Consolidation Unit: consolidate only until period 09 (divestment).

I have another problem related to consolidation:
I have a consolidation group with several consolidation units assigned to. For one assigned consolidation unit, I want to consolidate only up to period 09. So, I have edited the year and period of divestment (2008/09). I was hopping that, that consolidation unit wasn't proposed in the consolidation monitor for interunit elimination (for period 10).
Does anybody know what else do I have to do for this purpose?
Thanks,
Paula

This sounds like a minor bug. I suggest you search SAP Notes for solution and if none is found notify SAP via customer message.

Similar Messages

Consolidation unit's divestiture

Hi all,
We are implementing SEM-BCS 6.0 and we have a question.
In 011.2008 we defined in the Consolidation Group that a consolidation unit had Divestiture Accounting at Beginning of Period.
But in 012.2008 when we execute the upload of data from BW it uploads data to the total of records although the consolidation unit was already divested in the prior period.
Should we delete this consolidation unit from the hierarchy?
Because we read in this forum, that after a divestiture the consolidation unit should only be deleted from the hierarchy in the next year.
Thanks for your help.
Best regards

Hi Dan,
Thanks for your answer.
Youu2019re saying that although the data is loaded is ignored in the reporting.
But if data is loaded isnu2019t it considered in the consolidation methods? As in the method for IU IU Elimination and Reconciliation or Consolidation of Investments?
Thanks for your help.
Best regards.

Value based on the periodic unit price (only with pr.ctrl S)

Dear all,
There is this field in mateial master called "Value based on the periodic unit price (only with pr.ctrl S)" in accounting view 1,
1 - May I know what is this field about (in between our company using material ledger).
2 - May I know why the value of this field are different between our company period 6 and period 7 for this year? what contribute to it? and is it something wrong with different value between two different period or absolutely normal?
Thanks.
Tuff

Dear all,
Does anyone know my question?
Thanks,
tuff

Value based on the periodic unit price(only with pr.ctrl S) field in MatMas

Dear all,
There is this field in mateial master called "Value based on the periodic unit price (only with pr.ctrl S)" in accounting view 1,
1 - May I know what is this field about (in between our company using material ledger).
2 - May I know why the value of this field are different between our company period 6 and period 7 for this year? what contribute to it? and is it something wrong with different value between two different period or absolutely normal?
Thanks.
Tuff

Hi Tuffy,
For your 1st query:
PUP field in Accounting 1 (if ML is active, Price Determination indicator=3) is the result of Actual Costing Run (CKMLCP) closing entry.
For your 2nd query:
In most of the cases the values will be different in Previous Period and Current Period. e.g.Period 6 values are the results of Actual Costing Run (CKMLCP) in 1st week of Period 6 for Previous Period (i.e. Period 5). Period 7 values are the results of Actual Costing Run (CKMLCP) in 1st week of Period 7 for Previous Period (i.e. Period 6).
The reason for the different values: Price differences, Exchange rate differences, Price/Exchange rate differences from Low lower materials, etc.
Thanks & Regards,
ADI

Value based on the periodic unit price (only with pr.ctrl S) field in mat.

Dear all,
There is this field in mateial master called "Value based on the periodic unit price (only with pr.ctrl S)" in accounting view 1,
1 - May I know what is this field about (in between our company using material ledger).
2 - May I know why the value of this field are different between our company period 6 and period 7 for this year? what contribute to it? and is it something wrong with different value between two different period or absolutely normal?
Thanks.
Tuff

Hi Tuffy,
For your 1st query:
PUP field in Accounting 1 (if ML is active, Price Determination indicator=3) is the result of Actual Costing Run (CKMLCP) closing entry.
For your 2nd query:
In most of the cases the values will be different in Previous Period and Current Period. e.g.Period 6 values are the results of Actual Costing Run (CKMLCP) in 1st week of Period 6 for Previous Period (i.e. Period 5). Period 7 values are the results of Actual Costing Run (CKMLCP) in 1st week of Period 7 for Previous Period (i.e. Period 6).
The reason for the different values: Price differences, Exchange rate differences, Price/Exchange rate differences from Low lower materials, etc.
Thanks & Regards,
ADI

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

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.

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. Dont 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.!!!..

Consolidation Unit Hierachy deletion

The consolidation unit is time dependant, but has many duplicate hierarchies created unwantedly over a period of time. Hence this creates confusion in parameter selection in reports.
Can the unwanted hierarchies be deleted in development and transported across? Will the deletion of whole hierarchy get sucessfully transported?
Alternatively rather than deleting the hierarchy , can the hierarchy be put in invisible mode which will not trouble the users, which selection.
Edited by: BCS_BPC on Mar 3, 2011 6:05 PM

Can the unwanted hierarchies be deleted in development and transported across? Will the deletion of whole hierarchy get sucessfully transported?
- Yes, to both Qs, AFAIK. But, remembering that SAP SEM-BCS has two layers: BCS itself and underlying BW, such excersize is the SAP acrobatics. Without experience it might be very dangerous in sense of damaging data.
Alternatively rather than deleting the hierarchy , can the hierarchy be put in invisible mode which will not trouble the users, which selection.
- No, no invisible mode (in full). One may try achivieng it by different visibility in BCS and BW, but it also requires experience and risky in sense of bringing inconsistency between BCS and BW.

