Unplanned Depreciation not reducing Base Value

Hi all,
Assets created in SAP. At a point, these assets had stopped
depreciating in sub-ledger but seems as if depreciation continued to be
provided for directly in the GL manually (via a jnl).
User wishes to re-capture the revised APC and Accumulated Depreciation
values back into the asset sub-ledger so that SAP will automatically
depreciate the assets according to their remaining useful life.
User has used a Write-up transaction to load the APC value. After
write-up posted, depreciation ise being calculated as expected. To get
the Accumulated Depreciation value into SAP, the user has posted
Unplanned Depreciation (TTY Type 640). However, when this is posted,
depreciation is not being calculated evenly over remaining useful life
of asset. For Year 1, depreciation is being calculated from Write-Up
(APC) values ONLY, and the Unplanned Depr (representing Accumulated
Depr) has NOT been taken into account. Unplanned Depr is only taken
into account from Year 2. This is leading to dis-proportionate depr
values in comparison from Year 1 to subsequent years across the
remaining life of the asset.
Have been testing period controls, and depr key set up but no luck.
Any ideas or suggestions will be much appreciated.

Dear Dattatray,
The issue here is not with the fact that no depreciation values have posted.  The issue is with the values that have been posted.  Let me illustrate by way of example.
Asset start date for depr:  Changed to 01.01.2008
Useful life of asset:  3 years, 4 months (40 months)
Write up of asset posted March 2008:  EUR 135,492.18
Unplanned Depr of asset posted March 2008 EUR 93,605.12
Therefore, Net Book Value = EUR 41,887.06
Depreciation run happened in March after ABAA entry.
Expectation:-
Based on this NBV of EUR 41,887.06 you would expect depr to post at EUR1,047.18 per month (41,887.06 / 40 months) over the remaining life of asset.  In this case, 3 months would be caught up in March as asset depr start date is 01.01.2008, and balance of EUR1,047.18 to be posted per month until asset written off 3 years and 4 months down the line.
What is happening in SAP:-
Depreciation for FY 2008 is only being calculated on the write-up value of EUR 135,492.18 and not the NBV.  Therefore, for FY2008, depreciation is being calculated at EUR 3,387.30 per month (EUR135,492.18 / 40 months).
If i look at FY2009, the Unplanned Depr value of EUR 93,605.12 is now taken into account.  Therefore, NBV at start of FY2009 is Write up 135,492.18 less Unplanned Depr 93,605.12 less Depr in 2008 (12 months) 40,647.60 = NBV EUR1,239.46.  This new NBV over remaining life which is now 28 months is EUR 44,27 per month, or EUR 531.19 for the year.
So in FY2008, Depr posted = EUR 40,647.60 (3,387.30 per month)
In FY2009, depr posted = EUR 531.19 (44.27 per month)
In FY 2010, depr posted = EUR 531.19 (44.27 per month)
In FY 2011, asset gets written off.
You can see that year 1 is highly inflated and Years 2 thru remaining life is smoothed.  This is not correct.  We would expect the depr to be smoothed every month from the start i.e. EUR 1,047.18 per month or 12,566.11 in FY2008, 12,566.11 in FY2009, 12,566.11 in FY 2010 and then written off in 2011.
I hope this helps to explain the current problem.
Thanks.

Similar Messages

  • Wrong depreciation calculated for base value 04 + EA-FIN activated

    Hi,
    after activating EA-FIN, depreciation for assets using base value 04 (= half of replacement value) is calculated wrong.
    While AW01 for a particular asset shows depreciation values based on the FULL replacement value (like it would be base value 03) AW01_AFAR (the u201Coldu201D asset explorer) shows the correct depreciation for base value 04.
    The wrong base value can also be seen using the "display depreciation calculation" button in both transactions.
    There are no enhancements for base value determination active.
    I didnu2019t find any SAPNET notes nor SCN entries regarding this case, any ideas?
    Best regards, Christian

    For what it's worth, I did a search and didn't find anything either. 
    It sounds like you've already tried this, but if the base value (the actual $$ value) is different in the trace on both tcodes then you have a problem.  I would be sure to recalculate the values when you enter AW01 and AW01_AFAR to ensure that it's correct before looking at the trace.
    The formula for the replacement value is: 
    ( u_ganlc-kansw + u_ganlc-answl +
                   u_ganlc-kmafa + u_ganlc-mafav + u_ganlc-zusma +
                   u_ganlc-mafam + u_ganlc-mafal +
                   u_ganlc-kaufw + u_ganlc-aufwv +
                   u_ganlc-aufwp + u_ganlc-aufwl ) / 2 .
    I'd look at ANLC for the asset and do the calculation yourself to confirm the value. 
    You've probably done all of that so I predict an OSS message in your future !
    -nathan

  • Unplanned depriciation reducing the base value.

