Service cost settlement on AUC

Hi Experts,
We have a scenario where we've an Order type PM06 for performing some Improvements projects/Changes into existing process. The settlement of this order type happens on the AUC and finally to fixed asset.
Now if user want to execute some changes through external vendor's service, how this service cost will be settled to AUC (since this order type is settling to AUC) and finally converted as 'Asset' ?
Seeking your valuable advise...Thx in advance

Forgot to mention the other thing.
Internal Labor cost can't be settled to AuC or Fixed Asset. Only Primary Cost Element costs can be settled to AuC or Fixed Asset.
So, you need to define Source Structure & Allocation Structure. While doing the TECO of PM Order, based on Actual Cost or other conditions (Business Decision on settlement), user has to select the appropriate Source Structure & Receiver in Settlement rule.
Refer below thread.
PM Order Settlement to Fixed Asset

Similar Messages

KO88 - Error when settling for Cost Center AND Auc for the same Internal Or

Hi Experts,
We need to configure Investment Internal Orders that could settle to both Cost Center and Auc, but each assignments with different Source Cost Elements
We did the following:
1. Created Auc Class
2. Created Investment Profile "IMOBIL" and assigned to Auc Class, flagging Auc
3. Created Allocation Structure "CV" with two assignments:
01, Source = Cost elements 7000000000 to 7999999999, receiver AUC "by cost element"
02 Source = Cost elements 4000000000 to 4999999999, receiver CTR "by cost element"
4. Created Model Order, filling the Investment Profile IMOBIL created in step 2.
5 Created Settlement Profile ZCV0001, assigning Allocation Strucutre CV, allowing CTR and AUC for receivers, default receiver is "FXA", doc type "AA".
6 Created ORder Type CV01, assigning Settlement Profile ZCV0001.
When I post only for Asset Expenses (Source Cost element 7, Assigment 01), the settlement through KO88 correctly settles to AUC, and also creates the settlement rule for cost center (i'm using the strategy to create from Responsible Cost Center).
But when I post for Asset Expenses (cost elements 7, receiver AUC) AND General Expenses (Source Cost element 4, receiver CTR), KO88 generates an error KD506, saying that for Assigment 02 - AUC I didnt define a settlement cost element.
1. Assignment 02 is not AUC, is CTR;
2. I flagged "by cost element", so I don't need a settlement cost element. And also, I was able to post to AUC when the source posting was only for cost element 7.
Did you face any problem like this?
I cannot find out what is the missing configuration, or if it is a program error...
Kind Regards
Mayumi Blak

Hi Ajay
I already created Source Structure and assigned to my Setllement profile (so I assigned Allocation Structure AND Source Structure).
I don't understand when you say that I need to assign the Source Sutrcture in each rule....because the Source structure is in the Settlement Parameters valid for both rules...
When I post to Asset Expenses only for the internal Order, the 2 rules (CTR and AUC) are created when I run KO88 (but only AUC rule is settled). This is OK.
The problem is when I post for both General Expenses AND Asset Expenses, the system is not recognizing that I have 2 source structures, neither is findind that for CTR AND AUC the Settlement cost elements are the original cost elements.
I'm thinking about changing message KD506 to warning, do you know if this can help?
Kind Regards
Mayumi Blak

Settling the WBS element costs to an AuC

Please Explain the procedure for settling the WBS element costs to an AuC & then to asset?

Hi,
Please follow the below sequence of steps for this:
1) For WBS element where the asset has to be created, AUC willbe created automatically when the WBS element is in release status to get this investment profile should be assigned to WBS element in Control Tab
2) You can see in the system status show as AUC to see the AUC number follow the path
EDIT-> WBS element -> Investment program--> Asset under Construction where you can see the AUC which is created automatically
3) Once the above two steps are through, for settlement to AuC goto transaction CJ88 give the WBS element number select the processing type as partial captalization and execute all the costs pertaining to that. WBS elements will be automatically settled to the AUC which is created for that WBS element
Thanks,
Prithwiraj.

