cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

BSI Tax Factory 10.0

graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos
5,493


Hello community,

If you have questions about TF 10.0, you can post this on this thread. We will update this thread with tips and notes related to Tax factory 10.0.

Thank you,

Kind regards,

Graziela Dondoni

Accepted Solutions (1)

Accepted Solutions (1)

Former Member
0 Kudos

All -

We just applied up to support pack 83 and we're running 10.e1

Then I tested the 'Synchronization Payroll Tax Data' program.

It did NOT work. I verified this by the fact that new entry in T5UTX for tax authority ME 10 was not inserted as expected (in TUB 44).

I opened an incident with SAP in November which I did not ever receive a response on . Back then I was still on 10.d I believe. I proceeded with the e1 Cyclic and the support packs anyway, hoping to finally get a good result.

What recourse do we have a this point?

Tammy

graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos

Hi Tammy,

I replied your incident on 02.12.2014.
You mentioned that it was solved.

Are you using SE16 transaction to check the entries?

Thank you,
Graziela

Former Member
0 Kudos

Graziela,

What incident are you referring too from 02.12.2014?

I'm referring to 1117722 / 2014 that was created on 20.11.2014 - 10:21:44 UTC-5

I am using SE16 to check the entries. Is there something I need to check in the BSI TaxFactory tables?

Tammy

graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos

Hi Tammy,

You opened that incident to BSI, under component XX-PART-BSI-TFY.

SAP doesn´t have acess to the incidents that are opened using this component, just PY-US-BSI.

However, I can see they sent an info to you.

You can ask to BSI to send this mentioned incident to SAP side or create a new one under PY-US_BSI and I will check this for you.

Anyway, I would recommend to you to apply the note:

2125327 - BSI: Sync Payroll Tax Data generates a short dump when BSI version is not specified

There are some fixes in the tool including an error in T5UTX update.

Thank you,
Graziela

Former Member
0 Kudos

Graziela,

Prior to the new Synchronize Payroll Tax Data tool, I was used to seeing new entries in SAP, table T5UTX after the import of the transports for TUB. For instance, when I apply the transports for TUB 44, an entry is inserted for Tax Authority ME, TaxType 10, with date range 01-01-2015 - 12-31-9999. Now with the sync tool, which I believe pulls from BSI tables, does there have to be an entry in BTXRATE for Tax Authority ME, TaxType 10? It would be beneficial to understand the linkage between BSI and SAP, to know if the tool is working or not, since it does behave differently than directly applying the transports from SAP.

Thank You,

Tammy

Former Member
0 Kudos

Graziela,

I have applied note 2125327. I am still finding errors in the Synchronize Payroll Tax Data log, like "It was not possible to insert entry "300KY09KY CFayette....". The entry exists in SAP, so I deleted it. The program then reports a new error for another entry. I've done this three times now. I would hope this is not normal behavior. What is the recommendation for this?

Tammy

Former Member
0 Kudos

Tammy,

I am experiencing similar issues myself. Do you know how, when there is a new tax authority, we will know what the SAP code should be so as to map it in TF10 for input to the Sync tool? Will SAP provide this information in a TUB note as they do now except without transports? Thanks for your help.

Michael

graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos

Hi Tammy,

Is this error for T5UTD? If so, I´m trying to reproduce in house.

Regarding the way the tools works, It takes the information from BSI side, to update the SAP side.
BTXRATE is not update by TUBs, this table is used to override the entries in T5UTX. So, you will not see this update in this table.

Thank you,
Graziela

Former Member
0 Kudos

Graziela,


The error with the red icon in the program log is on table T5UTZ. There are also 3,345 warnings. In an earlier conversation, I believe you stated that an error will cause the program to rollback and not changes are applied. Three times, I found the records in T5UTZ, and then deleted them as a test to see the program behavior. The record in question was not reported in error, but it would then report a new one.

Thank you,

Tammy

P.S., I have open incident also: 1117722/2014.

graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos

Hi Tammy,

I already took over the incident. I saw that has been sent to SAP.

It is in customer action with some requests.

Thank you,
Grazi

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Michael,

I wish I could answer your question; I am still trying to decipher myself how the program is intended to work in relation to mappings and BSI table data. From my understanding, SAP TUBS will be discontinued on April 1st, so we all need some answers on questions such as this prior to the deadline.

