PSM-FM : FI documents carry forward with FMJ2

[former_member767370]

Hi experts,

I made necessary FM configurations normally, but when I execute the carry forward transaction FMJ2, only purchase orders and purchase requisition are selected for carry forward, no FI documents selected (FB60, MIRO).

Why FI documents (like FB60 docs, amount type 54) are not selected during carry forward with FMJ2 ?

Your helps would be appreciated.

Regards,

Arnold DEFFO

[mlabrude]

Hi Arnold,

as far as I know, FMJ2 only carryforward commitments as PR and PO. Why do you need to carryforward actuals as created by FB60 o MIRO?

Regards

Marc

[former_member767370]

Hi Marc

In this case, I have to carry forward the invoice with the budget consumed until the invoice has been paid.

Regards,

Arnold

[iklovski]

Invoices can be carried-forward as well, if required by business process

[iklovski]

Hi,

You should check if value type '54' is well configured in carry-forward customisation. Also, make sure that the financial document you want to carry-forward was posted on a proper commitment item (of financial transaction 30); otherwise, it won't be eligible for this action.

Regards,

Eli

[former_member767370]

Hi,

We did not do a special configuration for value type 54. See attached configuration nodes I have maintained . It used to work like that.

Does SAP change the behaviour of the system in the last release ? If not, I don't understand invoices are not selected in FMJ2.

Regards,

Arnold

[iklovski]

No, nothing has been changed on this matter. Check 'Enter settings for Commitment Carry-forward Payment budget'.

Also, check FMIFIIT table for one of the invoices and see that it is properly registered and not blocked for CF.

[former_member767370]

I didn't use to maintain this setting, but this time, even when I do it, and try to carryforward for value type 54, it doesn't work. The system throw the message "No open items to be carried forward found".

However, the invoices are in the FMIFIIT table.

[iklovski]

Then, it call for deeper analysis. Basically, start from FMIFIIT table, checking the C/F status. Also, there is a dependency on update profile: you have to work with payment budget, so that '54' is closed with '57'. If functional analysis doesn't help, I'd debug FMJ2

[former_member767370]

In the table FMIFIIT, the field for C/F status is empty for all invoices.

[former_member767370]

Hi Eli,

I remark that the "Payment status" flag is checked in table FMIFIIT for all invoices (FB60 & MIRO). And I read another discussion where you were saying that it is the reason of that block.

How to remedy ?

Regards,

Arnold

[iklovski]

Well, yes, this is correct. If the invoice is paid (and flag in FMIFIIT is the 'sign' of it), you can't carry-forward it. It is considered closed.

[former_member767370]

I don't understand why system is assigning "X" in the field FMIFIIT-PAYFLG, despite the fact that those invoices are not paid yet.

What to do ? What customizing setting must be done so that system does'nt assign "X" in this field again ?

Regards,

Arnold

[iklovski]

What is your update profile? Did you make some additional settings for it in OF39? What is the nature of commitment items (financial transaction) behind the invoice?

[former_member767370]

My update profile is 000350. No additional settings in OF39. Behind my invoices, nature of commitment items are 30 & 3. (see screenshot attached).

[iklovski]

There are OSS notes which can fix it if it is a bug. What release you are working with?

[former_member767370]

I think it is 2020 (see screenshot attached).

Which OSS notes ?

[former_member767370]

Hi,

Need your help please. How can I find the OSS notes to fix the issue.

[former_member767370]

I know invoices can be carried-forward, I made in a previous project. But this time, it doesn't work. I would like to know why.

Regards

[iklovski]

Please, refer to my answer

[former_member184992]

Hello Arnold,

I am not sure which is your current EA-PS package which represents PSM-FM (in any transaction Menu - System - Status and go for the packages) but there are some situations that PAYFLG is wrongly set.

See if the following corrections can help you:

2614472 PAYFLG set incorrectly in exceptional cases

2904841RFFMRPFI sets PAYFLG for reversals of invoice verification

2896459 RFFMS200_OLD: PAYFLG set incorrectly in exceptional cases

2823884 PAYMENT FLAG is wrong set during GR/IR reduction

2734369 PAYFLG is set for document bundles that are not completely closed

1854197 Reversal: PAYFLG (payment status) set incorrectly

2687207 PAYFLG indicator is inconsistent during GR reduction

2490952 PAYFLG set incorrectly in the case of parked documents

In addition to that, I would run FMN0 in test mode to see if the transaction suggests a correction. In this way you can be 100% sure that the flag is wrongly set.

Best Regards,

Vanessa Barth.

[former_member767370]

Hello Vanessa,

EA-PS package is SAPK-80501INEAPS.

Thank you for your help, I will exploit those notes.

Best regards,

Arnold DEFFO