Parallel Accounting

HI,
I have done the configurations for Non- leading ledgers and parallel accounting but when I post entry the entry posted in the non- leading ledger is not displayed in the entry.
Kindly advise me what are the configurations to be done for parrallel accounting.
Cheers
V.Krishnan

It is working.
Thanks
Cheers
V.Krishnan

Similar Messages

Open Item Management and parallel accounting

We are using parallel accounting, there are two ledgers setup.
With this setup, posing to leading ledger will automatically post an entries to non-leading ledger.
Our user have this requirement, that for adjustment purpose, they just want to post to one ledger (by specifying the leadger group).
but we encounter a problem, when GL account setup with 'Open Item Management' , FBB1 dont allow to post it directly when we enter the ledger group.
Can the expert advise, it is with parallel accounting, account with 'Open Item Management' have to post to all ledgers.
Thank you.

Hi,
Pls put this query in FI forurms and get reply immly.
Anil

Open Item Management and parallel accounting issue

We are using parallel accounting, there are two ledgers setup.
With this setup, posing to leading ledger will automatically post an entries to non-leading ledger.
Our user have this requirement, that for adjustment purpose, they just want to post to one ledger (by specifying the leadger group).
but we encounter a problem, when GL account setup with 'Open Item Management' , FBB1 dont allow to post it directly when we enter the ledger group.
Can the expert advise, it is with parallel accounting, account with 'Open Item Management' have to post to all ledgers.
Thank you.

Yes, this is a precondition , if a particular posting needs to be made to non -leading leadger , then accounts should be managed as not open items .
In case if the accounts is managed as open items then posting happens to all the ledgers.
Thanks
Regards,
Manish Garg

Parallel Accounting - Inventory Valuation

Hi Masters,
My leading ledger is IGGAP and non leading ledger IFRS. As per SAP whenver a posting is made to leading ledger, the same data will flow automatically to non leading ledger.
As per IGGAP, freight cost incurred in procuring the inventory shall be added with inventory. While, under IFRS, freight cost is an expenses and shall be charged to Income Statement.
I need your input on the above matter in parallel accounting situation.
Thanks in advance.
Regds
Joy

One more point!!!
I know that through specific ledger posting, we can account these scenarios. My question here is as per IGAAP frieght cost is added with inventory with both the ledgers updated.
Shall I reverse it in IFRS and post another entry by treating freight as expenses?. Cant we avoid reversal of first entry? Is there a way to stop the first entry in IFRS?
Can we achieve the purpose by creating Ledger Groups??
Please reply.
Regds
Joy

Parallel accounting cost objects in non leading ledger

Hi Gurus,
I have implemented parallel accounting and have my leading ledger in INR and the non leading leading ledger in USD.
also i have the FI profit center and segment activated and for segmental reporting i am using the same.
I now need to report on segments in the non leading ledger also.
can i transfer the account assignments (like profit center and segment) to the non leading ledgers also.
Points will be awarded
regards

I've tried it.
It works properly.
I created a movement type for Area 30 Only.
Anyway I had to modifyT093A: 30 IAS Depreciation Area now has '00' in filed WRTAFB."Adoption of values from depreciation area" like the Area 01.
I have to capitalize values (also negative; correction) only in Area 30 (IAS), not also in Area 01 (APC zero value).
There's no other way to obtain that?
Depreciation Area 01 (master area) 30 (IFRS)
APC 0 1000

Comparison parallel ledger app. with parallel account app. in terms of IFRS

Hİ ALL,
we would like to know what is the advantages of using parallel ledger approach for transition to IFRS in SAP instead of using parallel account approach?
thanks in advance

