Settle commissions to customers

The SAP standard for settlement of commssion payments (ICM) is to a vendor. We also receive money from our partners so we net off the commssion payable against the receivable. We need the settlement of the commission to go to customers not vendors.
Is there any way to change this?

Hi
SAP standard for settlement of commssion payments (ICM) assign to the customers instead of vendors.
Regards,
Srinivas Muthyala

Similar Messages

FEBP Missing automatically settlement for multiple customers

Running transaction <b>FEBP</b> (Update Account Statement/Check Deposit Transaction) the settlement of the account is not automatically carried out when the payment includes two or more customers. The documents is found and shown and it is possible to do the settlement manual upon the proposal by pushing the accept button. What can be the reason for the missing automatic settlement?
Best regards
Kaj

Hi Kaj
Please check have you activated automatic worklist for multiple customers in transaction OB55. Please also check is the 'Use worklists' flag set in transaction FB00 in 'Open item processing' tab.
If the above settings doesn't resolve the issue then the reported problem could be because of leading zeroes in customer numbers.
Reason for this is that worklist are saved in table TFAVW without leading zeros. But in postprocessing is called with leading zeros in field account (RF05A-AGKON).
I.e. in SAPLF40K FORM FILL_FTCLEAR AGKON is filled by this statement: ftclear-agkon = bseg-kunnr . Because there is Alpha conversion exit for BSEG-KUNNR field account is filled with leading zeroes for eg. 0000007693.
If AGKON in table ftclear is filled without leading zero worklists are considered in postprocessing.
Hope this info clarifies your query.
Regards
Kesav

Standard Condition type for Commissions to customers

Hey,
Can you tell me which standard condition type i can use for the purpose of giving commisions to customers on the bases of Materials they have sold. (Customer/Material)
Regards,
Shahzad

Hi,
I dont think any std condition type is available for Commission.
You can copy the std discount condition type K007 if ur commssion is % basis,
Or use K005 if commission is based on Qty and create Z condition type .
Cond. class:Discount or surcharge
Calculat.type:Percentage Or Qty
Cond.category: Delivery costs
Regards
JJ

Lenovo u410 Settlement Outside of US

Hi, I have been reading about the settlement regarding the U410 & U310 in relation to the wi-fi issues. Is this settlement applicable to customers outside of the US who also experienced this issue? I had to self repair my U410 to make it usable. The online application form seems to be geared towards purchases made in the US only which I would extremely unfair considering this product was also sold outside of the US. Seán

lead_org wrote:
@tripplec, i don't understand how a Chinese company affects the outcome of the OP's problem? Would IBM do it differently?
Yes, I spent 3 years at a Toronto Bank who bought say 500 systems or so plus notebooks. ThinkPad's and Think Center product. I supported did the warranty work while there. When the warranty was up it was up!! Even if a lowly optical mouse fail and a number of them did. Too bad nor replacement.
I've delt with IBM, Compaq and HP. There customer relations is entirely at at different level and would and did on may occasions provide one time post warranty repair even for catestophic issues well after warranty was over. This is a case by case basis. You could reach them and talk to them (locally) and not haveway around the world having no sense of what significance your case it.
There is a difference as was the turn around time 48hrs max and not weeks.
T520 Model 4239 Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2860QM CPU @ 2.50GHz
Intel Sandy Bridge & Nvidia NVS 4200M graphics Intel N 6300 Wi-Fi adapter
Windows 7 Home Prem - 64bit w/8GB DDR3

Tolerance Group DEBI & KRED

We're currently exposed to a risk which is the following:
There are employees who belong to both the DEBI and KRED tolerance group in Table T043T. This leads to a problem because the KRED tolerance allows the user to give discount in excess of that specified for DEBI when doing debtors incoming payments, i.e. if KRED is set to 30% cash discount, then the clerk can grant 30% settlement discount to customers on an incoming payment.
This however is standard SAP, are anyone aware of a solution to this issue or is there a way around this risk? Your input is appreciated.