Tammy

Former Member
0 Kudos

Grazeia,

I received an e-mail from SAP this morning, and logged in and I believe I supplied the requested information.

Thank you,

Tammy

xavier_joseph
Explorer
0 Kudos

Still I don't understand Why SAP has come with effective date on the selection screen rather than the TUB #. This is a pain if you have all the localities and 50 states. I am still strugling since we operate in 50 states and almost all the localities in the country.

0 Kudos

Graziela,

We are getting the same error Tammy is. Could you share the steps to resolve this and point us to any other documentation that will assist in properly positioning us to successfully use the Sync Tool now and in the future?

Thanks,

Jean

graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos

Hi Jean,

Once I finished my analyses I will let you know.

Thank you,
Graziela

Former Member
0 Kudos

Graziela,

Do you know how, when there is a new tax authority, we will know what the SAP code should be so as to map it in TF10 for input to the Sync tool? Will SAP provide this information in a TUB note as they do now except without transports? Thanks for your help.

Thanks,

Michael

graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos

Hello Michael,


As per SAP note:


2101719 - BSI: Sync. Payroll Tax Data dependencies on BSI Tax Type mappings

From now on, the BTXTAX, BTXTAXT, and T5UTT tables will no longer be updated by the Synchronize Payroll Tax Data report. This eliminates the dependency on the tax type mappings in the BSI TaxFactory instance. The updates to the BTXTAXT and T5UTT tables will be provided in a separate SAP Note whenever BSI releases a new tax type in a Regulatory Bulletin. Table BTXTAX is no longer used by the system and its maintenance will therefore be deprecated.

Hope this clarifies,

Kind regards,
Graziela

alicia_robinson
Participant
0 Kudos

Is anyone still having issues with Indiana and Ohio local taxes calculating with BSI 10? We are currently on cyclic E2, but can't seem to get IN/OH taxes to work as they did in BSI 9 especially if a person lives in an IN local and works in an OH local.

Thanks!

Former Member
0 Kudos

Graziela,

Thank you for this information regarding tax types. My question is regarding BTXTAXC which is for tax authority mapping. How will this table be updated with the 4 character tax authority code that maps to the numeric BSI tax authority code? Today, the information is provided in the TUB note from which we map the defined codes in BSi TF10. Will this information come in a separate note?

Thanks,

Michael

Felipe-Costa
Participant
0 Kudos

Hi Michael,

You can check the new mappings in the 'General Messages' node of the output log after executing the tool. Alternatively , you can check this information using the view V_T5UTZC, with the subapplication TMAP. The BSI code is listed under the "Code Identifier" field.

Best Regards,

Felipe.


Former Member
0 Kudos

Felipe,

Thank you for this information. Currently when there is a new tax authority, table BTXTAXC is updated by a transport provided by SAP. The question remains, for new tax authorities without the SAP code provided, how can the SAP to BSI mapping be accomplished in TF10 and how will table BTXTAXC be updated? I do not see this table referenced by the tool. Am I missing something?

Thanks,

Michael

Euna
Participant
0 Kudos

Tammy, Jean & Graziela,

I think we resolved that issue by applying T5UTZ(cumulative) to 300. (I think it was both 000 and 300, but my BASIS thinks it was only 300. He probably knows better.)

I guess you can try 300 first?

Regards,

Euna


Former Member
0 Kudos

Euna, Graziela,

Euna's suggestion to "applying T5UTZ(cumulative) to 300" is not clear to me (or there os more to read between the lines).

Therefore Graziela, I'm still expecting a call back from you on my SAP incident so I talk through this in person so I have a better understanding. I also have general questions about the process in general, like am I supposed to have a client 000 data set in the TaxFactory?

Somewhere along the lines, I missed some basic documentation I believe. I worked with BSI extensively for the initial installation and saw their documentation, but the one SAP document I have for how to use the new sync tool is lacking I believe in some aspects.

Thank you Euna!

I look forward to talking to you Graziela!

Tammy

0 Kudos

Hi Graziela, I was wondering how your analysis is going. I'm getting concerned that the date when TUBS are no longer delivered is drawing near and I don't know how to get the sync tool to run in my environment.