    Dear Experts,
    We have a asset on which we have posted a Unplanned depriciation, which has in turn reduced the Depriciation base value for future depriciation caluculation. Where as we want to depriciate the asset at APC value not at the Reduced base value (which is APC - Uplanned depriciation). Please suggest the possilbe solutin for this. Apart from this I have searched forum and learned that Unplanned depriciation can not be reversed. Please suggest any possilbe workaround through which we can reverse the uplanned depriciation.
    Regards
    JK

    HI
    1. When did you post this unplanned depreciation?? In the past yr or this year??
    If you posted it in the past years, then it is bound to impact in the current year... if you wanna avoid that, then Asset write up is the correct suggestion as given above
    I think the Std Tr Type in ABZU would suffice.. No need to create a new tr type
    2. If you posted the unplanned dep this year - Then you can control it in AFAMP as to when it should impact.. The Period controls have a new column for Unplanned dep, provided you have activated the new dep engine in EhP4
    br, Ajay M

  • Base value not flowing in J1IEX

    Hi All,
    The Excise Base Value is not flowing in J1IEX. I am doing an STO. The other duties like BED, AED are flowing while capturing  excise invoice, but not the Base value.
    PLease let me know the settings to ensure the Base value flows in J1IEX.
    Thanks.
    Manish

    Hi Chintu,
    Please find the process for STO.
    > > -2 Plants - 1 Supplying and 1 receiving
    > > -Receving plant is created as customer in XD01
    > >-Material is created in both the plants
    > >-All the IMG settings are done both at MM and SD parts
    > >-STO PO is created with doc.type "UB" in ME21n
    > >-In VL10B OBD is created wrt PO number & PGI is also done here
    > >-In VF01 commercial invoice is created (Here all the excise duties like BED, AED, SED are calculated and PR00 is statistical)
    > >-Excise invoice is created wrt Commercial invoice
    > >-Now in J1IEX I have to give both STO PO number and excise invoice number. When I give the excise invoice number, all the duties are flowing but when I give the STO PO number the BASE VALUE is not flowing.
    Let me know if you require any more details from my end.
    Regards
    Ayyallas
    Edited by: ayyallas on Nov 13, 2009 5:41 AM

  • Reverse a posted unplanned depreciation

    Hello,
    I have created a unplanned depreciation action of an asset by using ABBA and posted the unplanned depreciation by AFAB.
    Later, I found that this asset should not post any depreciation. Can I ask are there any ways to correct this mistake action?
    Many thanks
    Sunny

    Hello,
    I have the following case:
    There is Unplanned depreciation posted in the previus years and the users wants to make Write-up.
    After Write-up (transaction 730) with the proper amount on 31.12.2010 the system recalculate Ordinary depreciation in December.
    This recalculation is posted via AFAB in 12.2010 but the users complain and do not want to recalcuate Ord. depreciation.
    The question is:
    Is there a way to post Write-up  (730) without to recalculate Ordinary depreciation.
    I have tried to make some changes in the depreciation key (the base value) but I can not succeed.
    Also I have tried to to use ABAA with Z* transaction type to debit Unplanned depreciatino but the result is the same.
    Thank you in advance,
    Silvia

  • Unplanned depreciation in FI Fixed Assets does not post to FI-GL

    We used transaction ABAA (unplanned depreciation) movement typ 640 to post a depreciation amount - The document has been posted in the AA module ( it is now showing against the Asset in the transaction Asset Explorer transactions  AW01N and AB03) however we do not manage to get it posted to FI and consequently have a reconciliation difference between the value in the AA module and the FI-GL.
    Can anybody please give advise how we can correct this?
    We tried following so far:
    (1) post the unplanned depreciation document using transaction AFAB - depreciation posting run.
    No documents created.
    The message log displays "You want to run the next planned run of the depreciation posting run in period 014. However, the last planned posting run was already performed for period 014."
    Than tried to execute the transaction with selection 'repeat' , 'restart', 'unplanned depreciation run': no documents posted either ......
    (2) reverse the unplanned depreciation document using transaction AB08
    This failed; the system reports following
    "No FI document was generated for the asset transaction" and subsequently after clicking the 'post'button' an error"No unique header information transferred into Accounting
    Message no. RW001
    Diagnosis:  The interface into Accounting requires:
    Header data
    Item data
    Currency data
    The header data is missing, or several items were transferred.
    System Response
    Processing of the data in the Accounting interface is not possible.
    Procedure
    This is a system error of the application which was called up
    So..............No idea how to get rid of this document.
    Can anybody help?
    Kind Regards,
    Arjan

