Making interco transfers ABT1N for AuCs created as investment measures

My client uses Investment Management (IM) for projects as investment measures. AuC assets are generated for each account assignment WBS element upon project settlement.
Is there a way to make an intercompany asset transfer directly from one AuC (IM) asset to another via ABT1N or some other transaction, without having to settle to a final asset first? It is my understanding that this is not possible, that all posting to AuC can only be done through the WBS element, not directly to the AuC. Does any one have any suggestions/ideas about this?

Yes, I have tried this.
When I try to post an intercompany entry with tcode ABT1N, using AuC assets, I get the following message (which is what I would expect).
Asset is investment measure, transaction type not allowed
Message no. AK005
Diagnosis
Asset 1085 70020952-0 that is to be posted is an investment measure. You are not allowed to post transactions that affect acquisition value using the current transaction.
Procedure
Check the asset and transaction type 230
I have also tried to create non-IM AuC asset classes, settle AuC balances to these, and then do the ABT1N. I also have tried to do reversals and re-postings of all the entries made to the WBS elements on the old and new company codes. These work to an extent but they are extremely cumbersome and do not meet all customer requirements.
I was hoping someone had a similar experience and was aware of a way that I had not thought of to do a direct intercompany transfer of AuC's.

Similar Messages

How to post the Down payment for assets using the investment measure?

Hi,
We want to post the down payment using the investment measure for some of the assets. Please tell me how to post it and how to clear it.
I have searched the net but till now I am unable to find something with which I can do that.
Thanks in advance...
Regards
Nitin

Hi,
Please reply as I am facing problems with posting the down payments using the investment measure and I have tried and read alot but nothing as such I have been able to found.
Thanks and Reply
Nitin

Legacy AuC - Investment Measure

Dear Experts
One of our SAP client is getting merged into another SAP client effective 1st April 2011.
I'am not sure regarding the takeover of AuC which are not completely capitalised.
I've read several threads and it has been suggested to use TType 900 for prior year data in AS92.
I've tried that but system doesnt allow this Ttype in case of AuC created as Investment Measure under asset class 4001.
Error msg-
Trans. type 900 allowed only for assets u. const. Please correct.
Message no. AA967
Our Investment profile is created with 'Summary Settlement'.
Please suggest how to go ahead in such case.
Regards
Kapil

Hi,
If you are sure that the AuC has to be linked ot and Invesmtnet measure, then create the Invetment order or the WBS, post the openning balance of the AuC by using a cost element crated for this exercise, maintain the allocation structure by defining that the settlement has to be executed with the primary cost element and settle the order.
Regards,
Mariya

Error while creating PO for Asset is investment measure

Hi All,
I am getting error when I try to create PO for Asset which is investment measure.
Error is as below:-
Asset is investment measure, transaction type not allowed
Message no. AK005
Diagnosis
Asset 305000003 0 that is to be posted is an investment measure. You are not allowed to post transactions that affect acquisition value using the current transaction.
Procedure
Check the asset and transaction type 120.
I am using account assigment catergory 'A' in PO. I have checked Allowed transaction type for Acquisition and 120 is already allowed.
Please guide.

Hi,
Try to create PO with account assignment category as P/N for project related ones.
If the related asset is related to Investment Measure we need to settle transactions to WBS element and from WBS element to AUC. We cannot directly post to AUC.
Thanks and Regards,
padmaja

Capitalization of AUC investment measure to asset

Hi,
I created a project and then settled corresponding WBS elements to AUC investment measure using CJ88.After that i am not able to capitalize to final asset.Please help me in procedure as I am not able to settle using normal line item settlement AUC as this is investment measure.

Hi Prad,
I am on 4.6C/D.
Please check on your settings for Capitalization of AUCs created through Investment Support Measures: -
1. Go to the IMG, Asset Accounting under Special Valuation and determine the Depreciation Areas you would like your Investment Support Measures to post to.
2. Still in Special Valuation, define an Investment Support Key and assign it to the relevant depreciation area
3. Also, define the relevant account determination for such posting under the Special Valuation
4. Proceed in the same area to define the Transaction type for the Investment Support Measure by changing any of the Standard ones in there in line with your requirements
5. Now move back to IMG, Asset Accounting then Master Data. Here you go to the screen layout and pick the relevant asset class for AUCs. Get this logical feild group and pick on the item Investment Support. Proceed to define its feild group rule as optional at the required asset maintenance level (Main Asset and/or Sub Level)
6. Leave the IMG and access the relevant AUC's Master Data from the User Menu. Click the tab Investment Support and insert the Investment Support Key you created in note 2 above
7. Now capitalise the AUC. Should work

