Consolidation Unit acquiring a Parent company

Hi,
First COnsolidation: 12, 2009
Frequency of consolidation: monthly
Below is the structure as on April 2010
9099
9099
-----9033
9022
9023
9024
9025
9026
9027
9069
9088
9150
9579
9576
9677
9578
9579
9570
9570
9575
9060
----9600
9601
In May 2010 company code 9033 is acquiring 9600 which is a perent company in Sub Group 9060.
Pls advice me the steps involved in this type of acquisition.
Thanks a lot in advance,
Richard

Because 9600 and 9601 will be at the same level of the hierarchy as they already are, just at a new place, the first consolidation for them in the new group is May 2010 with divestiture also as May 2010.
The revised hierarchy is now: (correct?)
9099
9099
9033
9033
9600
9601
9022
9023
9024
9025
9026
9027
9069
9088
9150
9579
9576
9677
9578
9579
9570
9570
9575
9060
9600
9601

Similar Messages

  • How to link ECC Company code with BCS Consolidation unit

    I have to create new consolidation unit in BCS, parallelly in SAP R/3 also I have created a company code.
    I could read following in the forum :-
    The Company Codes from ECC are assigned to the characteristic Company in BCS, thus creating a one to one relationship between ECC & BCS company codes.
    BUT HOW TO DO THE SAME.
    Also any advise on Profit centre and cost centre etc in BCS in line with ECC. This is first time I am configuring in BCS,

    Typically in ECC company codes are assigned to a company. The company is typically used for cons unit in BCS, but it is not uncommon for company code to be used as cons unit.
    When company code is used, it is an attribute of the characteristic company and thus in the load mapping, the company is mapped to the attribute company code. This results in company code being mapped to company.
    Otherwise, if company code is in the databasis as the cons unit role, then it is simply mapped to company code to company code.
    For profit center and cost center, these are typically assigned the role subassignment, but it is not uncommon for profit center to be a cons unit for a matrix consolidation. However, these characteristics must first be included in the totals/databasis infocube.

  • Getting Parent Consolidation Groups for a given Consolidation Unit

    Hi Friends,
    I am writing a program wherein i need to get parent Consolidation Groups and their Hierarchy levels for a given Consolidation Unit. If anyone has worked on a similar requirement, Please provide me with Function module or logic for the same.
    Thanks
    Surya

    hi,
    asset-nr = ILOA-ANLNR
    Andreas

  • Consolidation Unit Clearing account for Income / Expenses elimination

    Hi,
    When companys are leaving the group, where the parent comapany has some income/expenses elimination transactions with the company leaving, there is still balance on the parent company on consolidation unit clearing account with the company leaving the group as partener company.
    This shows incorrectely the retained earning for the parent company for posting leve20 when balances on consolidation unit clearing account is not included. Please advise.
    We are not unsing COI but we are using Group change functionalities when company leaves the grop.
    Furthere, in all auto elimination document type for Balance Sheet Elimination and Income statement elimination, we have assigned same consolidation unit clearing account. Please advise.
    Best Regards,
    UR

    When viewing the results using the standard reporting mode I suspect the balances are okay. Please clarify in detail how the data is being analyzed so we may better assist.

  • Total transfer of equity consolidated unit using organizational change

    Hi,
    We have a scenario where we are doing total transfer of an equity consolidated unit (100% owned) from one company(old parent) to another (new parent)
    The new parent is one level above the old parent in the hierarchy.
    We've used organizational change logic and have set the divestiture dates/flag in the sender consolidation group and accordingly first consolidation dates/flag/OC number in the receiver consolidation group.
    The investment AFD is submitted with "total transfer" with OC number.
    There are multiple scopes of reported data for equity method in our configuration.
    Each scope(equity pickup) is inturn created by reclassifying several equity accounts to a single BCS only item(the scope item)
    When we run COI, the system posts one total divestiture document at the old conso group (where old parent is situtated) and posts a first consolidation, total divestiture, total transfer documents  at the new conso group level (which is one level above the sender conso group)
    The total divestiture document at upper level is reversing the divestiture document posted at old parent.
    The first consolidation document jas only statistical items posted in it.
    The real document to check is the "Totals transfer document" which actually reads the investment (at old parent and new parent) , the equity holdings adjustment data(the scope items) and adjusts the investment in subs at new parent with offset going to divestiture account but of double the value than the expected scope vlaue.
    Issues faced:
    Q1. Consolidation group change tasks (at PL02, 12, 22) are not posting any documents. Is there an issue? Since I am using these tasks for the first time and dont know if this is possible.
    Q2. The total transfer document is reading the equity holdings data as double the expected value( for each of the scopes of equity method). What could be the possible reason? How to fix this?
    Q3. I would appreciate if someone can clarify what kind of postings the system makes as part of divestiture/transfer in case of equity consolidated unit transfer.
    Please help!
    Thanks,
    AJ