Merger of Consolidation units in BCS

Hi Team,
Have anybody come across scenario like two consolidation units getting merged into one in BCS,
How to handle such scenario?
which functionality should we use ?
what will be changes in consolidation of investment?
Please suggest.
Thanks in advance.
Sreedhar

Dear greg misiorek,
As far as I know the consolidation group change task is applicable only if the consolidation unit is
transfered from one group to other, but In case of merger of consolidation units within the same group will it this be valid.
For instance I have a group A under which I have three companies A1, A2, A3.
but now I have to merge A2 in A1.
The new structure of group A will be companies A1 and A3 only,
Kind Suggest.
Sreedhar

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

Moving consolidation unit mid year

Hi,
we need to move 2 consolidation units from 2 different consolidation groups into a new existing consolidation group in June, rather then at year end. We did some testing on this, but it seems that the historical information of those 2 consolidation units is not transferred into the new consol group in July. Is that to be expected? If not, what is the best way to get the historical data into the new consol group? The managers of the old consol units still need to show the historical data as well. Your help is very much appreciated : )

The cons unit/group hierarchy is time-dependent. The best way to accomplish this is to execute the cons group changes tasks, which transfers the balance sheet balances "out" of the old cons group and the standard consolidation logic of the virtual infocube function module will automatically include the balances in the new cons group from the period of the change and thereafter.
Another possibility, is if you are not using any posting level 30 documents types, you can possibly make the change retroactive to the beginning of the year by changing parameters to period 001 for the hierarchy change. In this case, the reporting logic will automatically include the balances in the new cons group and not the old cons group for the entire year.
It is also important to not "drag-and-drop" for such changes, and to include the cons unit in both new and old cons groups with a period of divestiture in the master data of the old cons group and period of first consolidation of the new cons group.

Consolidation Unit Time Dependent

Hi Experts,
We are in Issue for the consolidation unit.
My client requested not to extract some consolidation unit transaction data from R/3.
He may use, the companies latter on (may be next year) in consolidation process.
For this I changed my permanent parameter for period and changed in LDS --> Selection Tab page I select exclude companies (which client not requires data from R/3). After saving it effect from previous period instead of, from current period.
How I can over come from this, I did any wrong, if so where i have to maintain these setting.
Thanks
Madhu

Hi Dan Sullivan and Eugene Khusainov,
We are using Consolidation system from 2006 onwards with 55 cons unit. Data for 55 cons unit getting from R/3
We configured one Load from DS, method and task for all Cons units.
Now my client requires, out of 55 cons units some Cons units they don't want data from R/3 for cetain period. But those will be appear in Consolidation Unit hierarchy.
Can I restrict cons unit in Load from DS in selection tab page.
My Questions are:
1. If I restrict cons unit in selection, it will effect from current period or from previous period which we already executed .
2. If I am wrong let me know the correct procedure for restriction of data extraction from R/3 for certain Cons Units which client not requires.
Thanks
Madhu

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.

Make field read only untill value within pciklist is choosen

Hello,
I am trying to establish if it is possible to make a field read-only until a value within a pick list is chosen. Basically we have a pick list called structure and if the field value called "Aligned" is selected then I want the text field called Aligned Name to be available for import all other times this field should not be available.
Has anyone done anything similar? I'm guessing that this could only be achieved through WF but I haven't been able to find any code to make fields read only.

For those of you unable to download the document from MetaLink3 here it is:
As an example to illustrate this requirement, let’s say that once there is a checkbox field called "My_Check_Box". When this field is checked, the "Account Type" field need to become a required for entry by the user. To do this follow these steps:
1. In the Admin> Application Customization, select the appropriate Object and go into the Object Field Setup.
2. Edit the field called "My_Check_Box" and enter a Field Validation expression so it uses the following expression:
=[<bMy_Check_Box_ITAG>] AND NOT([<AccountType>] IS NULL AND [<bMy_Check_Box_ITAG >]='Y')
3. Enter an explicit error message.
This expression means that when the checkbox field is checked, the Account Type becomes required. Your custom error message will be raised when checking the checkbox, leaving the account type unpopulated and trying to save the account record.
4. Edit the Account Type field and enter the following expression as Field Validation:
=[<AccountType>] AND NOT([<AccountType>] IS NULL AND [<bMy_Check_Box_ITAG >]='Y')
5. Enter an explicit error message.
That validation handles the user case where a user changes the Account Type value from a NOT NULL value to a NULL value. Your custom error message will be raised when emptying out the account type from a populated value to nothing while the checkbox is checked and trying to save the account record.
Note that the expression in both fields validations begins with the field variable on which the statement is being written.**

Consolidation Unit: consolidate only until period 09 (divestment).

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for