Internal Order for AUC Asset not getting created Automatically

As per SAP Standard , when I create an AUC Internal Order (KO01), and save , AUC asset is gets created automatically ted via AS01 and stores the AUC Asset in Internal Order settlement rule.
However when tried with the client Im not able to create, AUC is not getting automatically created and stored in Int Order Settlement rule.
In config I have added investment profile to Ord Type and in OAOA ( AUC Asset class setting , Investment profile is also checked)
Kindly let me have your inputs to fix the issue
Advance Thanks
Sanjai

Hi,
In order to create AUC asset automatically by the system, you need to create an investment profile in OITA.
Then assign this investment profile in the Internal order master data created through KO01 in the Investments tab.
There is no option of assigning the Investment profile in the Order type.
And in OAOA that is Asset class, select the radio button investment measure.
You can default the Asset class of AUC in the investment profile or leave it blank so that same can be filled when system prompts for AUC creation.
You cant see the AUC asset in the settlement rule once Investment order is created, but only after settlement of the balances to the AUC u can see.
Thanks & Regards,
Ravi Kumar

Line item Settlement and KOB5 for automatically created AUCs to PM orders

Hello Experts,
I am trying to set up line item settlement for automatically created AUCs. We would like to use line item settlement because we want to see the costs split up by either percentage or amount when settled to the AUC. If I can't settle by percentage or amount to the AUC then i'd like to be able to temporarily block some of the costs from settling. This is for billing not capitalization purposes since all costs will eventually settle to one final asset. The settlement is done using transaction KO88 or KO8G and automatic processing type. I’ve configured a PM Order type as an investment order and set up the related investment profile and investment asset class. Some of the things I've determined from my testing:
Using transaction KOB5, costs can be split up by creating other distribution rules, but only to another object (i.e. another
asset, order, cost center etc. by using the Preliminary) not to the automatically created AUC linked to the order
The default settlement rule is account assignment category FXA, percentage rate 100%, settlement type AUC to the AUC
and therefore cannot be updated/altered when using KOB5 or any other transaction.
Once the costs are settled to another object other than the AUC, those costs cannot be settled to the final asset. Creating Preliminary
settlement rules to a receiver IO and changing the period or fiscal year will not “block” costs from settling whether the processing type is automatic, by period, partial capitalization or full settlement.
I’ve been testing this out in our development client and need verification that this is the way that transaction KOB5 works with line item settlement or did I do something incorrect .
Your feedback is greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance.

Hi Zaid,
Thank you for your response. Assets are not my area so I’m not sure if I missed a transaction or step in the process. I tested this out by doing the following steps:
Created AUC Asset class with line item checked
Assigned PM Order type as non-investment with no investment profile and created order number
Created a main asset number
Created an AUC sub asset number to step 3
Created settlement rule to sub asset number on order
Posted costs to order
Settled from order to AUC with transaction KO88
Created distribution rules for asset with transaction AIAB
Settled from sub asset to main asset number with transaction AIBU
When I settled from the sub to the main asset number in step 9, I found I lost the line item detail. Is there another configuration setting I need to make to allow me to see the line item detail when I use AIBU?
Thank you,

Making Settlement rule mandatory for creating any WBS element

Hello All,
We have an requirement that system should not allow us to save any WBS element until the settlement rule is maintained.
This we want only for WBS elements where Investment rule is not assigned.
Can alyone help me to find out if this is possible, if yes then how.
Points Assured.
Thanks & Regards,
Jatinder Bansal

Hi,
The only way it seems possible is using exists in validations.
if not try to check the status of the wbs element in a validation. function module is STATUS_CHECK. and i think the system might set a special status, if a settlement rule has been maintained for a wbs element.
Rgds
Sudhir Reddy