Hi .,
Tolerence group means that it allows the percent of deviation from the ordr,Tolerence groups are generally meintained in Shipping
For example take tolerence group is mentioned as 10 % & Raise a sales order for 100 Kgs,We can do the delivery of the goods to 100 Kgs + 10 % of the 100 Kgs
REWARD if helpfull
Thanks & Regards
Narayana

How to settle downpayment request for customers

Hi Members
My company is doing project on turnkey basis. We get advance say 20 % of project amount initially which we book through FI with special indicator "A".
In each bill generated through SD we reduce 20% of basic amount in order to arrive at net receivable. Further Retention amount say 10% of basic amount is retained by customer which they release after one year after successful completion of project.
Please let me know how to dealt with situation. I tried to create a condition type with down payment request clearing but system does not allow me to post any amount in this condition type. I want to give effect to customer account for settlement of advance or for retention of PBG by way of separate entry.
Thanks
Manish K Ojha

Hi,
Please go to XD02 / XD03 ---> Enter customer No. -->Click on All Sales Areas. It will show you that how many type of sales maintain for Ship to party. If your sales area is not maintain then please maintain your sales area in XD01. and Please check it's Sales organization --> Distribution Channel ---> Division
Thanks,
Raviteja

Settlement of Sale Order to Sale Order

Dear experts
I need help in the following scenario:
At my client place we are doing job work for external material. All the material are supplied by the customer and our client will do the processing and send it back to customer's customer on customers request.
To create Excise Invoice against the Customers Customer we are handling through 2 sale orders.
First One Sale order will be created against the Customer Order and Sale price will be the selling price of Customers to Customer.
Second Sale Order will be created for Job Work Charges for the processing the materials.
On settling the process orders all the cost is settling to Sale Order One, Clients revenue is coming from Sale Order Two.
Here I need to settle the First Sale Order to Second Sale Order. I have given the second sale Order number in first sale order number in Settlement rule.
But when I settle the First sale Order all the amount it going to Price Differance Account.
How to settle the Cost of First Sale Order to Second Sale Order?
Regards
Kiran A

Dear Experts
any advises.
Can I go for Sale Order to Sale Order Settlement ?
Regards
Kiran

I have created a group in my address book, but when I try to use it to send out a group email, only a comma shows up. How do I send out an email using my new group contact list?

I have created a group in my address book, but when I try to use it to send mail, only a comma shows up. How can I send mail using my new group? I have an IMac with OSLion.

I will agree with you on this one. Version 31 and all the fixes so far are a mess. Since I have been here answering questions for a little more than a year now I have learned to wait to upgrade until all the dust settles. I see no end to the dust storm version 31 has caused. I am still on version 24.6 and plan on staying there for the duration. At least until the developers comes to their senses and put out a working product.