Cost not settled to AUC in last fiscal year

Dear SAP Gurus,
We have some WBSE's for which cost is not settled to AUC in last fiscal year. Now while moving the cost from that WBSE's AUC in Current fiscal year , SAP is not allowing us.
So what will be method to settle the cost from those WBSE's to AUC ?
Thanks & Regards,
Pradip

what type settlement you are processing. whether it is a periodic or full settlement.
If you are settling the WBSE to AUC with the periodic settlement refer to the OSS note 425601.
Regards,

Cost settlement only for assets that have been paid

Dear all,
i need to do, at the end of the month, the cost settlement from wbs to asset only for the the part of asset that have been paid.
I don' t know how to do this using standard sap funcionalities.
Theonly way that we think to use is:
- setlle of the entire wbs
- transfer posting (FI) from asset to wbs of the part that have not been paid.
Some of you can help me?
thanks
Elena

Hello friend,
Because I do not understand your requirement to capitalize from AuC to final asset only only those costs for goods/service that have been paid - I would like to give warning that you may not have the requirement correct.
This would not be your fault, but the fault of the accounting users giving you the requirement is my guess.
Receiving against PO may be MIGO, and then posting the vendor's invoice later on when it's received, is MIRO usually.
The actual payment to the vendor is a subsequent posting known as a check cut. The accounting for a check cut does not create the AuC value, nor does it meet any accounting requirement for capitalization.
The accounting requirement for capitalization in almost all countries would be MIGO. Because we have posted the receipt of goods or services, we now owe a vendor somewhere. The liability will be in your non-specific vendor account, GR/IR which stands for Good Received/Invoice Received. MIRO clears out the amount from your GR/IR account, moving it to your reconciling account in the g/l for a specific vendor sub-ledger account. The check cut then removes specific liability from reconciling account, and removes cash from g/l cash account.
Recognizing that we owe the cost of the goods receipt MIGO, it is already fair and required to capitalize the costs to final assets and commence depreciation expense (assumption you have placed the capital fixed assets into service).
So, neither MIRO nor check cut should delay your capitalization from AuC to final completed assets unless your requirement is different that SAP basic scenario. Regards

WBS settlement wiht AUC

Hello,
Can anybody help to do the configuration for wbs settlement with AUC other than below mentioned configuration.
1. New Asset class creation with line iteme settlement.
2. Allocaiton structure added settlement with FXA.
3. New settlement profile created with default object type FXA,document type AA and amount settlement check box activated.
but based on above mentioned configuration i am not moving forward, kindly suggest any more configuration need for this requirement.
Thanks for your advance help.
Regards,
Lakshmi.

Hi,
Please follow above mentioned points
Allocation structure added settlement with FXA. -- Path - SPRO - IMG - Investment Management - Projects as Investment Measures - Settlement -- Maintain Allocation Structures -create on Allocation structure - and assignment - 010 -- Material & service cost -- and select - click on - source - give Cost elements - from - to
and click on settlement cost element - give receiver category -- FXA - check box for By cost element -- and save it ,
2.Maintain Settlement Profiles -- Define Settlement Profile -- XX - WBSE Settlement Profile
    select radio button - to be settled in full , give allocated structure ,
     Default object type FXA Asset
     select all indicators -- and give other parameter -- Document type -- AA or as per requirement
     and Assign Settlement Profile to Project Profile
3.New Asset class creation with line items settlement     --   Investment Management -- Projects as Investment Measures -- Master Data --Assets under Construction --Define Asset Classes ==
      give- Account determination -- asset class , scr layout rule -- capital investment measure ,
give number range --whichever is created
status of AuC -- select radio button -- Investment Measure
Save it ,
Now you can create Project -   Run -- CJ88 for settlement
Thanking you
Regards
Mahesh

Assiging wbs element as settlment receiver in service order settlement

Hi PM CS Experts.
We are using scenarios of creation of service order from sales order. So whatever cost we incurred for service order settling to sales order via settlement rule - settlment receiver is Sales order i.e. SDI. We are using settlement profie XX which have default object type for settling SDI. While releasing the service order the settlement rule created with settlement receiver is SDI.
Now for different business scenarios, we are settling service order cost to WBS. Now we want to create a settlemetn rule for WBS, settlement receiver will be WBS element, while saving the service order. What configuration, master data or processes we have to follow for this.
please reply on this.
regards
abhay

Sales Order line item have account assignment WBS element. From this sales order line, a service order will be created. So our idea is whatever cost booked to service order should be settled to wbs element instead of sales order.
also in location tab of service order, the wbs element from sales order is not inherrited in account assignment section. Why this we are not knowing. Have you have any idea for this.
regards
abhay

Settle an AuC with investment support

Hello Gurus,
I have the following problem:
I have some AuC with investment support measure assigned.
If I settle the AuC created in prior-years the system settle the costs and the investment support to the final assets but If I try to settle an asset created this year, the system does not settle the investment support to the final asset.
I need that when the asset under construction is created and settled to a final asset (within the same year), the investment support iis posted to the final asset aswell.
Thanks alot for your help.
Christine

Normally settlement needs to be performed twice, if the investment support measure is there.
1) for Investment object to AUC ie WBS / IO to AUC. This called automatic /AUC settlement.
2) From AUC to Final Asset: This is called final / periodic settlement.
But both these settlement needs to be executed with KO88/ CJ88.