Asset Down Payment for AUC

Hi,
I am having a query in Asset Down Payment for AUC
I have configured for both Acquisition: down payments and Down-payments clearing account in 'AO90' in asset module.
But I am still not clear why Down-payments clearing account account needs to be configured.
The entry I am getting are
1. F-47 DP request - I enter the Asset number here. Noted item.
2. F-48 -DP- an entry is created as follows:
Vendor     Dr     1000
Bank     Cr     1000
Acquisition: down payments     Dr     1000
Down-payments clearing account     Cr     1000
3. Now the Down-payments clearing account shows a credit balance all the time.
How should this be rectified
rgds
Vidhya

Hi Vidya,
Option 1: When you follow based on your example, ie., asset debited during down payment entry, asset entry will be reversed when you adjust down payment against invoice.
Option 2: Down payment request and down payment made against AUC asset with reference to Purchase order:
With reference to PO: Please refer sap note number 310368 valuated goods receipt paragraph and they have clearly mentioned about making down payments against asset/AUC purchase order without getting debited to asset account.
You have to make F5 378 message number to be a warning message instead of error message and you have to suppress asset related settings in OB41 posting keys 29 and 39. Posting key 39 is useful when you have down payment request.
If you have done this, then it will show only warning message during down payment that "purchase order is related to asset" and it will not be debited to asset account. Also after following the above steps, it is not necessary for you to give Acquisition: down payments G/L and Down payment clearing G/L in AO90 transaction code.
Hope this helps. Assign points if useful.
Regards,
Dwarak.

Making existing roles watertight for HR data

Hello,
I hope to get nudged in the right direction in here. I already descended pretty much to the end of my rope and ... well ... I need some more rope
The situation is like this - I inherited everything that has to do with maintenance of authorizations on our system half a year ago, the guy that did that before me is no longer in the company (so there's no use in asking what he was thinking (if anything) when he was putting the roles together). Documentation is scarce/non-existing. When it exists it's usually not up to date. I'm not exactly a newbie in authorizations field, but at the same time I'm not really that far away from being a newbie yet, so I'm not beyond listening to basics being pointed out to me.
The Utopia:
There are five single roles built for all users of our system (say R1, R2, ... , R5). They're supposed to build on one another, R1 being the basic role, R2 having a couple more authorizations than R1, and so on until R5 which is the role that also has all HR authorizations.
The Reality:
The roles have been designed in a hurry and from the top down starting with the sap_all profile and removing some (or most of the) CA, BC and HR authorizations. They were not properly tested. They do not derive from one another in any way ... R2 for example is a complete copy of R1 with some additional objects and values, same for all the others. Every problem needed to be fixed five times, once for every role. That of course resulted in chaos, things got changed just in one place and the basic role suddenly got more powerful than all the rest. These roles are in use in the production system and there are no plans to substitute them with something better in the very near future.
The Problem:
Suddenly (yeah, right ) the need arose to have these roles watertight with regard to HR data. I did some rudimentary testing and sure enough they're nowhere near watertight even for the most common HR transactions. There are ranges defined in S_TCODE for which I have no idea why they are as they are, there was access to SA38 given where SAP HR programs with no authorization group (and no transaction code) assigned could be run by everyone ... there's god knows how many other security holes. The only help I got from the HR consultants was the list of all 2000 or so HR transactions (taken from the SAP menu tree) which shouldn't be accessible to a normal user. I suspect I might be in need of a typing monkey to check them all five times
Question:
How do I close as many security holes in these roles as possible? What's the strategy when dealing with such tasks? I've made it clear to the management that we probably won't have watertight roles if we don't create new ones, but making a set of new roles created properly from the bottom up is out of the question at this moment.
I'd be extremely grateful for any advice or if anyone could point me to any kind of documentation about making roles like ours more secure for protecting HR data (and also keeping the users away from any BC stuff).
In the meantime, I'm off to searching through the archives of the forum.
ursa

Mopping the floor with the water running is a spot on description
Actually we're in the process of setting up new and improved authorizations but (of course!) the testing phase turned out to be much more time consuming than anticipated. No surprise to me, however someone obviously thought authorizations are a matter of defining roles and their menus and the system does everything else by itself. Riiight.
What I did so far - first I educated myself on the specifics of HR authorizations. I never had to deal with those before, so (for example) it was a surprise to me that there's actually a separate SAP course dealing with HR authorizations Then I compared the existing roles to each other like you suggested and figured out a way that allowed me to do all the modifications with least amount of work. I cleaned most of the infotypes out of P_ORGIN and (to cover my behind), adjusted the ranges in S_TCODE to exclude the 2000 HR transactions our HR consultant listed for me.
Most importantly - I made it clear to the guys above me, that with the roles we use I can't guarantee HR data to be inaccessible for people who should stay away from it. So ... back to the testing of the new authorizations
Thanks for your help! It always makes a huge difference to get something like a second opinion when one can't decide if left is better than right or if it's the other way around.
ursa

