Duplicate consolidation unit in hierarchy ( where COI is active) in EC-CS

Hi all
I ve a question regarding duplicating(multiple assignments) existing Consolidation unit in the Hierarchy(tcode:CX1X)
There are several groups where One of the COI Cons Unit is now duplicated ex: 1000 cons Unit
Ex: GROUP1
Cons UNit = 1000
Group4
Cons Unit = 1000
Cons Unit = 2000 - PU
Now we are adding new COns Unit along with CU = 1000 in New Hierarchy
Group6 -
( New Group Created and added new cons units: 2001 -2003)
Cons Unit = 1000 - PU
cons Unit = 2001
Cons Unit = 2002
Cons Unit = 2003
With Above Cons Unit - 1000 Triple in 3 Different Groups.
I did tested COI, Then System Posting 3 Different Documents by Group Level. CAUSE of 3 Group Level
>> The fact is The real COI assignment  is at "Group4" >>>
Please Advise, if this is normal or i should take care differently?
Your reply is highly appreciated.
Thx
Ramana

Hi Dan
Thanks for your reply. Yes, I agree with you and also I am expecting same  in system behaviour. But system is not proposing Full Transfer instead proposed Partial Div, Increased CAP/Red Cap and Step Acq process. this is what I have acheived in the system.
Exicsting Investor CB A PU      reduce 100 % Invest  -2000 .00  Ttype 140  TP CU B ( take out 100% share) in CG1
                             CB D  PU      Increase 100 % Invest  2000.00 Ttype 140  TP  CU B in CG2
still i am not able to move full transfer from old CU A -  new CU D  with INVESTMENTS.
any thoughts please
thanks  in advance
Ramana_12

Similar Messages

  • Consolidation unit's hierarchy can not be organized well in BCS

    Hi,gurus here.
    We are using SEM-BCS to analyse business consolidation based on BW.
    In BW,the consolidation unit's hierarchy is good,but when we execute the data load task in BCS,the consolidatioin unit in BCS can not be organized as an entire hirarchy well.
    What's wrong?

    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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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

  • Consolidation Unit in the wrong position in Accounting Techniques tree

    Hi all,
    I'm facing a problem with a consolidation unit (A) in the Accounting Techniques tree (T1).
    The issue is resolved when I delete the unit A from the consolidation group tree (T2) but, when I add the unit A to the consolidation group tree (T2) again, the unit appears in two places, and that is not correct.
    I've tried to delete and move the unit through the Accounting techniques tree (T1), but the problem continues.
    Can you help me??
    Thanks in advance.
    Inge Eichhorns

    In some cases it is standard for a cons unit to be included in the Acctg Techniques assignment multiple times. Because the assignments may different at various levels in the hierarchy, especially when not inherited downward.
    One way to check this or change this is to check the assignments via the cons group view by clicking on the cons group and selecting View > Cons Group.
    Edited by: Dan Sullivan on Nov 19, 2009 10:38 PM

  • 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

  • BCS  how to change the accounting technique of consolidation unit.

    Hi, expert,
        We have a C/I method with accounting technique 'equity method', but when we assign the method to consolidation unit, the value of 'accounting technique' of consolidation unit  is 3 (mutul stock method ), not 2 (equity method).
       How to crrect this.
      I really appreciate your input on this matter
      Thanks.

    Thanks, Dan and Collet
       In my compandy hierarchy, each consolidation unit with the method is 3, not 2. include inheritance and not inheritance.
       When I double click one of consolidation unit.  a maintain window display,  I change accounting technique in this window, the syste issue another message  UGMD016 ('The value 2 is invalid for characteristic METHOD'
                                                                         Characteristic METHOD has no master record with the value 2.
                                                                         (The non-existing value was stored as an attribute for characteristic and value .)
       This mean that the method is incorrect?
       But the accounting technqiue of the method  is '2 equity method';

  • 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.

  • 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

  • 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 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.

Maybe you are looking for