I appreciate your time,

Jean

dick_haber
Member
0 Kudos

Tammy,

I have the exact same issue with an error stating "It was not possible to insert entry 300KY09KY CFayette".

Were you able to fix this?

If you were can you please describe how you fixed it?

Thanks.

Dick

Former Member
0 Kudos

Dick

I think you probably should open a high priority incident with SAP.

I can't say for sure which notes eventually corrected that specific error for us.

I can say we applied up to SP 83 and then required two more pilot notes after that.

Tammy

Former Member
0 Kudos

Graziela,

I have submitted an incident request to SAP for resolutio of an issue with table T5UTD that occurrs after a productive run of the sysc tool for the client specific tables. When I executed the program in the productive mode for TUB 46, the entries that were created by the program for table T5UTD contain blanks in the formula number field and the date ranges overlap the existing entries in the table. 12/31/2014 is being chosen as the end date for the inserted entries regardless of the begin date. This error leads to payroll receiving an error when it encounters one of the entries that has blanks in the formula number. Do you know of a correction for this scenario? I have had to restore my T5UTD table back to its original form and cannot use the sync tool at this time. Thanks for your help.

Best regards, Michael Nunnally

Former Member
0 Kudos

Has there been a response to the problem Michael Nunnally reported in post 869? We are having the exact same issue.

Regards,

Sharon

cassigiani
Advisor
Advisor
0 Kudos

Hello Sharon,

SAP Note 2069358 - 'BSI: Corrections in Synchronize Payroll Tax Data report' should solve the issue with formular number on table T5UTD.

Could you please implement it and retest the scenario?

If the issue is with the transport, then SAP Note 2128332 - 'BSI: Sync Payroll Tax Data does not save new client-specific data in transport' should be implemented.

Regards,
Cassiana.

cassigiani
Advisor
Advisor

Hello everyone,

In case any of you are facing issues with client-specific transports when using the sync tool, SAP Note 2128332 - 'BSI: Sync Payroll Tax Data does not save new client-specific data in transport' may solve the issue.

It was released today.

Regards,

Cassiana.

Answers (240)

Answers (240)

cassigiani
Advisor
Advisor

Dear community,

If you would like to change your licensed platform version, or any of the following:
- Change the database provider.
- Extend the support service with BSI.
- Install BSI in your operating system.
- Extend your BSI access as it is about to expire.

For all of these scenarios, you must contact your SAP Account Executive.
The SAP Account Executive will then proceed with contacting the BSI contracts department with the respective request to take the necessary actions.

This is explained in Knowledge Base Article 1892911 - Support Services from BSI (BSI license, upgrade, installation, access, download).

Regards,
Cassiana.

he_vis
Explorer
0 Kudos

BSI has released Cyclic M.

In the notes, I see that Tomcat 8.0 will be in support.

On the Apache Tomcat site, I see that 8.0 is superseded by 8.5.

Who can say something for pro and con of 8.0/8.5? We currently have 7.

Thanks in advance.

he_vis
Explorer
0 Kudos

Tomcat 8.5x is not yet supported.

Maggie3654
Participant
0 Kudos

We are in the process of apply 79 which states that for various PA locals the reciprocal formula data has been modified to not return either taxable or reportable wages when the tax liability is zero. I have an who lives in the PB50 (LowerMakefield, Buck) and he works in NJ. Since he has no tax liability I would expect to not see any taxable wages for the PA locals. I am stilling seeing the taxable wages. Is anyone else seeing this and how did you resolve it?

Regards,

Margaret

alicia_robinson
Participant
0 Kudos

Margaret -

There is a reply from Graziela that mentions TUB 84. You might need to apply up to this one to make this work for you. We had applied up to 83 and had to stop because of the same problem.

Maggie3654
Participant
0 Kudos

Thank you Alicia! I need to decide if I go ahead and implement up to 83 and say there are no changes for the PA locals and then do 84 and 85 and test this change at that point.

Regards,

Margaret

alicia_robinson
Participant
0 Kudos

Margaret -

You may want to investigate your PA EE's a little closer, especially if you have EE's who live/work in separate PA locals with a "0" rate.

