Negative delivery costs not allowed

Hi Experts,
In the below situation I am getting message like 'Negative delivery costs not allowed'.Please
give your suggestions.
There is a PO line item which I want to check the 'Delivery completion indicator' But when I am
going to change mode of the PO, in that line item delivery costs are coming in negative & samething
is shown in PO header condition tab as well.
So system throws message that ' PO Header still faulty'. 'Negative delivery costs not allowed'.
Please suggest how to overcome this problem.
Regards,
Partha

Hi,
PLease check which condition is causing this error and change "rounding rule" to B. If this does not solve the error, I would recommend that you open a ticket at SAP.
Best Regards,
Arminda Jack

Similar Messages

Negative delivery costs when releagins PO

Hi all,
When I am releasing a PO in t.code ME29N, I am getting the error 'Negative delivery costs not allowed'. First of all, why did the system apportion a negative delivery cost to one line item in my PO?
Second, how do I correct this error and go proceed normally?
Note my PO has several line items. And the delivery cost has been entered as a golbal amount. It is the system which does the apportionment.
Thanks for ur help.
Nas

Hi,
PLease check which condition is causing this error and change "rounding rule" to B. If this does not solve the error, I would recommend that you open a ticket at SAP.
Best Regards,
Arminda Jack

Negative delivery cost

when i make a deletion for line item in a PO it gives me message
"Negative delivery costs not allowed"
please advice

Check if you have any net discount at header level, so the new total of the PO is negative, and delivery cost resulting from a formula is being calculate as negative.

Reg.Negative delivery cost problem in PO release

Dear Friends
'' PO cannot be released due to negative delivery costs" this is my client requirement, I am unable to understand this. Please explain and give the solution.
Thanks
Rajakumar.K

how can you have negative delivery costs?
that means you order material, get it delivered by a carrier, and then the carrier pays you (instead of you pay carrier)?
Please explain your PO process in a bit more detail.
maybe this thread with a similar problem can help you:
http://forums.sdn.sap.com/thread.jspa?threadID=1516469

Delivery costs not reversed in GR reversal

Hi,
I have a situation where in PO following conditions are used-
ZR0 - (100) USD - Statistical - Accrual - Discount/Surcharge type
ZR2 - (100) USD - Statistical - Accrual - Discount/Surcharge type - Delivery cost - (100% of ZR0)
ZR3 - (-100) USD - Statistical - Accrual - Discount/Surcharge type - (-100% of ZR0)
When I post the GR, the following entries are posted-
148000    CAInv NonTradStock S   30,421.60 AUD
311700    CLPbls GR-IR Clearin   64,991.68- AUD
629935    Std-Actual Price Var   34,570.08 AUD
611900    Purchasing (FG)        64,991.68 AUD
611910    Purchase offset (FG)   64,991.68- AUD
311700    CLPbls GR-IR Clearin   14,504.64- AUD (ZR0)
120240    CARecv Sundry-Extern   14,504.64 AUD
311700    CLPbls GR-IR Clearin   14,504.64 AUD (ZR2)
311700    CLPbls GR-IR Clearin   14,504.64- AUD (ZR3)
But when I reverse the GR, the following entries only are posted-
99 148000    CAInv NonTradStock S   32,653.56- AUD
86 311700    CLPbls GR-IR Clearin   64,991.68 AUD
96 629935    Std-Actual Price Var   32,338.12- AUD
50 611900    Purchasing (FG)        64,991.68- AUD
40 611910    Purchase offset (FG)   64,991.68 AUD
Can you please let me know why the ZR0/ZR2/ZR3 cond are not reversed in the 102 movement?

Hello Jurgen,
I am cancelling the initial material document (101) with MIGO - 102.
When I check the accounting documents:
For the 101:
001 89       311010     STK RAW MAT                                   18,219.00
002 96       408111     UNVOUCH A/P RAW MAT                           11,489.81-
003 86       601120     PURCHASES RAW MAT (O                             548.57
004 50       408113     UNVOUCH A/P TRANSP                             6,384.00-
005 50       408113     UNVOUCH A/P TRANSP                               893.76-
For the 102:
Itm PK BusA Acct no.   Description                    Tx     Amount in   USD
001 99       311010     STK RAW MAT                                   18,219.00-
002 86       408111     UNVOUCH A/P RAW MAT                           11,489.81
003 86       601120     PURCHASES RAW MAT (O                             345.19
004 40       408113     UNVOUCH A/P TRANSP                             6,384.00
There were several goods receipts between 101 and 102 (but no invoicing) because this is an automated flow with EDI.
The PO has 2 freight condition types:
FRC1 (freight/qty) with vendor A in the details of the conditions on the PO
FRA3 (freight %) with vendor B in the details of the conditions on the PO
For different reasons, the pricing is maintained in MEK1 (not in an info-record).
Thanks for your help,
Annabelle R.

