    Thanks,
    USR

  • Cons Group & Unit Display in Monitor

    With the upgrade to EP3 the cons groups and units name displayed in the monitor are the short description instead of the long description as was previously the case.
    It would be most appreciated if you would please suggest ways to change the names display from the short description to the long description.

    HI Dan,
    The display in Monitor works on standard future, and there is no customization involed in that as of now to display wither Short or Long description.
    Else, you can keep the short description as same as Long description, I know this may not solve your problem if the length of Long Description is grater than short.
    Also try contacting OSS help...
    or in R/3 normally if we want any changes in the standard display, we will do the by copying the standard and make changes.  So try using ABAP help, creating Own transaction code by copying the standard "UCMON" and apply necessary changes.
    Give this as last preference, as this includes only technical work.

  • Execution of preparation for consolidation group changes

    Hello,
    In 1/2011 there was a change in the consolidation units hierarchy.
    A consolidation unit  moved to upper consolidation group.
    I cannot find in the master data of the consolidation unit , where should I update the FIRST CONSOLIDATION DATE,
    and the LAST CONSOLIDATION DATE.
    Best regards,
    Odelia Volfovich.

    Look at the master data of the cons groups - both the initial cons group as well as the new cons group.
    If this truly is a vertical move up the hierarchy, the initial cons group should have a period of divestiture, as 001/2011.
    Because the cons unit has always been a part of the higher up cons group via the lower cons groups ownership, the new cons group should have period of first consolidation the same as that of the initial cons group.
    The cons unit should remain in both cons groups until at least the end of the fiscal year and in many cases, depending on the reporting needs for year-over-year comparison reporting, it should remain for an additional year or more.

  • Cons unit change at year end

    Hi : )
    when performing a cons unit change at the end of the year whereby the old cons group becomes unnecessary as no cons unit is part of it in period 1/2011, do I have to delete the cons group as well from the new hierarchy starting on the 1.01.2011 or do I just delete the cons units out of this old cons group?
    Also, as we will have a new cons group and cons unit hierarchy starting from the 1.01.2011 will we not be having a problem displaying period 12/2010 data come January as the hierachy then used in the queries will only have the new structure, i.e. the moved cons units sitting under the new cons group??? Our queries are currently set up to select the hierachy using the default query date...
    Your views would be very much appreciated.
    Kind regards,
    Tanja

    Thanks Dan : )
    The configuration document that I received mentions to deleting the cons unit in the 1st period following the consolidation group change. So because I am divesting the cons unit in period 12/2010 I interpreted that I can delete the cons unit from the old cons group in period 1/2011 including the old cons group as there are no more cons units within it.
    But this will be causing us problems in January for period 12/2010 reporting as the new hierarchy starting on 1/1/2011 that is picked by the queries due to default query date will not be have the old cons group.
    So I think by what you said to leave the cons unit and cons group until the year over year reporting is finished will solve our problem.
    But here is the example anyway. Maybe there is a different way:
    Cons unit A is the only cons unit under Cons Group A and is divested as at 12/2010
    Cons unit A is acquired into a new never before existed Cons Group C as at 12/2010
    So the currently valid hierachy is valid from 01.01.2010 - 31.12.2010 with Cons unit A now residing in 2 places
    In period 1/2011 I deleted Cons unit A under Cons Group A and also deleted cons Group A.
    This created a new hierachy that is valid from 01.01.2011- 31.12.9999
    So in I am correct in assuming that if our queries use default query date that we will have a problem trying to report on period 12/2010 data in January?
    Kind regards,
    Tanja

  • Adding and removing current user from one SharePoint group to another with event receiver

    hi friends
    i need to change current user from one SharePoint group to another with list item adding event receiver.
    please help me

    Hi Malli,
    Greetings. Its nt possible
    http://sharepoint.stackexchange.com/questions/42286/event-receivers-on-add-remove-users
    Please remember to click 'Mark as Answer' on the answer if it helps you

Maybe you are looking for