    Hi Suresh,
    Thanks for you feedback.
    I had already tried your suggestion; it was the actions which I mentioned under the point (1) in my message.
    The system did not generate any FI document, this is exactly the unexpected problem that I am trying to solve.
    Any further suggestions?
    Kind Regards,
    Arjan

  • Posting Unplanned Depreciation when asset net book value is zero

    We recently transferred some assets from one company code to another.  However, when they transferred, the depreciation all reversed out YTD.
    We are now trying to post the YTD depreciation back in under the original company code, but when we try posting unplanned depreciation, the following error message appears -
    "In area 01, you can only post manual dep. up to the amount 0.00"
    I believe this is because the asset does not have any net book value now.
    Any suggestions on how to resolve this?
    Many thanks,

    Hi Susan,
    do you have the option to reverse the transfer postings? If so, you could specify another period control for transfer postings (such as fiscal year start, etc.) in your depreciation key, with which you can influence how much depreciation is left back respectively transferred.
    It is correct that you can´t post an unplanned depreciation on the sending asset now, because the net book value would go below zero. As unplanned depreciation does not influence the ordinary depreciation in the year of posting, this value below zero can not be adjusted with a reduction of planned ordinary depreciation.
    I am wondering which effect you´d like to have on the sending asset. Did you post a complete retirement? If so, there should be no APC left which you can depreciate on the sending asset. And as the net book value is zero already, which effect do you want to get? You have to keep in mind that the non-depreciated APC will be continued to depreciate (normally) on the receiving asset. But maybe I misunderstood the problem here ...
    Regards,
    Markus

  • Depreciation not Run value reaches to 95 %

    Hi,
    KIndly suggest when Asset Depreciation value reached to 95% system will not calculate that material in next depreciation posting run, currently we are using 10% depreciation value on yearly basis.waiting for reply.
    Thanks & Regards,
    Kshitiz Goyal

    This behaviour is only because of residual value 5% specified in depreciation key / single asset master level.
    Check in AS02 for single asset at depreciation area level by double clicking on 01 area.
    or
    Check the depreciation key settings in AFAMA if the cut off key specified in the Scrap value field or
    Base value is specified by the scrap value amount.
    In the above cases, the depreciation stops posting if it reaches 95% acquisition value.
    Please check

  • Excise base value is not changing in MIGO excise tab for Import  PO scenari

    Dear Gururs,
    We are using MIGO to capture & Post Excise Invoice for our Import PO (PO type ZIMP). the problem is, when we change the qty in MIGO Qty tab, corresponding base value is not getting update in Excise tab. we are not creating the planned cost mIRO directly we do the GRN.
    Please suggest a solution.
    Thanks
    Shital

    Hello Shital  ,
    You are using the India Scenario right?
    The issue can be because you have not assigned a zero tax code to the line item. For India please make the tax code field in PO as mandatory so that the user does not save the PO without atleast a zero tax code.
    Maintain the tax code & proceed. You will see the tab in MIGO.
    Regards
    Plauto

  • Data type of the base attribute or the base value does not match...

    ...the assigned expression.
    Hello all,
    I always get the Error
    +<ERROR+
    TEXT="'DWH.CUB_REGISTRATIONS_AW.REGISTRATIONS': XOQ-02517: Der Datentyp des Basisattributs oder der Basisgröße stimmt nicht mit dem zugeordneten Ausdruck überein.
    XOQ-01400: Ungültige Metadatenobjekte"/>
    The English message must be something like this:
    The data type of the base attribute or the base value does not match the assigned expression.
    when I run my mapping. The attribute REGISTRATIONS is NUMERIC (12,2) in the Cube and I map a NUMERIC(12,2) constant in it.
    I use a simple OWB-Mapping for loading, but I don't understand why it doesn't function. Other mappings where the attributes are out of a
    table I put in a cube are running well.
    I tried different things, but nothing fixed my problem. Any idea ?
    Thanks a lot for help
    Michael