Forcing customers to pay for a phone and/or data package they don't want or need

By their practices Verizon is forcing customers to pay for more than what the customer wants or needs, and at the same time giving the customer less of what they want or need.
I've been a Verizon Wireless customer for years. Everytime my 2 year upgrade is due I check what phones are available. It seems that as time goes by there are less and less Basic Phones with a qwerty keyboard, music player, good camera, and video. Now, there are only 3 phones to choose from that don't require a data package: none of them have a camera over 1.3 megapixels, none have video, and ALL had HORRIBLE customer reviews. Those reviews tell me I'm not the only disgruntled Verizon customer.
I've had Verizon phones that I liked in the past; right now I have a Blitz. I settled for that one because it was the best of the few bad choices available at the time. My most recent 2 year contract has been over for 5 months so now I'm on month-to-month with no contract, which is awesome. But my phone, which I like for the most part, doesn't work right.The problem is the earpiece speaker quit working as soon as my contract was up (maybe a software timebomb to force me to get a new phone?) so I took it to a repair shop to get it replaced. They replaced it but that speaker died after 2 months and since the phone has been discontinued (grr!), there is NO chance of getting a new speaker. That wouldn't be such an issue if the Bluetooth function had ever worked, which it never did. I recently broke down and decided I'd settle on something, so I tried the KinTwo (one of my 3 choices) but it sucked immensely so I sent it back.
So now I'm forced to buy a phone (with Some of the features I need, because it's obviously impossible to get ALL the features I want/need in One phone) that I don't like; AND pay for a $10 -$30 data package which I don't want or need, and can't afford; AND forced to sign up for a new 2 year contract. I'd rather go with Pay As You Go because I barely use any 'minutes' (I do more texting than talking, which is why I need a good qwerty keyboard) but I'd have to pay over $350 for a fairly decent phone.
HEY VERIZON, How about providing more than 3 choices of phones that don't require a data package? And how about making those phones GOOD QUALITY and not the garbage you're providing for sale now?
I'd like to stay with Verizon because they DO have the best service area compared to the other Big wireless phone companies . I've been with AT&T and the service area is really not as good. I even did comparison research for a college course's Final Project because I wanted to know which company had the more truthful claims about their coverage area. I live in the Sierra foothills and reception is a big issue with a lot of people here. I've talked with customers of the other companies and they all agree I should stay with Verizon. But if Verizon can't offer any good phones then I might as well switch to another carrier who may have more concern for their customer's needs. Even after giving us few choices of devices, charging high prices, and gauging us at every opportunity, they give us less incentive to stay a loyal customer. At least AT&T has roll-over minutes, Criket has 'no contract' service, and TracPhone has no contract/Pay as you go service with inexpensive phones.
So please excuse me while I go to the other carriers' websites to see what they're offering...

JF2mad wrote:
Marilee
You are spot on. Verizon wants to squeeze every dollar it can from it's customers and customer service can take a DISTANT back seat to greed. I have a Chocolate Touch which I got a few years ago(before it REQUIRED a data package). I had activated a different phone which I ended up not liking and when I tried to re-activate my Chocolate I got slammed with the required data crappage..er package. I had to fight to get the data BLOCKED and the phone activated again.
Wifi is all over but all the phones that have Wifi that Verizon sells require data packages too. I REFUSE to give Verizon $30 minimum for data when I have no need for it. If they had ANY CLUE about customer service they would simply allow you to buy whatever phone you wanted from them(or others) and activate them with data blocks.Until they do I guess I will either be stuck with my old phones or go provider shopping. Which I am sure Budone will find great satisfaction in.
On that topic. I am amazed that Versizon sits back and lets your apathy and disrespect of ANYONE who does not kowtow to the company line as they seem to. You are a "gold user" so clarly you are some sort of Verzion demi-god. Gotta say, there is not one word of disrespect in what I wrote. I do not puke on anyone, BUT I do present a different view than you or the OP may be willing to see with your, "Woe is me, have pity on me, and let me do what I want, if not involve the government to protect myself from myself attitude."
If you took time to look at posts of mine, I have had VZW in my crosshairs a few times, but they made it right. All in how you present yourself. Personally, I am willing to bet that corporate suck ups like you are the very reason many people finally DO make the break from Verizon. Your habit of puking all over people with legitimate complaints and the tolerance of same on this board lead ME and I am sure others to feel that your dismissive attitude is acceptable to, if not encouraged by Verizon in General. And yes, I have been edited in the past. But there was NOTHING in my prior post that has anything you state in it. You just dont like what I said. That is not towing the company line, that is knowing it costs a Ton of money to get a new deivce to market and data plans helps recoup the cost and allows upgrades and LTE to be deployed. You would be upset if you could not use your phone where there is NOT any WiFi.
Even though I have had issues with Verizon's service and corporate paradigm(especially the companys determination to exthort every penny it can from me), almost every Service Rep I have spoken to has been considerate, friendly and helpful. There have been one or two who, when I broached the possible need for finding a new provider, seems unconcerned, but in general I have been made to feel valued by the people I have spoken with. {please keep your posts courteous}
As for the demi-god comment, maybe I can get a MOD or ADMIN to change me from Gold to that!