This was our issue:

EE res = PA53, wrk = PAE6

BEFORE TUBs the system created PA53 wages

AFTER TUBS the system stops PA53 /701 wages (still builds /301, /601) and now creates wages for PAE6 (/301, /601, /701).

We have not built wages for PAE6 all year and do not want to start now. I'm also curious in the TUB 84 also stops the /301 and /601 wages from building for all the "0" rate authorities.

Maggie3654
Participant
0 Kudos

Alicia,

Once again, Thank you! I am heeding your advice and will implement up to 83 since it does not change our PA locals. This will give me more time to closely examine the changes brought about with 84. We do have employees who live and work in separate PA locals with zero rates. I rather be safe than sorry.

Regards,

Margaret

alicia_robinson
Participant
0 Kudos

Margaret -

I just want to make sure you understand - we are implemented up to 83 and cyclic L and we have the issue with the multiple "0" PA locals.

My understanding is that TUB 84 is supposed to correct the issue of the taxable wages being created for the "0" PA local. I can't get TUB 84 applied until early next week so I can't test to see if this truly does resolve the issue.

Maggie3654
Participant
0 Kudos

Alicia,

For my testing, I went to our production environment and for each company and we have approx 25, I copied down one test employee for each tax combination we have for each company. We then use the variance monitor to simulate the payrolls for these employees for our last payroll and compare against the original results. We then get a report of any taxes that are not the same. For those differences I then check to see if they are due to an update that we are implementing. I then check to see if all the differences we were expecting appeared on our report. One of them which I expected was for the employee who lives in PB50, has taxable wages but no tax, and works in NJ to no longer have taxable wages for PB50. But he still does. I did not have any differences that I could not explain. or was not expecting. If we had the situation you are describing, I would have had new taxable wages that I hadn't of had when we ran our payroll without the updates. But we didn't so I feel comfortable that I am not seeing the issues you are experiencing. I am okay with still having the taxable wages in the situation I described. I will implement 84 later and see if I have the changes I expected to see.

Regards,

Margaret

alicia_robinson
Participant
0 Kudos

Margaret -

I totally understand - just wanted to make sure I was making sense. We use the exact same process for testing using variance monitor (it's a life saver for us). We have a very high EE population in PA and have approx. 30 different combinations that are issues with the "0" rate (not 30 EE's). We currently have 1700+ different tax combinations with our 55,000+ population and it's almost gotten to the point that we have to test all 1700 scenarios every time we implement a TUB/cyclic for fear of missing something and getting bitten in our production environment. The constant reciprocity changes are what are hurting us the most along with random issues that have been popping up since the first of the year (cross year retro notes). You could say I'm just a little frustrated with taxes.

I hope to test out TUB 84 the first of next week and will reply with the outcome.

0 Kudos

Concerning the reciprocity issue, I received a response from SAP this morning stating that OSS note 2313491 is the cause of the problem. They have released a pilot note, 2351550 to correct the problem.

If anyone is having this issue and has not created an incident, you may want to and request this pilot note to see if your issue is corrected.

Andrew Taylor

rick_megaro
Explorer
0 Kudos

Does Tub 084 have anything to do with this mess?

xavier_joseph
Explorer
0 Kudos

Did anyone apply 2351550? I am just curious to see the outcome.

0 Kudos

RE 1258

My Basis team is applying the note right now, when done I will test and will post whether or not it fixed the reciprocity issue. Hopefully it will not cause other issues.

ConeC
Participant
0 Kudos

We have applied pilot note 2351550 (Tax Incorrect Value on Certificate Code RC) and it has resolved the reciprocity issues we were experiencing with the following:

Work Live

PA NJ

NJ PA

MI WI

PC5Z NJ

IL WI

Now the system is taxing the resident authority.

0 Kudos

I have tested the pilot note for the reciprocity issues and it appears to resolve the issues the previous note caused and I cannot see any new issues created.

I tested:
Work and live in 2 different states with the IT0234 delimited

Work and live in 2 different states with the IT0234 still valid

A person who works and lives in the same state, to make sure the taxes calculated the same

And a MO resident working in IL to calculate only the IL tax.

All tests were successful.

xavier_joseph
Explorer
0 Kudos

When you say taxing resident authority... do you mean based on regulations or an issue?

0 Kudos

SAP just updated my incident stating that they are going to set the note for general release based on my and others feedback.