    Thanks Dan.
    Appreciate if you can help on the below points as well.
    1. As part of divestiture/transfer postings: The system is reversing some Previous Year(PY) equity accounts into themselves. How can we get the system to eliminate them by posting to COI Clearing account. Basically, we dont want the PY accounts to be touched?
    For the Retained earnings - PY account, the system is actually posting to COI clearing account.
    These PY accounts are part of some scopes for equitization.
    Is there any link between the "balance carry forward" - list of items table and the divestiture postings?
    Does the system check this table while posting/reversing the equity(PY) accounts?
    2. I want to understand the sequence in which the system posts the documents at the old parent and new parent (group) level.
    The same activity number is there  for Total Divestiture, total transfer documents posted at new parent level and total divestiture document posted at old parent level.
    Does the system follow bottom up approach? Thereby creating total divestiture document at old parent level.
    Followed by documents at upper level (new parent level)
    Also , at the upper level(new parent level), does it post documents in the way they are shown in the log? (We havent changed the default sequence maintained in UCWB - COI settings). so it will post first consolidation doc, followed by total divestiture, followed by total transfer docs at the new parent level?
    Is this the reason for the double value being posted at new parent for equity holding data?
    Will studying the statistical items (corresponding to eliminated equity holding items) be relevant here to understand why at upper level there is double the value being posted by system?
    Thanks.

  • Concept of Integrated Consolidation Unit of SEM BCS

    HI Experts,
    I'm now in the SEM BCS 4.0 and BW 3.5 implementation. Previously I was the ECCS specialist and before the FI and AM specialist.
    Now I'm in SEM BCS implementation.
    I have one question in connection to the integrated consolidation unit. As the reference, I take the concept of this using the ECCS.
    As you might know, the creation of integrated consolidation unit for using realtime update method in ECCS, is pulled from FI company ID.
    Meanings if I set the configuration properly, I can pull out the company master data as the consolidation unit master data in consolidation monitor.
    Now, in SEM BCS, I want to do the same thing. I mean, off course I can create company ID in R/3 and then create the consolidation unit manually using UCWB. But this scenario can create inconsistency, and I also think this is not the right concept of doing integration between R/3 and SEM BCS.
    My question is : what is the concept of this master data integration, and what is the proper way to do it?
    Any advise on this question is highly appreciated.
    Thank you in advance.
    regards,
    Halim

    Hi Halim,
    You need to build properly your data basis in data model.
    Assign your company to a consolidation unit role:
    http://help.sap.com/saphelp_sem350bw/helpdata/en/dd/f3783bcfef4a2de10000000a114084/frameset.htm
    I sent to you the file concerning BCS that you asked for in another thread.
    Best regards,
    Eugene

  • SEM-BCS how to make Consolidation Unit with Business Area

    Hi all,
    I am newbie in SEM-BCS and implementing BW-based BCS. Our situation is as follows.
    Situation
    - we have 7 companies worldwide and 4 different Business areas.
       Every company consists of at least two business areas in R/3.
    - we have sales transaction in FI among companies.
    requirement
    - we need consolidated F/S in whole consolidation group and consolidated F/S in Business area level.
    actually, we are planning to make the consolidation unit in company level.
    Do we have to break down consolidation unit in business area? or just breakdown category solves our requirement?
    If we have sales transaction even between business areas within certain company, do we have to make it in business area?

    Following are the answer to your questions…
    Q:   What to do for using this cube in BCS?
    A:    Add the business area to the cube. Generate the data basis and the business area gets added to all ODS/DSO , virtual cube.
    Suggestion: To avoid deleting the Profit center cube, since you can reduce the complication.
    Q:   Is it the problem about DATA BASIS Role?
    A:   No. Assign the role of subassignment or consolidation unit as needed. If you are giving the role of consolidation unit to business area, you need to insert the char Partner business area also in the cube.
    Q:   Is there some materials to solve this situation?
    A:   Refer the matrix consolidation material in help.sap.com from BCS portion.  As per SAP literature any relevant object can be made as second consolidation unit such as business area, functional area etc. Don’t fear. Once you start it the issue will be resolved in few days.
    Expected complication:
    If you are going to make business area as subassignment then it is simple. But if you are making business area as Consolidation unit, go for partner business area in cube.
    Ensure with your BI consultant that all BCS messages are addressed in BI infoobject for business area specifically.
    Things can get complicated only if we allow for it get complicated. But you are doing great.. Keep  posted.. Good luck.!!!..