Internal order for AUC with cost center - 'Please Select proper plant code'

Hi All,
User is getting error 'Please Select proper plant code', while inserting 'cost center' in field 'Responsible CCtr' for new Internal order which is for AUC.
In Devlopment server also when we try to create asset through internal order we get same error.
For your information this is new Plant, profit center and cost center for which we are trying to create internal order for AUC.
If we try to post without Cost centre entry is saved. But we want to add cost center.
Please help to resolve.

Hi,
If it is a custom message then please check whether any Validation or USer exit is maintained for the IO master data. If yes, then update the cost centre accordingly.
Regards
Sreekanth

Screen layout rules for Auc

Hi
one my clint in development screen layout rule has been defined and where as the same has been moved to production but if using the T. co OAYZ it is not maintained , exit screen is appearing , how change or create the screen layout for AUC in production
pls help
regrds
sekar

sekar,
The oayz screen is a customizing transaction and normal you are no alowed to make customizing changes in production.
When you don't have the values you set up in development and transported to production you have to look to the error in the transport system.
When you use invesment orders or project, then this setting/ changes (for AUC) are only working for new orders or projects.
In OAYZ you give only default values and activate a depreciation area. This values are proposed when you create new AUC.
Paul

IPhone not making its own album for downloaded photos

Why iphone dont do this?
I always download lots of photo from different apps and why they all go to "Camera roll" instead of making a new album for the photos?
example. i downloaded a photo from viber, iphone should create an album named "Viber" on the Photo because the photo is from there and if its from facebook its named "Facebook" or from the internet "Download". If you guys know what i mean, because its like a trash can 1 basket with different things.
and what im asking is album of photos for each apps.
Is there a way or something that can do that?
Android does this.. Im not comparing them, just saying..

Dear ecarlivan,
I agree with you absolutely, I have the same problem and dont be sorry to compare with android, because Apple in his great wish to be very original loosing some quality on functional side. I become Iphone 5s user two weeks ago and day by day I notice more and more things that they are not right. And even here i dont see any wish from apple people to change something.
Sorry to say but I am very disappointed.
Only good appearance.

Order 23 is not a capital investment measure for Asset accounting(AUC)

Dear All,
Help This Error
For T Code Ko02 select order for AUC getting this error
Order 23 is not a capital investment measure
Message no. AY097
Diagnosis
Object concerned: Order 23 .
The object is not an investment measure, either because there is no investment profile entered for it, or the indicator "manage asset under construction" is not set in the investment profile.
System Response
Processing is not carried out.
Procedure
If you want to create assets under construction for the object, then enter an investment profile in the master data for the object.
Check if the the indicator "manage asset under construction" is set in the definition of the investment profile.
Replay solution ASAP
Regards
Nag
Edited by: Nagaraju Chagonda on May 24, 2011 1:18 PM
Edited by: Nagaraju Chagonda on May 24, 2011 1:19 PM

Hi Nag,
Please check if correction note 1165656 is valid to your release. It can correct this error.
Best Regards,
Vanessa.

Delete Distribution Rules For AUC

Hi,
I am wroking on one problem address to me. User haas created 999 distribution rule group for AUC settlement...and getting error message KD803.... Maximum distribution rule group reached.(T code AIAB).. we have implemented note 720619 and 483600 to delete unused distribution rule group.... but I am still not able to delete the same....as I found in programme (Z_SAP_SRULE_DEl_DISTR_GROUPS) it is not supporting assets rule group....
can you please suggest some other way how to delete Dist. rule group.....
Regards,

Hello
If any un used rules are there then only the said programme deleted the rule, if 999 rules are used then it is better to look for other options like transfer the values to another Internal order
Thanks
Kameshwar Rao

Making interco transfers ABT1N for AuCs created as investment measures

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for