ConeC
Participant
0 Kudos

Xavier,

The system is now taxing the resident authority as designated by the reciprocal agreement of the two states.

Thanks

xavier_joseph
Explorer
0 Kudos

Thanks Cherylnita.

graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos

Hello community,

Developer is working on SAP note 2231550 doing some additional tests. Once this is released to customer, I will post on this thread.

Thank you,
Graziela

aida_alonso
Explorer
0 Kudos

As for our testing, we found that the note did resolve the issue except where the Resident State was IN and Work State was different. In this case, we needed to created related T5UTRC entries for the various IN / Work State combinations we had.

stevenan
Participant
0 Kudos

We have also applied the note and all issues are resolved. I had created work around reciprocal overrides in BSI but those are not by company whereas SAP configuration is. These entries resolved the problem but now they are no longer needed.

Best regards,

Anna Stevenson

he_vis
Explorer
0 Kudos

In the latest Regular Bulletins, BSI recommends the following:

Keeping all messages in your Message Viewer may use all available database free space. BSI recommends monitoring table spaces and clearing old messages that are no longer required to prevent this from happening.

We can indeed remove quite some old messages, but we must know if removing affects performance. Does anyone have experience with removing e.g. 50,000 messages?

Thanks in advance for the answer.

Regards,

Hans Eric Vis

graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos

Hello community,

Note 2351550 has been released.

Kind regards,

Graziela

he_vis
Explorer
0 Kudos

Deleting in PRD took some seven hours for 14.000 messages.

.

alicia_robinson
Participant
0 Kudos

Margaret -

Just curious to see if you have any issues with the "0" rate PA locals still creating /701 for Supplemental wage type items.

We applied TUB 84 and it does resolve the issue of creating wages when we had a person who lived and worked in 2 separate "0" rate PA locals. However, we have noticed that for wage types that we have marked as supplemental the /701 is still being created.

Thanks!

0 Kudos

Anna,

We had the same issue and this note fixed the issue - 2302287. Additional notes brought in

1. 2289441

2. 2221567

Thanks

Kumar

Former Member
0 Kudos

We are in the process of applying cyclic M, upgrading from K. We have discovered that for our salary population, the /810 and /840 are no longer generated post upgrade. The hourly population continues to behave normally. Has any one experienced this?

Thanks.

Brandyn_Richmon
Participant
0 Kudos

HI All,

We are currently upgrading from Enhancement Pack 6 to Enhancement Pack 8. As part of this upgrade we are also updating to the latest cyclic and bulletin.

Current Cyclic i (going to cyclic L)

Current Bulletin 68 (going to 83)

Our BASIS support is asking if its best practice to just treat this as a new installation (i.e. from scratch) versus reinstalling our current level cyclic/bulletin and then upgrading to latest cyclic/bulletin.

Has anyone experienced this yet? Any suggestions?

Thanks,

Brandyn

Matt_Fraser
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

As the major portion of the Cyclic and Bulletin data is in the TaxFactory system and not your ABAP system, why would you reinstall that? Why not apply the latest cyclic and bulletin, upgrade your ABAP system as intended, and use the Sync Tool to bring over the relevant bulletin data into the ABAP system as normal?

Brandyn_Richmon
Participant
0 Kudos

HI Matt,

The comments from my BASIS support are below. I think because of the new server environment.

Do you think its better to go another direction? Your comments are appreciated.

==================================================================

Currently we have completed only the migration of sap instance(ECC6) to the new windows 2012 server.

As part of that migration, only sap schema/tables are migrated. No BSI tables /schema were migrated.

Now EHP8 upgrade has been started on the new Dev server. It will take few days for the completion.

After the upgrade completion, we can install BSI from scratch on the new server and restore any BSI datasets from old Dev server.

For this process, If we can request procedure directly from BSI, it can be easier on our part.

=================================================================

Thanks,

Brandyn

Matt_Fraser
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Ah, ok, now I understand. In this circumstance, it may be easier to just reinstall BSI from scratch. It's probably about the same level of work to copy/migrate it as to reinstall it. It really depends on whether your payroll office needs to maintain the logs of pay runs that exist in the BSI database.

In my environment, we have BSI on a separate, dedicated server, so it's not directly impacted by any upgrades or migrations that occur on the ABAP system, except for any hostname changes in ACL files that need to occur for the gateway, etc.