  • One Parent company and its subsidiaies

    Hi freinds,
    I need your help in mapping the following scenario in SAP B1.
    There is a group of companies where there will be a parent company and its 4 subsidiary companies. Each subsidiay company has its own accounting system and hence seperate Balance sheet.whereas they also want a consolidated balance sheet of all these 4 subsidiary companies ,apart from their individual Balance sheets. If we create 4 different companies (subsidiary companies) how can we get one consolidated Balance sheet of the whole group?
    Please help.

    hi sudhir,
    Check this link
    Consolidation
    Jeyakanthan

  • 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

  • Consolidation unit not integrated

    Hi SAP Gurus,
    I'm using SAP 4.6C. I've created a new consolidation unit. But If i compare with the other consolidation units created previously, using tcode FX1M, tab "Data Collection" .. the new consolidation unit I created doesn't have the section "Integration".
    This section "integration" should have the information such as :
    - Type of consolidation
    - Logical system
    - Company
    - Profit center group
    Something is missing here, and I don't know where is it. Anyone could help me ?
    Regards,
    Melissa

    I run CXNT. Solved.

  • Merger of two Consolidation Unit

    Hi,
    I am working on a project where I need to Merge Two Consolidation Unit of the same Consolidation Group.
    For Example, Consolidation Group A1 & A2 is under Consolidation Group ABC. Now we need to Merge Cons. Unit A1 into Cons. Unit A2 under the same Cons. Group ABC. How to handle this in SEM - BCS?
    I cannot use Consolidation Group Changes as this is not transferring but it is merging of two Cons. Unit.
    Your input is highly apprecialbe.
    Regards,
    Viral Joshi

    Hi HI COLLET Thibaud ,
    Thanks for the reply and sorry for my late reply. I was gathering information that you asked from the client. Now picture is more clear.
    Ex.
    Consoildation Unit: A & Consoildation Unit: B. Both are under Consolidation Group AB
    Parent Unit : C
    Now Consoildation Unit: A is getting transferred to Consoildation Unit: B. Business wants to transfer Balance Sheet as on Date. There is no Goodwill. Everything is getting transferred at Book Value.
    Now for Share Capital purchase, there are two options suggested. One is to buy share of Consoildation Unit: A by Cash and second is to buy share of Consoildation Unit: A by issuing Shares of Consoildation Unit: B.
    If we go for option 1 of purchasing through Cash, then there will be impact only on Cash Outflow from Consoildation Unit: B and Share Capital Reduction from Consoildation Unit: A. This will happen becasue Consoildation Unit: B will pay Cash to Consoildation Unit: A and Consoildation Unit: A in turn will pay for Share Capital and reduce its Share Capital. But if we go for option 2 of issuing shares of Consoildation Unit: B, then there will be change in the Share Capital of Consoildation Unit: B and reduction in the Share Capital of Consoildation Unit: A. In any case, there will be reduction in Share Capital of Consoildation Unit: A.
    So what do you suggest in this scenario? What will be the BCS impact if we go for option1 or option2. Just to remind, we are transferring everything including Share Capital in FI. But I am wondering the steps and impact on BCS...
    Your input is highly appreciable and definately will be rewarded with points !!!
    Thanks..
    Best Regards,
    Viral Joshi

  • Branches as Consolidation Unit in BCS

    Hello,
    We have created branches as Company Code in SAP R/3.
    We would like to use these branches as Consolidation Unit in SEM-BCS 6.0.
    Can you please guide, if this is feasible specially in terms of Consolidation of Investment settings and  Inter unit eliminations?
    Thanks in Advance,
    Regards,
    UR

    Yes, it's feasible.
    Enter in AFD: share = 100% & investment = 0.

  • Consolidation Unit and Consolidation Group

    Hello Experts,
    We are actually in the blueprinting phase of the SEM implementation and i had a quick question at this stage.
    For ex: Well we have individual company codes 0100, 0200,0300,1000,1100,1200,2000,2100,2200 and 2300.
    0100, 0200 and 0300 being american company codes
    1000,1100 and 1200 being european company codes
    and similarly 2000,2100,2200 and 2300 are asian company codes
    So would America, Europe and Asia be consolidation units then and then Global would be consisting of these 3 consolidation units.
    Correct me if i am wrong anywhere - I am pretty new to SEM.
    Thanks,
    Nandita