What are the custimization steps to run interest calculations for customers

Hi,
I need a full custimization steps to configure the interest calculations for customers. i created interest indicators, g/l accounts and account determinations also. but no interest is calculating for customers and customers are having no of days to calculate the interest. So please guide me on this regard.

Hi,
Configuring the Interest Calculations Procedure
This configuration allows you to charge interest on overdue customer accounts. Interest can be calculated by using the line items or overall account balances. SAP keep tracks of the date of the last interest run and stores it in the customer master record.
First create an Interest Indicator.
OB46 - Interest Settlement Calculation Type
Int Calc. Type
P - calculate interest based on line items.
S - calculate interest based on account balances.
Secornd, make it avaliable to the interest run program.
OB82 - Interest Terms
Third, determine the interest rate that will be used by the calculation.
OBAC - Define Reference Interest Rates
OB83 - Enter the Reference Interest Rates Value
Fourth, assign the interest indicator to the reference interest rate.
OB81 - Define Time Dependent Terms
Finally, determine the how and to which accounts the interest program will post.
OBV1 - Prepare Interest on Arrears Calculation
Please check out the following link also:
http://help.sap.com/saphelp_erp2004/helpdata/en/41/37b8e7455b11d182b40000e829fbfe/frameset.htm
Hope this helps.
Please assign points as a way to say thanks.
Regards,

Consignment Settlement with Commission?

Dear Folks,
I would like to deduct 20% off the settlement amount when performing settlement via MRKO?
Is this possible? If not, is there any other way to achieve this?
The business scenario is such that when I sell vendor consignment goods, the vendor will give me 20% commission. I will only need to pay 80% of the amount to the vendor.
Also, can the 20% be posted to a commission account?
Best Regards
Junwen

The obvious answer is create condition type to reflect the commissions and add it to the pricing procedure with appropriate account settings.. This will allow you to enter the commission in the Consignment info-record. Then the MRKO settlement will include that too.

EAM ID based or Role based? Why settle for just one?

G'Day All,
I've raised a question in the following blog, however I would like to open it up to other people as well so they might get something out of it and in the process might share their own thoughts on the matter at hand.
ID-Based Firefighting vs. Role-Based Firefighting
So this is where I am at this point:
From what I can gather so far, my understanding of EAM ID/ROLE based is as follows:
- Id Based: Logs in using own U.ID and through GRAC_SPM accesess FFID from the GRC Server and logs into the system assigned to them (ECC, SRM, CRM etc)
Only one user at a time can use a FFID.
Firefighter need not exist in every system assigned to them due to central logon however they need to exist in the GRC system
Knows exactly when FFID is being used as he/she has to login so has a psychological effect (good thing)
Better tracking of FF tasks - Specific log reports with Reason Codes. Bonus point from Auditors!
Two Log ins so potential to commit fraud. (1 action using own UserID and 1 action using FFID)
Could be hard to track and find out when a fraud has been committed so can be a problem with auditors.
      ID Based -> GRAC_SPM : TCode for Centralised FFighting -> You will see FFIDs assigned to you
      ID Based -> /n/GRCPI/GRIA_EAM : TCode for DCentralised FFighting -> You can see the FFIDs assigned to you
- Role Based: Logs into the remote system only using U.ID, so everything gets logged against that one ID.
Multiple users can use the FFROLE at once.
Firefighter has to exist in every system assigned to them - so multiple logons.
Hard to differentiate between FF tasks and normal tasks as no login required So easy to slip up
Time consuming to track FF tasks - No Specific log reports. No Reason Codes
     R.Based -> GRAC_SPM : TCode for Centralised FFighting -> You will see FFROLEs
     R.Based -> /n/GRCPI/GRIA_EAM : TCode for DCentralised FFighting -> Not applicable so wont work
So based on this there are pros and cons in both however according to SAP only one can be used. To me personally, it makes more sense to get the best of both the worlds right? So here is my question why can’t we just use both?
    . Really critical tasks -> FFID
    . Normal EAM tasks -> FFRole
Alessandaro from the original post pointed this out:
"Per design it isn't possible to achieve both types of firefighting at the same time. It's a system limitation and hence to configurable."
Well this is what I can't seem to get my head around. For a FFID, there is a logon session so it has to be enabled and as far as I can tell there is no way around it.
However for FFRole, there isn't such limitations/restrictions like starting a separate session. FFRole is just assigned to an end user for him/her to perform those tasks using their own user ID.
So in what way is it different from any of their other tasks/roles, other than the fact that they've got an Owner/Controller assigned to the FFRole? and
What is stopping us from using it when ID based is the default?
If I were to do the following does it mean I can use both ?
    . Config Parameter: 4000 = 1 (GRC System) -> ID Based
    . Config Parameter: 4000 = 2 (Plug-In) - > Role Based
Please excuse me if my logic is a bit silly, Role Based firefighting is only done on Plug-in systems so the following should work just fine:
   . Config Parameter: 4000 = 2 (Plug-In) - > Role Based
However for ID based, it is a Central Logon, so the following is a must:
    . Config Parameter: 4000 = 1 (GRC System) -> ID Based
Which means both ID/Role based can be used at the same time, which seems to be working just fine on my system. Either way I leave it you experts and I hope you will shed some light on it.
Cheers
Leo..