Also in my environment, our payroll office doesn't ever directly access BSI. They only use the logs and such that are in the ABAP system. So, if the logs on BSI go away, they don't even notice nor do they care. This is why, when I upgraded BSI from TF9 to TF10, I didn't actually upgrade. I started over on the new release to keep things simpler.

Brandyn_Richmon
Participant
0 Kudos

Hi Matt,

I received similar feedback from BSI. If going to a new server, it's best to just install the latest cyclic and backup/restore your old data sets. Thanks for your input.

Brandyn

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello All,

Does SAP or BSI offer a separate type of Tax Factory license for SAP Test and Demo environments? We have a non-productive demo system where we would like to have Tax Factory installed.

Thanks in advance for your responses.

Regards,

Chirag

ConeC
Participant
0 Kudos

It has been brought to my attention that our end users are receiving a Tax Locator error when entering new hires or address changes.

Message 8 - Authority returned by BSI: BSI0, was not found in a tax area
Message 13 - Authority returned by BSI: BSI0, was not found in a tax authority table


Also, there are no tax authorities being presented for selection.

From my conversations this issue appeared before our upgrade to Cyclic K, but I am not sure of an exact time frame. From my testing, in BSI Mapping Tools > Map Tax Codes > the equivalent of SAP Tax Authority has to be selected as the "Preferred Status" to have the authorities present in Tax Locator.

I do not know if our preferences were previously noted and wiped out by mistake or is this a functionality change. Has anyone else experienced this issue?

manish_kumar13
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hello All,

We are on cyclic L and the Tubs level is 83, on processing payroll to an employee from the CT region we see that there is an error which is generated. Has anyone come across the same error and if yes can you guide us to resolve it..

9002

ERROR IN SELECT FROM BTXBGRP FOR 00090000 - SQL CODE IS 1403

Any help would be much appreciated.

Thanks,

Manish M.

former_member10768
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos

Hello Guys,

I have just found a KBA to solve a BSI connection issue.

If you come to face the error below when running a connection test on the transaction SM59.

"CPIC-CALL: 'ThSAPCMRCV' no data received"


The KBA 2330299 - RFC Connection test fails for BSI which was released in the middle of June fixes the issue.

Just follow the steps on this document and things should work fine.

Cheers!

Former Member
0 Kudos

We have installed cyclic L in our test system and are having significant performance (slow calls) issues with it. Has anyone else installed L? We are creating an OSS message later today.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Jeff -

I believe you are referring to the call from SAP to BSI. We have recently installed cyclic L but no issues related to slow calls so far. The only issue we have after the update is with mapping of Tax codes. It gives a message 'Please wait while data loads' and the data never loads so we are not able to map any missing tax authority.

We will check again later and raise to BSI support if the issue still exists.

Thanks,

Mitesh

DipeshMistry1
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hi Mitesh,

We had the same problem of the message appearing "Please wait while data loads' when we access the BSI Web client using Internet Explorer browser.

However, this message does not appear when you use Google Chrome and were able to load & map tax authority mappings.

Please try accessing the BSI Web Client using Chrome browser. This should solve your problem.

Regards,

Dipesh.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Thanks Dipesh. Appreciate the quick response. Unfortunately for us IE is the only option, so will check if there is any other way to get this resolved.

Former Member
0 Kudos

I read an old reply from on how to resolve this issue.

If you are using IE and facing an issue with mapping of Tax codes where it just displays 'Please wait while data loads', you need to switch off the compatibility settings and issue would be resolved. Also, the other option is to use Google Chrome.

stevenan
Participant
0 Kudos

Hello, Mitesh -

I no longer use IE and our IT department recommends Google Chrome over IE. I have not had issues since using GC. The BSI client works slightly different in GC vs. IE but you get used to it.

Thanks, Anna

ConeC
Participant
0 Kudos

We recently applied BSI 10k and TUBs 76 - 80. Before the upgrade employees that worked in IL and lived in WI had taxes only withheld in WI. After the upgrade these employees are being taxed in IL.

I have confirmed that table T5UTRC is work IL reside in WI is set to 1. There is a reciprocity agreement between these two states. Has anyone else encountered this issue?