Block settlement to auc for downpayment

Hi SAP Friends,
There is a specific requirement in one of our project.
In an investment project, advance payment is issued against a service PO with ref to WBS. The requirement is to block the settlement to AUC for this advance payment only until service entry acceptance is made. Other commitment in the WBS should go as usual without problem with regular path of setlement to AUC and from AUC to Fixed asset.
Regards
Srinivasan

Hi Srinivasan,
Please check if this could be of any help to you.
Specify Capitalization of AUC/Down-Payment
In this step, you determine how the system will deal with down payments on AuCs and their closing invoice during the settlement (capitalization) of the AuC. This system setting is particularly relevant for respresenting down payments from previous years in the asset history sheet.
Standard Settings
The system capitalizes down payments as follows in the standard system:
If you capitalize a down payment from the previous year and the closing invoice from the current year together, the amount of the down payment is transferred with the transaction type for asset data from previous years, and only the difference between the closing invoice and the down payment is transferred with the transaction type for current acquisitions.
Activities
If you want to change the default setting, you must set the indicator for the capitalization of assets under construction without down payments. If this indicator is set, the system ignores down payments during the line item settlement of assets under construction. The total amount of the closing invoice is always transferred with the transaction type according to its posting year.
SPRO - Asset Accounting - Transactions - Capitalization of Assets under Construction - Specify Capitalization of AUC/Down-Payment
Indicator transfer down payments from previous years
When you set this indicator, the system ignores downpayments during the line item settlement of assets under construction. The total amount of the closing invoice is then always transferred to the capitalized asset using the transaction type based on the year of the closing invoice.
Use
This has the following result:
There is an opposite effect when the indicator is not set, and you capitalize a downpayment from a previous year along with the closing invoice from the current year. In this case, the system transfers the amount of the downpayment from the previous year using a transaction type for old assets data. It transfers the difference between the total amount of the closing invoice and the downpayment using a transaction type for new acquisitions.
Regards
Vinayak.

Capital project WBS settle to AUC individually

Dear all experts,
please help me on the following issues.
i am working on a capital project. Investment profile is defined and assgined to the project profile.
the top WBS is T-09-001
the second level WBS are T-09-001-01, T-09-001-02, T-09-001-03, T-09-001-04, T-09-001-05 for example.
the third level WBS is T-09-001-05-01.
i do the test settlement when the project status is release. (i didn't maintain the settlement rule.)
the result is that every single WBS is settled to a FXA (the numbers are generated automatically)
for example
T-09-001-01 to FXA 1000/40047/0 30000CNY
T-09-001-02 to FXA 1000/40048/0 40000CNY
T-09-001-03 to FXA 1000/40049/0 40000CNY......
i am not sure if it is correct or not, because it's my first time to deal with capital projects.
if i want to settle all the sub-WBS to top WBS and the top one settled to AUC, how can i do it.
i manually maintain the settlement rule for all the sub-WBS to top WBS and settle the project again.
but the result is the same. i don't know where the problem is.
please tell me how to do it or how to settle the capital projects in most cases?
thanks a lot.
judy

Below was something which we had done in such case:
1. Created a substitution rule against the WBS element, if the level of WBS >=2 substitute the Investment profile with 'Blank'. With this when ever you create a project and save it or call the substitution from menu, system would retain the investment profile on level 1 WBS and when project is released only 1 AUC is created for the project which is on level 1 WBS.
2. Settle all other lower WBS to it's parent WBS and you can implement OSS note 211324 - CJB1: Strategy for settlement to superior WBS. Refer the below link about how this works:
http://wiki.sdn.sap.com/wiki/display/PLM/ModificationnoteforStrategyforsettlementtosuperiorWBS
Doing both the above, you would create only 1 AUC (on level 1 WBS) and finally settle all lower WBS to level 1 WBS and from there system would then automatically settle the costs to AUC fixed asset.
Regards
Sreenivas

Shipment Cost settlement to multiple vendors

Hi team,
When we are calculating shipment cost, with reference to outbound shipments, we have to get the multiple vendors like freight cost settlement to one vendor and insurance will be to the other vendor.
How do we need to map this requirement? We are using SD route.
Regards
Venkat Ramana