Gretchen,
Thank you for thoughts on this.
Looks like I'm failing to articulate my thoughts properly as the conversation seems to be going in a different direction from what I am after. I'll try once more!
My query/issue is not in regards to if/what SAP needs to do about this or why there isn't more support from Companies/Organizations and not even, which one is a better option.
My query is what is stopping us(as in the end users ) from using both ID/Role based at the same time?
Now before people start referencing SAP documentation and about parameter 4000, humour me with the following scenario please. Again I would like to reiterate that I am still in the learning phase so my logic might be all wrong/misguided, so please do point out to me where I am going wrong in my thought process as I sincerely would like to know why I am the odd one out in regards to this.
Scenario
I've created the following:
FFID
FFROLE
Assigned them to, two end users
John Doe
Jane Doe
I set the Configuration Parameters as follows:
IMG-> GRC-> AC-> Maintain Configuration Settings -> 4000:1 - ID Based
IMG-> GRC (Plug-in)-> AC-> Maintain Plug-In Configuration Settings-> 4000:2 - Role Based
User1
John Doe logs into his regular backend system (ECCPROD001)-> executes GRAC_SPM-> Enters the GRC system (GRCPROD001)-> Because the parameter is set to ID based in the GRC Box, so he will be able to see the FFID assigned to him-> and will be presented with the logon screen-> Logs in -> Enters the assigned system (lets say CRMPROD001) At this point the firefighting session is under progress
User2
Jane Doe logs into her regular backend system (ECCPROD001) -> (can execute GRAC_SPM to check which FF Role has been assigned to her but she can see that in her regular menu, so there is no point) -> Executes the transactions assigned in FFROLEThis is done at the same time while FFID session is in progress
So all I want to know is if this scenario is possible? if the answer is No, then why not?
I physically carried out this scenario in my system and I had no problems(unless I am really missing the plot here), which brings me back to my original question: Why settle for just one?
Again to reiterate I am not getting into the efficacy or merits of this or even if one should use this. Just want to know if it is possible/feasible or not.
So there you have it. That's the whole enchilada(as they say there in Texas). I tried to word my thoughts as concisely as I can, if there are still any clarifications, more information you or anyone else reading this would like, please do let me know.
Regards,
Leo..