    Technically this is a 'warning' from the server, not an 'error'. This means that the change you made should have been submitted, but you get an warning message on the client. AWM would suppress this warning, but evidently OWB does not. Can you switch to use AWM?
    Here is the definition of the warning along with 'cause' and 'action' sections. (Unfortunately these sections are not translated into German for some reason.)
    >
    02517, 0, "The data type \"%(1)s\" of the base attribute or base measure is different from the mapped expression \"%(2)s\"."
    // *Cause: Either the base attribute or base measure with the mapped expression was set to an inconsistent data type, or it was mapped to an expression of a different data type from its fixed data type.
    // *Action: When changing a mapped expression for a base attribute or base measure, ensure that the expression has the same data type; otherwise, set the data type of the base attribute or base measure to NULL first. When a base attribute or a base measure has an existing mapped expression, do not set it to a different data type.
    >
    It is probably safe to ignore this warning, but if you can post the relevant XML for the cube, then will probably be able to spot the problem. I assume that REGISTRATIONS is a measure in the cube CUB_REGISTRATIONS_AW, so this is what you can look for in the XML:
    (1) The definition of the base measure along with the datatype. It should be something like this
    <Measure>
      <BaseMeasure
        SQLDataType="NUMBER(12,2)"
        ETMeasureColumnName="REGISTRATIONS"
        Name="REGISTRATIONS">(2) The mapping info for the measure, which should looks something like this:
    <MeasureMap
      Name="REGISTRATIONS"
      Expression="...">
      <Measure Name="REGISTRATIONS"/>
    </MeasureMap>I don't know if you can get the XML directly from OWB. If not, then DBMS_CUBE.EXPORT_XML should work (assuming you are in 11.2). You could also attach AWM and save the cube to an XML template.

  • Base value and BED not coming in Excise Irem in MIGO

    Dear all,
    I created PO base value and basic Excise duty is calculating it is showing  in tax pop up menu
    but it is not coming in Goods receipt (MIGO) in Excise Item Tab
    Base Value and BED
    Please help
    Manjunath

    Hi ,
    I maintained Excise  Default  
    Account payable BED condition type --  JM01
    BED Percentage condition -
    16 ( Number )
    It is upgraded 4.7 t0 Ecc 6
    BED Percentage condition it is given as 16 number but if i changed this, In PO tax Popup menu is not coming
    I change ---JMX1   it not coming in MIGO also
    I cant understand what is this 16 number   i want to known it is program or had code ......
    J1ID as different percentage
    Manjunath

  • Base Value not changing in MIGO Excise Tab

    Dear Gururs,
    We are using MIGO to capture & Post Excise Invoice for our Import PO (PO type ZIMP). the problem is, when we change the qty in MIGO Qty tab, corresponding base value is not getting update in Excise tab. Please suggest a solution.

    Hi,
    If you are doing a MIGO for Import consignment, duties are flow from Invoice booked thru MIRO, so doutful if you can change corresponding base value in MIGO.
    Regards,
    Vikas

  • Excise base value not updated

    Dear all,
    We have found that excise base value is not updated after creating excise invoices,later we corrected it,
    excise base value started updating in table J_1IEXCDTL,
    Intially for 2 months excise base value is not updated in table,
    Is there any problem will arise in future ?
    or
    How to solve this issue ?
    Jeyakanthan

    Awaiting valuable replies.....
    Edited by: Jeyakanthan A on Mar 6, 2010 5:36 PM

  • Scale base value with price discrepancy credit note

    Hi gurus,
    I have a problem in which credit notes for price discrepancies are having direct effect over scale base value in structure S060. I tried to modify the update rules, but found out this is hard coded for this structure. The other solution will be maybe to include a new pricing procedure and sales document just for discepancies, handling a fixed value condition type. Since the rebate which is experiencing the scale base value update is a quantity rebate I don´t know if it will have the desired effect.
    The question is:
    Is it possible to avoid the update to S060 through a user exit?
    I saw RV60AFZZ could be used, but I´m not really sure if it will work to avoid quantities update ?
    Thanks for your time and help.

    hi,
    check out the following link:
    http://help.sap.com/erp2005_ehp_03/helpdata/EN/de/5e74c39d3211d596fc0000e835339d/frameset.htm
    Regards,
    siddharth.

  • Condition Type JSRT not picking Condition Base Value in Pricing Procedure

    Hi Friends,
    In a procedure System is not picking condition base value for condition type JSRT. I have checked the tax procedure and found alternative Cal Type is 17 and is working fine for Domestic vendors.
    Friends i need your help in sorting out this issue. Pls suggest what I can check in order to sort out this issue.
    Rgds, Krishan Raheja

    Hello!
    In TAXINN the base value for the condition JSRT is picked up from step 100.
    I suggest that you change the "From" value to 100 instead of whatever you may be using
    Then test the transaction once again.This will not affect your normal service tax calculation either. So please make this change & try using S1 for planned delivery cost.
    Hope this helps !
    Cheers!
    Plauto
    Edited by: Plauto Abreu on Feb 11, 2011 9:03 PM

Maybe you are looking for