And/or does anyone have suggestion on how to resolve? I have reached out to BSI and they noted to confirm that the Nexus and RC codes are 1. I confirmed the NX code of 1 is being passed on the work state. There had been no changes to the employees master data before the upgrade.

ConeC
Participant
0 Kudos

I found the solution to this issue Work in IL Live in WI. It required an update to the Payroll Schema, USTAX Parameter 4. I referenced SAP Note 2058305 where the same scenario was occurring for Washington, DC.

This is a change to BSI functionality before we applied the Cyclic K the certificate status was not required on IT234 to pull the WI taxes.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello,

We are in the process of upgrading the TaxFactory Cyclic from 10.0.G to 10.0.L. The latest version of Regulatory bulletin in our system is 75.

We are first trying to update the Regulatory bulletin level from 75 to 77 and then start with the cyclic update L. There is an issue after applying updating TUB 76 as even after the successful update, the bulletin level in system tools is still at 75. Because of this issue, we are not be able to apply TUB 77.

The sync program in SAP is displaying the Regulatory Bulletin Information as below:

Level in BSI Client: BSI TaxFactory 10.0.g | Cyclic G | Regulatory 076 | Tax Locator N/A
Cross-client Tables: BSI TaxFactory 10.0.g | Cyclic G | Regulatory 075 | Tax Locator N/A

Client-specific Tables: BSI TaxFactory 10.0.g | Cyclic G | Regulatory 075 | Tax Locator N/A

So we think the bulletin level has been updated somewhere in the BSI TaxFactory as it gets picked by SAP but not displayed correctly in the system tools. Has anyone faced this issue and can provide some information on how this can be solved?

Thanks,

Mitesh

stevenan
Participant
0 Kudos

Hello, Mitesh -

We have not had this issue but we always apply the cyclic first and then the TUBs.

I think you should try applying the cyclic bulletin first and then apply the tax update bulletins. There have been some mandatory cyclic updates between g and k that were required due to data format changes and this can affect the application of TUB data.

Hope this helps!

Anna

Former Member
0 Kudos

Thank you Anna! We had thought of the same approach but were not sure if it would cause any issue. I think we will give this a try and see if the issue is resolved.

Thanks again for looking into this!!

alicia_robinson
Participant
0 Kudos

FYI....TUB 81 has incorrect changes.

If you have employees impacted by the Harrisburg, PA changes within TUB 81 then you may want to delay applying TUB 81. We had received a notification from Harrisburg PA about the changes and they did not match what BSI released in TUB 81. I sent a request to BSI on 6/15 questioning the discrepancy and had to request an update this morning. BSI's reply is "the issue will be resolved in the next up and coming bulleting which is scheduled to be released no later than the end of this month".

Thanks,

Alicia

jwiblepasshe22
Participant
0 Kudos

Alicia, we (PASSHE) and the Commonwealth of PA are aware of the issue with the $156 annual limit not being enforced at the end of the year but since we are Harrisburg based we had to apply TUB 81 anyway, supposedly the limit fix will be in TUB 83. Did you experience some other issues?

alicia_robinson
Participant
0 Kudos

Jeff -

We haven't applied TUB 81 just yet. We were preparing to apply Cyclic K and several TUBs, but wanted to confirm this deduction beforehand as it would likely upset our Harrisburg population. We were concerned because of TUB 81 stating a $250 deduction that was set to start 7/1/16 when our documentation stated it was supposed to be a $156 deduction. That was too large of a difference for us to not question.

Thanks,

Alicia

jwiblepasshe22
Participant
0 Kudos

Article from Harrisburg Patriot News/PennLive.com:

Alicia, you are correct the Tub description was a bit confusing but after testing we found that the weekly deduction is $5, (or for us $10 biweekly) which is correct for the rest of 2016. It will then revert to $3.00 weekly deduction on 1/1/2017.

alicia_robinson
Participant
0 Kudos

Jeff -

Thanks for that insight! We just didn't want to apply and have our DEV system stuck with the issue until BSI fixed it. We will get it applied and make sure we get the same result for our biweekly payroll.

One question - if the bulletin is actually letting you withhold the correct amount ($10 biweekly), then what fix will be in TUB 83?