    Hi,
    Each of the Company Code will be a Consolidation Unit. So, 0100, 0200, 0300 etc will be Consolidation Units in Consolidation. The integration between Company Code and Consolidation is Company created in FI.
    Consolidation groups can be compared like Cost Center or Profit Center Groups. A group of Consolidation Units (and possibly Consolidation groups) will be come Consolidation groups. In your case, you can think of creating a Consolidation group each for America, Europe, Asia etc. If required you can create a sub group within a Consolidation Group.
    All the Consolidation Groups can be linked at a higher level where the global consolidation required to be done. The top node and groups can be depicted as under:
       GLOBAL
            AMERICA
            EUROPE
            ASIA
    There will not be any Consolidation Units under GLOBAL. Consolidation Units will be under America, Europe and Asia.
    Thanks
    Murali.

  • Consolidation unit

    I need Company A to appear in one version of BCS with K4 variant in another version of BCS with K2 variant.
    Can a consolidation unit appear in 2 different version with 2 different varaint?

    This may be possible, but not likely in the same cons area.

  • Reparenting - of equity consolidated units upward in hierarchy

    Hi experts,
    We're doing reparenting of a cons unit (upward in a hierarchy) : The scenario is explained as under:
    There are two hierarchies in a single version. The consolidation units falling under both hierarchies are same. Difference being - H1 is a flat hierarchy with parent A and all other as subsidiaries (100% owned and purchase method consolidated)
    H2: Has multiple levels (conso groups) with overall parent A. All other companies are equity consolidated (ofcourse parents in each group is assigned purchase method, ownership is again 100% of all units)
    In H2: we're doing a reparenting. From a lower conso group(cons group CGB with parent B) a unit(unit C) is moving to the top conso group(cons group CGA with parent A). The master data changes in both conso groups have been made(period/yr of divestiture and period/yr of acquisition set in the sender group and receiver group respectively; added the cons unit C in CGA group).
    The organizational change logic is being used.
    After the conso group change task and COI task are run, in the report there is a difference in the equity PY surplus at level A - overall parent) in both hierarchies.
    There are two equity pickups - A/c1 and A/c2
    The opening balances on these accounts are getting reversed in the divestiture period in old parent.
    Whereas the PY - RE(Previous year - Retained earnings) account is not getting reversed (in itself) but the balance is being posted to COI:Clearing item (COI clearing item defined in COI settings->Appropriation of retained earnings -> Net income tab)
    1. The client doesnt want PY equity surplus to change. In H1 , it is not changing (not reversing) whereas, in H2 it is reversing in the same accounts - balancing to zero.
    2. They'd ideally want the PY surplus to goto the COI clearing.
    They'd like the system to do this entry and not fix this by doing a manual PL30 journal.
    Can you tell me if there is anything in the configuration of COI that can fix this issue?
    Why is the system behaving differently for A/c1 (and A/c2)and PY - RE account?
    Another thing, when I look at the COI documents posted in the H2 hierarchy, I see the A/c1 and A/c2 (scopes of data for equity method) as double the amount in the new cons group (equity holdings data) whereas in the H1 (where only a total transfer doc is posted) I see the accounts (as part of equity data) with the actual value.
    Thanks, AJ
    Edited by: A J on Nov 17, 2009 3:17 PM

    Thanks Dan.
    Appreciate if you can help on the below points as well.
    1. As part of divestiture/transfer postings: The system is reversing some Previous Year(PY) equity accounts into themselves. How can we get the system to eliminate them by posting to COI Clearing account. Basically, we dont want the PY accounts to be touched?
    For the Retained earnings - PY account, the system is actually posting to COI clearing account.
    These PY accounts are part of some scopes for equitization.
    Is there any link between the "balance carry forward" - list of items table and the divestiture postings?
    Does the system check this table while posting/reversing the equity(PY) accounts?
    2. I want to understand the sequence in which the system posts the documents at the old parent and new parent (group) level.
    The same activity number is there  for Total Divestiture, total transfer documents posted at new parent level and total divestiture document posted at old parent level.
    Does the system follow bottom up approach? Thereby creating total divestiture document at old parent level.
    Followed by documents at upper level (new parent level)
    Also , at the upper level(new parent level), does it post documents in the way they are shown in the log? (We havent changed the default sequence maintained in UCWB - COI settings). so it will post first consolidation doc, followed by total divestiture, followed by total transfer docs at the new parent level?
    Is this the reason for the double value being posted at new parent for equity holding data?
    Will studying the statistical items (corresponding to eliminated equity holding items) be relevant here to understand why at upper level there is double the value being posted by system?
    Thanks.

Maybe you are looking for