Hi,
Currently I am making a similar review - account based versus parallel ledger. The pro's of the of parallel ledger are the con's of account based and vice versa:
Parallel ledger - Pros
- G/L accounts: fewer G/L accounts required (so opportunity to reduce SCOA), same G/L accounts are shared across all ledgers - unified reporting
- Fiscal year variant: company codes with different fiscal year variants assigned to a separate ledger, facilitating consolidated reporting
- Posting period variant: postings to ledgers can be separately controlled by assigning a separate posting period variant for the ledger
- Carry forward: no need to maintain separate retained earnings accounts per accounting principle
- Currency valuations and translations: Automated postings updated to appropriate ledgers based on the assignment to relevant accounting principles
- Adjustment and value postings: Adjustment and value postings, such as reclassification are automatically posted to the appropriate ledgers
- Standard reports: standard reports are executed by ledger
Parallel ledger - Cons
- The data volume could increase as a result ofmaintaining parallel ledgers (see SAP note 820495 for tips on resolving the issue)
- Parallel ledger is a new concept at my customer so it requires a complete revamp of system configuation, with all the impact on processes and people, all old local reports (using special ledger) will become obsolete.
Hope this helps. By the way: we have chosen to move from account-based to parallel ledger despite the implementation effort.
Best regards,
Alexander Min

Parallel Account SAP Document

Dear Sir,
Can you please forward me any SAP document showing how to configure Parallel Accounting in SAP. We are using SAP ECC6 without activating NEW GL module.
What is the difference in "Complete Posting and Difference Posting" in context of parallel accounting.
Can you please clarify whether we need to activate NEW GL for using Parallel Accounting or the parallel accounting can be used without activating NEW GL module.
Thanks in Advance.

Hi,
Complete Postings versus Difference Postings
Postings that differ depending on the accounting principle applied can be posted either as a difference posting for the posting in the general ledger (as a delta posting) or as a complete posting. Only the application component Asset Accounting (FI-AA) supports delta postings.
SAP recommends implementing the delta method for postings from Asset Accounting because, for complete postings, you have to subsequently filter out the valuations of valuation area 01 from the additional ledger
In the new General Ledger, you can display the parallel accounting using parallel accounts (as in R/3) or using parallel ledgers. The FI standard functions and reports are available for all parallel ledgers.
regadrs,
Santosh kumar

Parallel accounting for income tax

Hello Experts,
Please explain configuration process for depreciation as per income tax.
we are using depreciation as per company act, need to extend parallel accounting (general ledger) for income tax.
Thanks & regrds,
Sachin

Hi
For Indian Income Tax Depreciation, you would have to create a new depreciation area. If you are on EhP 5, please have a look at the below business function:
FIN_LOC_CI_8
This business function would need to be activate in SFW5.
The below notes are also useful:
1964284
1997948
783919
Thanks & Regards
Sanil Bhandari

In parallel Accounting of NewGL, how do you implement PS&CO?

Hello,
Could you tell me a hint of this;
In parallel Accounting of NewGL, how do you implement PS&CO?
For example, there is some difference between IFRS/GAPP,
parallel value of asset should be handled in CO-OM or PS?
I know the combination of modules as follows;
asset depreciation cost(FI-AA) => cost accounting(CO-OM) + project accounting(PS) => general ledger(FI-NewGL)
regards,
Katsumi Makabe

HI,
if you are using New GL ledger functionality Controlling area covers only the values of the leading ledger (to keep CO data comperable for the whole company, no matter what local differences may occur). I am not totally sure but doesn't PS also cover only the leading ledger values.
Best regards, Christian

Parallel Accounting Method for IFRS

Hello all,
My company would like to explore the parallel accounting method for IFRS. Currently we are on ECC 6.0 with classic GL.
Currently we have both US GAAP and local GAAP reporting running in the same ledger. We use a similar method (setting up additional H accounts which are used in local GAAP reporting only) to segregate local GAAP from US GAAP as recommended by SAP.
We set up 2 different depreciation areas: 01 (post to US GAAP accounts) and 02 (post to local GAAP accounts). The problem we ran into at year-end is pertaining to Retained Earnings. Because this a complete replacement method (US GAAP reporting will ignore all the H accounts which are set up for local GAAP and visa versa), we can't simply roll all the P/L accounts into one Retained Earnings account. We have to set up 3 Retained Earnings account (one for US GAAP only accounts, one for common accounts and another one for local GAAP accounts).
If we add IFRS into the mix, we will need to set up even more Retained Earnings accounts which is not ideal. Also, we plan on including more countries into our SAP environment which requires us to generate additional local GAAP reporting. So my thinking is that this will become very hard to manage.
Also, this method will fall apart if the common accounts are not the same for any of the reporting requirement (e.g. common accounts for US GAAP and local GAAP are different than IFRS).
My understanding is there are 2 ways to handle parallel accounting: replacement (which is what we are current using) or adjustment methods. Instead of completely replacing the US GAAP accounts, the adjustment method is to post the delta to the additional accounts.
My question is:
1. Giving current situation of my company, what is the best method to handle IFRS and also implement additional local GAAP reporting in the same environment?
2. What is the best practice to handle parallel accounting method? Replacement or adjustment method?
3. Since I'm already in the replacement method, can I easily switch to the adjustment method?
Any guidance will be greatly appreciated.
Regards,
Cassandra Wong