Thanks,

Alicia

jwiblepasshe22
Participant
0 Kudos

Alicia, I'm not entirely certain but I believe it has to do with people who move from one LST tax area into Harrisburg and may exceed the max for this year. The Commonwealth discovered this but it was in their weekly payroll that actually has a first pay date of 7/1/16 so it should not be very impactful.

Venkat61
Explorer
0 Kudos

We have DB on development server and we upgraded to TF10K to TF10L. Before the upgrade our DEV and QA systems were both connected to it and working. After upgrade to L, DEV is working fine and QA is not working. we are getting RFC connection error. Anybody has this this kind of issue?

stacey_degarmo
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hello,

Has anyone had issues installing the latest (mandatory) Cyclic "L"?

Our Basis Team installed Cyclic "L" in our test system (appeared successful from their side) but both the SM50 connection and RPUBTCU0 are failing. Basis also noticed the file size between Cyclic K and L appeared significantly different. We reverted back to "K" and that works fine so it appears to be related to "L" somehow.

We had already upgraded to the new SAP NetWeaver RFC Library back in April. We did submit a ticket to BSI and they initially referenced that the error occurs because the new RFC Libraries are not being found by the application and to look at Note 2219445. However, after updating them that we are on the latest RFC Libraries; Version 39 released on 04/20/2016, they advised that we should submit an Incident to SAP and identify we are on this version of RFC Libraries and Note 2219445 so they can provide us with assistance. The deadline for this Cyclic is June 23rd.

Any assistance is greatly appreciated!

Stacey

Former Member
0 Kudos

At first glance...

Check the executables named in your tf10server batch files. Make sure you're calling the new exe and that the name is correct.

If that looks good, enable debug mode, check the RFC again, then review the contents of the debug log file on the server from which you ran the RFC test.

mike

stacey_degarmo
Explorer
0 Kudos

Mike, thank you for your response. However, we use Linux rather than Windows. Here is a screenshot from our TF10server.csh.

Any suggestions?

Thank you,

Stacey

michael_sharrar
Participant
0 Kudos

Stacey DeGarmo wrote:

Mike, thank you for your response. However, we use Linux rather than Windows. Here is a screenshot from our TF10server.csh.

Any suggestions?

Thank you,

Stacey

With cyclic L I had to add the NWRFCSDK path to LD_LIBRARY_PATH within tf10server.csh and tf10server.ksh scripts. In our case, this is how we set that environment variable:

setenv LD_LIBRARY_PATH /oracle/DCA/11204/lib:/sapmnt/DCA/exe/nwfrcsdk/lib

If you use ldd to find the library dependencies for tf10server you'll see that it needs to have libsapnwrfc.so available now. That wasn't the case with the previous version.

Also, if you set all 4 environment variables listed in the script at the command line and then execute tf10server.csh manually you should see if there is a library dependency issue. If there is no response at the command line then the script is working correctly. The RFC connection test should be successful at that point.

Regards,

Mike

Former Member
0 Kudos

Stacey,

We are having the exact same issue as you after updating from K to L we are also on Linux and I had my Basis guy check that the libsapnwrsf.so is in our path already.

Have you found a solution yet or talked to BSI?

Our Basis guy will be logging a ticket with BSI but not until Monday.

Thanks,

Martha.

Sivakumar_Kannan
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hi Martha

I work with Stacey and she has asked to to reply to this thread.

Steps to Resolve = SM59 BSI connection Issue.

1. Download & Extract the Latest NWRFC Library from SAP Service Market (NWRFC_39-20004565.SAR).

2. Folder Structure = nwrfcsdk/lib (Copy this folder nwrfcsdk and place it in your kernel directory

either = /sapmnt/<SID>/exe/nwrfcsdk/lib or /sapmnt<SID>/exe/uc/linuxx86_64/nwrfcsdk/lib

3. Now edit the tf10server.csh and add the following line

setenv LD_LIBRARY_PATH :/sapmnt<SID>/exe/uc/linuxx86_64/nwrfcsdk/lib.

This should resolve your error.

Regards

Siva

SAP Basis

Former Member
0 Kudos

Sivakumar,

Thank you so much for your quick and detailed reply I greatly appreciate that. I have forwarded your steps onto my Basis guy and hope for a resolve soon.

Thanks again,

Martha.