Commissions

Dear experts,
we have a legal requirement to process the payment of Intra-company commissions with a debiting process instead of a crediting process (as we are using up to now). Currently we are collecting the commission values on Rebate Agreements which we settle at the end of the period (using the integrated settlement functionality of the rebates that clear the accruals and issue a credit note).
As in this process there is no functionality to debit these values (should be initiated by the receiving company of the commissions instead of the owing one as above) the rebate functionality seems not to be correct.
I guess we will have to design a commission process, with new condition types that create the accruals. What I do not know is how those should be selected after the period (Z-Report ?) and how the settlement/payment process should be set up, allowing the receiving company to invoice the open commissions and clear the accrual accounts.
Thanks in advance for any best-practice reference!
Best regards,
stefan

Hi Suda,
Our commission report would include the following columns:
Sales Employee, Customer, Inv #, Inv Date, Inv Total, Inv Sales Amt* (to be used for commission calculation), Payment Receipt Date, Receipt Amount, Comm %, Calculation for Commission to be paid (Receipt amount x (Sales Amt/Inv Total) x Comm %)
*Per invoice item row, there are 2 unit prices involved. "Unit price" brings in the value from the price list. In some cases (per cust's request), we add freight/hub fees to the unit price using "Price after Discount." In this way, the invoice total will reflect total price including fees. However, we only want to pay commission based on Sales Amt (orig unit price x quantity). So we also need to have some way to sum up the sales amts for each row for the total Inv Sales Amt.
In this case we would need to group and show the Commission subtotal for each Sales Employee.
Hope this is clear-any help you can provide is much appreciated!

Commit statement in badi method

hi all,
i am using commit statement in badi method save_data, it is put after function module,
in function module i have used insert and update statement, if i do like that then the commit statement refresh the global data but update the table,
if i create one perform inside function module and put commit statement in that perform, then it shows message update was terminated,
i also want the global data for processing thats why i can't use commit statement after FM in method, please give Suggestion,
Points will be awarded.

Hi,
sounds as if you call that FM in update task. Update function modules do not allow all actions. They should only include the neccessary SQL statements and must include any COMMIT.
For more information read SAPDOCU of COMMIT WORK and everything of SAPS update concept (start immed. V1, start delayed V2 and so on).
ATTENTION. Most BADIs designed to save customers data may be used several times and standard data may be saved after them. To avoid inconsistent data inside those BADIs normally no COMMIT should be done.
Kind regards,
HP

Incoming Payment Settlement

Dear Expert
I know it is possible to partially settle invoices by making incoming payment. However, we can not enter amount of 0 for incoming payment. Due to client's special requirements, I would like to know would it be possible to make a incoming payment of 0 to partially settle an invoice. I know it sounds weird, but this could solve some issues if this could be achieved.
Thanks for any help
Regards
Elton

Thanks for all of your replies.
My client scenario is as below:
Client's business is project based and would invoice customers in a two approaches. These may include:
1) initial deposit of the whole project (30% or 40% of the total amount) + balanced A/R invoice upon completion of project.
2) initial deposit of the whole project (30% or 40% of the total amount) + invoice upon completion of project phase (30% or 40%) + balanced A/R invoice upon completion of project.
These are normal flows and can be fulfilled by issuing down payment invoices. System would allow issuing A/R invoice (balanced) in relation to down payment invoice only when the down payment invoice is settled by incoming payment. However, my client would have to issue the balanced invoice even if the down payment invoice is not paid since project may have completed before receiving payments for the initial deposit or completion of project phase.
It would not be good to issue down payment invoices for initial deposit + completion of project phase + completion of project and close them by a zero amount balanced A/R invoice since my client does not want to recognize sales when actually receive all payments but want to recognize sales after completion of phase or completion of project.
If a down payment invoice can be closed by a 0 amount incoming payment. System would allow to issue A/R invoice (balanced) in relation to down payment invoice and thus can fulfill my client's requirement.
Would it be possible to do so or would there be other alternatives to solve the scenario?
Regards
Elton

Settle commissions to customers

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for