Delivery cost not created during GRN of PO using BAPI

I have a customized program which use BAPI - BAPI_PO_CREATE1 to create PO, PO was created successully.
then program will use BAPI - BAPI_PO_CHANGE to update condition pricing, which is also executed succesfully. all condition pricing (KONV) updated correctly.
Lastly, the program will use BAPI - BAPI_GOODSMVT_CREATE to create GRN and update delivery cost. However in my case, the delivery cost is not update, EKBZ table record is not created, as well as GRN item line table MSEG table is not updated with delivery cost.
Anyone face this type of problem before?What is the possible causes?
Any help and suggestion is greatly appreciated.

Lai,
you should try asking this on ABAP forum thread. You will get a response. May be there is another BAPI u should use or may be you the usage of BAPI is incomplete. Pl confirm with ABAP forum.
Rgds

UNPLANNED DELIVERY COST NOT PROPERLY DISTRIBUTED TO MATERIAL LINE ITEM

Hi ,
Presently my system is Configured to distribute Unplanned Delivery Costs among invoice items,but it is not properly distributed among line item while doing the posting.
What may be the problem,Is there any additional settings to be checked ?or in which areas i need to check? Plz Help regarding this.
Thanks,
Raju

Hi,
Plz chek the SPRO settings for unplanned delivery cost. You need to maintain the company code
in SPRO - Material Management - Logistics Invoice Verification -Incoming invoices - Configure How Unplanned Delivery Costs Are Posted
regards

GR based IV for delivery costs not working

Hi Gurus,
GR based IV is not working for certain delivery costs. I have not assigned any accrual key to the condition type in the calculation schema.
When I try to perform invoice verification for the delivery cost, the GR quantity / value does not appear automatically.
Is there anything I need to do with the schema / condition type?
Regards,
Aroop

Hi Kumar,
I had missed out the Vendor in GR option 2 in the condition type configuration: I changed it to 2, but the problem remains.
During PO creation, the vendor gets mentioned against the condition type automatically.
Any further idea on this?
Regards,
Aroop

Planned delivery cost not updating Through Invoic02 idoc

Hi,
We are using Inbound IDOC (INVOIC02) to create invoice. The enhancement that we are looking to do is to use the indicator Goods/Service items + planned delivery costs which is seen when we manually post invoices using MIRO. Can you please let us know of any inputs in this regard.
For your information - the current functional module we are using to post invoices received through EDI is IDOC_INPUT_INVOIC_MRM and the message type is INVOIC. But this does not seem to help us in case of goods which has got a planned freight attached to it.
Thanks
Shasi

Hi Experts ,
Kaindly provide me your inputs ..
Thanks
Shasi

Delivery Cost not to be inventorised

Dear all,
I need your advise in our business scenario.
Basic Price = 100.00
Customs duty = 10.00
I dont want to inventorise the customs duty to the material cost but required as a separate entry like below:
Inventory account Dr. 100.00
Customs duty Dr. 10.00
GR/IR clearing a/c Cr. 110.00
Because the imported materials are exported within 180 days. Initially we pay the customs as deposit not as a duty. If we are unable to export within 180 days then the deposit amount should get transferred to Customs duty account and to be inventorised to the material account.
Please advise.
Regards,
S.Suresh

Hi Suresh,
For this you define respecive custom duty condition type as accrual in customizing and condition type as delivery cost then after in pricing procedure mentin your defined account keys against custom duty condition type.
Hope it will solve your problem
Regards
VS

Goods receipt of packed inbound delivery is not allowed

Dear all,
I have a scenario that as per of business process,i have to post Packed inbound delivery in MIGO .
But i am getting an error says inbound delivery cannot be packed during posting in MIGO. I know that i can post it through VL32N without any problem. Since i need to capture damage,short or excess and some reference numbers and date of production and expiry for the items i need to post through MIGO option instead of VL32N.
I have already checked in our client IDS ,it is allowing to pack without any errors but in Development server i am getting this error.
I changed the item category control ELP of inbound delivery also but of no use .
Any hindsights on this both funtionally or tecnically will be of great help.
Thanks and regards,
Jothiswaran.
Edited by: A. Jothiswaran . on Nov 12, 2009 8:32 PM