Cassandra,
Check out this blog which has info and process map for parallel accounting. Theer's also a link for a recent SAP webinar about how we implemented parallel reporting for our own use.
http://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/scn/weblogs;jsessionid=(J2EE3417400)ID2115139750DB10714505287783485243End?blog=/pub/wlg/15679
siva
Edited by: Siva Darivemula on Sep 25, 2009 7:37 PM

Parallel accounting - different APC values for different ledgers

< MODERATOR: Please don't post in multiple forums. Message locked. Please review the [forum rules|https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/wiki?path=/display/home/rulesofEngagement]>
Hi all,
I defined the following 3 depreciation areas:
01 - IFRS - posts in realtime / target ledger grp = 0L
30 - local - posts depreciation only / target ledger grp = Z1
60 - difference 30-01 - posts only APC directly / target ledger grp = Z1
0L contains leading ledger (IFRS)
Z1 contains parallel ledger (local)
Then I defined a new transaction type for acquisition (e.g. Z10) and limited it to depreciation area 01. This transaction type I wanted to use for acquisitions which are relevant only for IFRS ledger.
Now I post an $1000 invoice using transaction F-90 (acquisition with vendor). I select posting key 70, in the field Account I select an asset under construction and I choose the transaction type Z10.
After proceeding this step I would expect that the amount $1000 would be posted only in IFRS ledger. But it is not, it is posted in both ledgers.
If I want to run the transaction ASKB (APC values posting), I get an error message "Account 14001 in company code 0100 cannot be directly posted to". The account 14001 is the acquisition account for the AuC used when posting the invoice.
Why I get this message? How can I get the values posted correctly (i.e. only to IFRS ledger)?
Thanks for all ideas
Zbynek

Did you get a solution to your issue.?
Would you please mind sharing your solution ?
I am in a similar situation where we have area 01 as local Gapp and area 15 as IFRS.
we want to have 01 posted to leading and 15 to nonleading ledgers.
thanks.

Infoprovide new GL ledger group parallel accounting

Hello
Is there BI Content for an infoprovider that contains ledger (0AC_LEDGER) or ledger group or accounting principle as infoobject? This to allow to produce a balance sheet according to the GAAP (accounting principle) selected (navigation attribute)
Regards
Arjan

You tend to create your own GL line item cube
However in your case for the parallel ledger - I would look at creating your own totals datasource from the parallel ledger via
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw70/helpdata/EN/be/928f40f5767d17e10000000a1550b0/frameset.htm
And then create your cube and datasource from there
The difference from this to the GL line items is that retained profit will be missing from the balance sheet for line items.
As standard credit assets will still reside in assets and debit liabilities in creditors - if you need these to change (like the FSVs in R3) you have to a bit of coding using a virtual provider to flip the accounts

Parallel accounts on the same machine

I run Creative Cloud app versions at work on a PC.
I have a personal copy of CS6 running on my home office iMac.
I want to install and activate Creative Cloud versions on my Mac at home using the second instance of my work account (allowed) - whilst leaving my personal CS6 install untouched and also active.
Instructions on how to do this would be great.
Thanks

Sorry, but you didn't specify details, and it was worth checking whether or not you had overlooked this approach.
The problem you're having (as I suppose you already know) is that any new disk item inherits the permissions of the folder it is originally created in in. These permissions (sensibly enough) need owner or administrator permission to change once they've been established; that will happen when you copy a file to a new location (because that's essentially creating a new file) but not when you move it. any of the following would work:
changing the permissions on newly created files for both users so that they all explicitly give r/w access to a particular group.
writing a droplet that would change the permissions of files dropped on it and move them programmatically to the shared folder
set up a folder action or launchd job that would watch the shared folder and automatically convert permissions on files placed in it.
The last would be the approach I would take, but... which appeals to you?

