Inversion of postings at level 10

Question

hi,
maybe itu2019s a simple question, but Iu2019m a bit confused about the inversion of document types at posting level 10. We do the following posting in period 12:
p/l-acc 100
balance-acc -100
Now I have the problem whether to use the inversion for the next year or not.
If I do, the result in period 1 of the following year is the following:
balance-acc -100 (carryforward)
balance-acc 100 (inversion)
p/l-acc 0 (carryforward)
p/l-acc 100 (inversion)
If I donu2019t invert the posting document, the result in period 1 of the following year is the following:
balance-acc -100 (carryforward)
p/l-acc 0 (carryforward)
No matter which setting I use, I only see three possible solutions:
1.     Carrying forward all p/l-accounts and inverting the posting document
2.     Not using the inversion and doing a new (balance- or p/l-)manual posting in period 1 of the new year
3.     Not mixing up balance and p/l-accounts in one posting
All three options are not really satisfying u2013 maybe you have some other suggestions? It would be really great!
Thanks,
B

Answer 1

Hi BickBee and welcome to SDN.
Actually mixing up with B/S and P&L items is a usual thing in accounting and SEM-BCS. In order to balance FS reports (B/S and P&L) the system the system uses special (clearing) items.
Journal entries in your case will look like follows:
P&L -> 100
P&L Clearing -> -100
B/S -> -100
B/S Clearing (= CY R/E) -> 100
After BCF we have:
P&L -> 0
P&L Clearing -> 0
B/S -> -100
B/S Clearing goes to Prev Year R/E -> 100
And, finally, after inversion:
P&L -> -100
P&L Clearing -> 100
B/S -> 100
B/S Clearing -> -100 (will appear during inversion)
Prev Year R/E -> 100
Taking into account that P&L Clearing is an artificial (not accounting) item we got additional income in P&L, right? However, from accounting point of view we also got additional CY R/E in B/S. Which is right.
Considering also that P&L items are usually not BCFed, the situation you faced looks for me like a methodological problem.
Proposed solution: do not invert these J/Es. Actually, shouldn't be such entries. Could you give us more info, what kind of entries you have?
P.S. Your proposed slution #2 will not work at all. - You'll not be able to break consistensy between R/E in B/S and NI in P&L (if not  to do it by 1-sided reclass without DocType).