Hello,
To my knowledge packing through MIGO is not possible.
If your SLOC is HU managed and you have done the configuration of u201Cdefault value of delivery and HU requirementu201D
SPROLGHandling Unit ManagementBasicMaterial managementInventory managementsecond option, then your issue will be solved.
In this case, when you post the MIGO with all information you will get IBD delivery number and not material document number. After that you can pack the material in IBD
Thanks
Milind

Delivery costs not reversed (MIGO - 102)

Dear all,
I need to cancel a material document (101) of which the freight costs correctly posted (101), with 2 different condition types and a different vendor for each of them.
Now with MIGO (102), I am able to reverse the freight costs for the first condition type, but not the second one. Both condition types have a very similar setup in the customizing and I do not understand why one of the freight amounts does not get reversed in MIGO (neither in MBST) whereas it was correctly posted with 101.
Any ideas?
Annabelle R.

Hello Jurgen,
I am cancelling the initial material document (101) with MIGO - 102.
When I check the accounting documents:
For the 101:
001 89       311010     STK RAW MAT                                   18,219.00
002 96       408111     UNVOUCH A/P RAW MAT                           11,489.81-
003 86       601120     PURCHASES RAW MAT (O                             548.57
004 50       408113     UNVOUCH A/P TRANSP                             6,384.00-
005 50       408113     UNVOUCH A/P TRANSP                               893.76-
For the 102:
Itm PK BusA Acct no.   Description                    Tx     Amount in   USD
001 99       311010     STK RAW MAT                                   18,219.00-
002 86       408111     UNVOUCH A/P RAW MAT                           11,489.81
003 86       601120     PURCHASES RAW MAT (O                             345.19
004 40       408113     UNVOUCH A/P TRANSP                             6,384.00
There were several goods receipts between 101 and 102 (but no invoicing) because this is an automated flow with EDI.
The PO has 2 freight condition types:
FRC1 (freight/qty) with vendor A in the details of the conditions on the PO
FRA3 (freight %) with vendor B in the details of the conditions on the PO
For different reasons, the pricing is maintained in MEK1 (not in an info-record).
Thanks for your help,
Annabelle R.

JSlider - Negative minimum value not allowed?

Hi,
I want a JSlider ranging from -10 to +10. setMinimum(-10), however, gives me a JSlider ranging from 0 to +10. Why?
Thanks for your help,
Thomas

But, all you have to do is rescale it. You're not SOL at all. The slider value is just the internal representation, you can put whatever labels you want on it and trnasofrm it to wahtever you want.
So for example, say you have a range of -10 to 10. Then you have a range of 0 to 20, and when you set the value you add 10, and when you get the value back, subtract 10. Simple!

Delivery Cost

Dear All,
Can negative delivery cost be maintained in the pricing procedure for Purchase order?
Regards,
Indranil

check this links
Delivery Costs
Re: Negative delivery costs not allowed
Negative delivery costs not allowed

Conditions type of category "Delivery Costs"(B) donu00B4t allow negative values

Hello,
I would like to know if it is possible to munipulate a condition type with category "B" Delivery costs in such a way that it allows a negative entry in the Purchase Order.
Estandard SAP does not allow it. Message: 06259 "Negative Delivery costs are not allowed".
If the above is not possible, can anyone tell me how a can manipulate a Discount (fixed amount) in such a way that it not only points at a particlar account (accruels indicator does this job) upon MIGO, but also apears as a line-item upon receiving the invoice (MIRO). As far as I know, only Planned delivery costs can do this job. But they do not allow negative values!
If anyone has encountered a similar task, please tell me how they solved it.
Thanks,
Aart

Hello Guys,
The scenario isas follows.
When one buys fuel, in Chile one has to pay fuel especific Taxes.
Version especific config does not resolve this because we need the tax in amount (value) not in percentage.
In our system we resolved this by creating a material "Fuel especific Taxes" which points at a tax-account with a special tax-indicator.
So far so good.
Now the government implemented a second fuel tax - "Fuel tax variable" which we might resolve in the same way, but the problem is this tax might be negative(!).
We cannot create a material with a "negative value" in our Purchase Order and discount conditions have inmediate efect on the material costs in the PO.
The ideal would be incorporate a condition type in the PO which upon invoicing (MIRO) shows up with the tax account (and a possible negative value!
The model we have developed upto now is using the tabpage "GeneralAccount" in the MIRO but in this model we have to indicate the account ourselves. The system does not propose it.
Thats why I thought of the "Planned Delivery costs" option.
Hope this clarifies a bit more the case we have.
Thanks for any feedback
Aart

Negative delivery costs not allowed

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for