Hi Venkat,
If different service agents exist in the shipment cost documents, a
corresponding number of condition lines (with value 0) must be
specified in the purchase order item. These can always belong to the
same condition type (in schema 'Manual') or also to different
condition types (not 'Manual'):
a) Manual condition lines: If the condition type in the schema of
    the purchase order is marked as 'manual', the condition type must
    be created (with value 0) in the purchase order item before the
    goods receipt. If delivery costs are expected from different
    service agents, several non-valuated entries must be generated
    for this condition type. If more condition lines exist than
    required, these are then no longer taken into account. If
    condition lines are missing, the last service agents are not
    settled.
    - Advantage: You only have to define one condition type for the
    delivery costs.
    - Disadvantage: Each purchase order must be processed manually
    before the goods receipt.
b) Automatic condition lines: If the condition lines are to be
    generated automatically for the delivery costs (the condition
    type is not flagged as 'Manual' in the schema), the schema must
    have enough condition types to settle several service agents. If
    more condition lines exist than required, these are then no
    longer taken into account. If condition lines are missing, the
    last service agents are not settled.
    - Advantage: The goods receipt can be carried out without manual
    preparation beforehand in the purchase order.
    - Disadvantage: You must define identical condition types with different names.
Regards, David

Final settlement in Service Charge settlement

Hi Experts
My client wants their customers to pay their bills when they have recivecd their bills. How should thisa be represented in the SAP system . The flow types available in the system are those for advance payments and flat rates. Which flow type should i adopt for this scenario?
How should this also appear in the application side?
Regards
David

Hi,
You should acticate the service charge settlement functionality.
1. one posts the incoming invoices on settlement units
2. one runs the service charge settlement which distribute the costs to the rental units and invoices the tennat if he participates in the service charge settlement (which generates open items in FI)
3. one runs the invoice processing (which is based on the open items in FI
regards
stefaan

Internal order posted and settled to auc in incorrect ccode and fiscal year

Hi,
We created an internal order in ian ncorrect company code and settled the cost to AUC in previous fiscal year.
I would like to know what options do you recommend to move the AUC cost from incorrect company code to internal order in a correct company in the current fiscal year. Our AUC account is set up as control account and cannot be manually posted to.
I understand Internal order settlement to AUC for previous fiscal period cannot be reversed in the current year?.
Kindly advise
Umang

Hi
Select the Internal order > Reverse the settlement in the same year...(KO88)
Try to transfer the balance from this IO to new IO in the other co code from (F-02)..
You need to have Inter Co clearing accounts in the IMG....
now settle the new IO to new asset (AUC) in the other company
Br, Ajay M

Service Cost and Material Reservation

Dear Experts,
We have came up with a requirement that maintenance service costs and material requirements for the same to be captured through PM orders.
- A budget will be used to paid maintenance service costs
- Service costs are to be paid for external parties(framework PR will be raised through PM Order)
- Material requirements for the maintenance to be mentioned in the same order but it should NOT consume the budget.
- Only cost of service should consume the budget.
However when i tried, using control key PM03, budget get consumed when materials are requested.
How do i cater the requirement.
Thanks in Advance...

Sank N.
whn u reserve a material in maintenance order. Material will have cost element assigned to it (via. valuation class) this cost element will be mapped with a cost center. That cost center should be mentioned in your work order settlement rule. so then your material cost will be effecting cost center.
For service you are having WBS so that WBS you will maintain in same work order settlement rule. Your service cost will effect that WBS element.
Both are different process.
For this purpose only i had requested you to ask your FI team and confirm for cost element and cost center mapping.
Refer below eg so your problem will be clear.
Cost Element -1 (service) is mapped to WBS and Cost Center
Cost Element -2 (material) is mapped to WBS and Cost Center.
Or
Cost Element -1 (service) with WBS
Cost Element -2 (material) with Cost Center
If first case then you will have budge mix up problem
If second case then no budget mix up problem

Customer service Order settlement

Resource related billing.
I created a Service Order. I finished all the steps from Create Order to Billing VF01.
Next Service Order Settlement. I did not activate Profitability. I freezed the settlement profiles and allocation structure.
I configured the settlement to Sales document item.
I cannot settle the order. if I give Sales document also in settlement rule order is not accepting.
Suggest.

Error message.
Maintain the settlement rule of the sender.
I have maintained the settlement rule. I have assigned a settlement cost element to receiver category as SDI.
I got the error message when i do settlement.

Service cost settlement on AUC

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for