Reason 4 parallel account to admin on personal computer?

As the sole owner and user of this personal computer, are there any reasons one would want to create a separate account from the one as the admin.?I.e., I've already created a user account guest for obvious reasons.
G4 dual 1 GHz 1.5 GB SDRAM Quicksilver Mac OS X (10.4.9) 2 120 GB HDs, Apple's 23" HD LCD

Hi Biovizier,
Thanks for the thorough explanation. I've been using my Mac at the admin level ever since I purchased this machiine used for about a year now. And although, (as far as I can tell) I haven't run into any malicioius or benign attacks, I think I will reconsider my practice and go the route of using my machine for the day to day stuff at the non-admin level. This makes most sense as you (and Apple) recommend we do until we are comfortable enough to be carrying out operations at the expert level. I can see by being logged at the admin level, the machine would be more susceptible to "harm" than had it been at the non-admin. For now, I will start the practice of logging in as non-admin and only login to my admin level when it really requires so, i.e., system updates, etc. Thanks!
Ultimately, the choice of course is up to the user,
but Apple recommends in at least two documents for
users to avoid using an "admin" account for day to
day functions. Use a non-admin for common activities,
and only perform administrative tasks while logged in
to an "admin" account.
http://images.apple.com/server/pdfs/TigerSecurityCon
fig.pdf
http://developer.apple.com/internet/security/securityi
ntro.html
If you don't consider yourself to be knowlegable
enough about the risks to decide for yourself, I
suggest you follow Apple's guidelines for now. I
would also suggest that people providing advice have
good reasons for recommending a lower level of
security than Apple recommends (and there might be
good reasons depending on the situation). I.e. stick
with a non-Admin account unless you have a reason not
to.
One difference between an admin and a non-admin
account is that an "admin" account is known
unfortunately to be able to make system level changes
automatically, whereas a non-admin user would have to
enter an "admin" password to do so (although the
existence unpatched security vulnerablities that
allow a non-admin to make system level changes can't
be ruled out). The appearance of the password
dialogue when you are not expecting to make system
level changes can provide a useful warning that
something suspicious is being attempted.
Since it is easier to install hidden processes or
backdoors with system level privileges, users already
running with "admin" level privileges make an easier
target. But using a non-admin account is no
substitute for following "safe" computing practices
with respect to the treatment of unfamiliar
applications or attachments, etc. Using a non-admin
account will not protect the data in that account
either. It might be of benefit to segregate
activities even further - eg. conduct any on-line
transactions from a whole separate non-admin account
-- but the benefits of this practice itself are
eliminated if the "admin" account is used routinely.
There have been very few reports of any sort of
malware affecting OS X to date, although a few have
shown up in the past on this very site complaining of
strange behaviour that turned out to be caused by the
proof-of-concept-ware "Opener". I.e. in the real
world, people have come here with Opener installed,
with no idea how it got on their system. Opener was
not very sophisticated and it likely would not have
been installed if the user hadn't been using an
"admin" account.
G4 dual 1 GHz 1.5 GB SDRAM Quicksilver Mac OS X (10.4.9) 2 120 GB HDs, Apple's 23" HD LCD

Parallel Accounting using New GL Ledgers

Hi
I would like to know if it is possible to use different ledgers that use different Chart of Accounts.
So for example in the leading ledger I would like to post to GL account 111000 but in one of the non leading ledgers I want it to post to 559100.
Is this possible? I do not see anywhere to link Chart Of accounts with different ledgers?
Thanks in advance

Hi
I'm a bit confused though.
I thought the purpose of parralel accounting was the ability to do different posting according to different accounting priniciples.
So lets say you need to use a specific chart of accounts, enforced by country regulations, these postings must be done in a specific way to specific accounts.You need to post according to these principles. But then you want also postiings done according group financials which use a different chart of accounts, different posting methods and principles.
I was under the impression one could use the ledgers to get the different type of postings to occur. Is this correct?? Am I wrong?
I do not want to use country chart of accounts.
Any suggestion will be appreciated.

Parallel Accounting

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for