cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

(MX) Contabilidad Electrónica - RME 2014 Anexo 24

reburujado
Participant

Dear Forum,

In Mexico, new rules has been publish as part of the new legal change for "Regla Miscelanea Fiscal" (RMF) 2014. "Contabilidad Electronica".

01.07.2014


According to this rules, companies must take in their electronic system three elements:

a) Catálogo de cuentas (chart of accounts) identified with a "código agrupador" (CA). This is the chart of account used by your company that should be update each time the structure has been change. Anexo 24 provides the (CA) catalogue.


b) "Balanza de comprobación" This is an extraction for each single account by period showing the initial balance, account movement (S/H) and final balance.

This is send in a monthly basis in the "Buzón tributario" (a mailbox with SAT)


c) "Polizas", that is an extraction for accounting documents.

This extraction is required only when SAT asked for them, or when your company ask for a "devolución o compensación" process.


For all above elementes, a XML file must be generate according to "Anexo 24 - Contabilidad en Medios Electrónicos".


Some question arise to front this challenging goal so far:


- If you already have a solution to front this requirement, can you please share your experience.

(New customizing, developments, add-on, third party, etc.)


Thanks for your help Fernando Luna


http://www.sat.gob.mx/informacion_fiscal/normatividad/Documents/a24_01072014.pdf

Accepted Solutions (1)

Accepted Solutions (1)

reburujado
Participant
0 Kudos

Hi SAP Experts,

I would like to include this thankful note to share your knowledge in order to build this discussion forum.

We are about to close this threath, but before I would like to write a quick guide for electronic accounting as an Overview and Conclusion for this subject:

SAT - Electronic Accounting:

SAT is the administrative authority office that apply the fiscal regulation here on Mexico (Servicio de Administración Tributaria).

Past July 2014 Aritóteles Núñez Sánchez (the SAT Leader) publish a new regulation that ask the "persona moral" and "persona fisica" Mexican entities to sent their "electronic accounting" via "Buzón Tributario" .

The files structures was published on "Anexo 24" (this is call Electronic Accounting Version 1.0)

Since then, the anexo 24 file structure has suffered so many modification, a big one were publihed on December 2014 (Septima Resolución 2014); currently we are on Electronic Accounting Version 1.1.

You can ask for further information for free 01-800-4636728 (01-800-INFOSAT)

Contabilidad electrónica

Personally, I did not receive the best IT support assistance from SAT office , their IT support are limited to said "check Anexo 24 please" assuming the Anexo 24 is clear, so many technicall key points are not clear at all countless interpretations will arise, so be careful.

The "Buzón Tributario" is a "new" web page were you are supposed to receive notification from SAT and there is supposed to be a link to upload the XML SAT Electronic Accounting files.

MiniGlossary

I am not a "fan" to translate the mexican legal concepts from "spanish to english", but here is some translation approximations if you like to search over the internet:

Contabilidad de Medios Electronicos, e-Contabilidad ::: Electronic Accounting

Catálogo de cuentas ::: Chart of Accont

Balanza de Comprobación ::: Trial Balance

Pólizas ::: Journal Entries, Accounting Documents

Folio Fiscal / UUID ::: Mexican Electronic Tax Receipt, the UUID number from your Electronic Invoicing

Buzón tributario ::: Tax Mail

RFC Registro Federal de Contribuyentes ::: Mexican TAX ID (this only apply on Mexican entities)

Mexican Tax ID are divided on two: Persona Física is a "sole person" for example "Fernando Luna Fukumoto" and a Persona Moral is an entity, for example Proveedora del Bajio SA de CV.

Electronic Accounting initially is cover by the following xml files:

- Chart of account

- Trial Balance

- Journal Entries

The anexo 24 de la Septima Resolución Fiscal 2014 covers the "format" technically specification, but please also take a look about the form, or what is behind this files to support it.

SAP standar solution or Z Custom solution?

SAP has create and publish their own solution to cover these need by SAP Notes and corrections; however please take into account these "standard solutions" are on "pilot phase" and so many escenarios are not cover at all.

2042663 - [MX] Announcement for Electronic Accounting in Mexico

Out of scope:

2nd local currency, Special Purpose Ledger, FI-CA, Other Posting Periods treatment.

Also the SAP "standar solution" are only applicable on SAP "current versions"; so if you have a old SAP version may you really need to plan an update or in this case build your own Z custom solution to achieve this on time.

Personally we decide to build our own custom solution to have the flexibility to build, adjust and correct the deliverables on time. So please take into account this consideration to decide your own path.

If your Mexican Implementation was not complete at all, it is likely you need to correct this before to consider, plan, build and delivery an Electronic Accounting solution.

For example, on Mexico it is a legal report need (MX Localization) to have separate tax accounts for IVA, one for "IVA to be paid" and the other for "IVA payed"; on SAP you can achieve this using the initial and final tax code V2 -> W2 usign the RFUMSV25 report

You need to invert so much time and ressource to implement this project; please spent some time with the financial accounting, fiscal, BPAs, IT team, FI, ABAPs consultants to achieve these projects.

This is not a simple "ticket" is a big impact long-term project,

You may found some "commercial" solutions over Internet, but please ask them what it really covers, approach, scope and methodology behind this.

"Copy and Paste solutions" or "Just Install and Go solution" does not exist at all! please take time to analyse your accounting system and your MX Local needs before implement "Electronic Accounting"

Here some general guidelines and recommendation you will find over this SAP discussion forum: (Rules from December 2014).

All these files are sent by financial entity, so we are assuming each company code has its own RFC assigned on their IMG and customized as a Mexican Company Code.

Chart of account

- This is the chart of account of your company code and each GL account it must be classified with a "Código Agrupador SAT" (on english you may find this as a "Coding Group SAT"

- The Coding group is an "equivalence table", so you should choose "the most suitable one" according to the nature of the GL account and preponderance of the operation posted of the same.

- Initially some technically problems arise and interpretation confusions about the "level field" (nivel), due SAT does not explain the right use when the rules were published on last July 2014. Fortunately clarification were published until December 2014 (six month later!!!).

- According to Septima Resolucion I.2.8.1.6. on fraction I, you should send the Chart of Account Coding Group classification at least at the GL 1st level and sub GL 1st level.


There is an exception for financial accounting systems that only manage the GL accounts (SAP system in this case).

Due SAP financial accountig system is designed to only manage the GL account level (the sub account level does not exist on SAP); then you carry on the GL account classification to the sub account level.


That is the reason all GL accounts are classified as level "2" on the SAP standard solution

Level Coding Group Name of the coding group

1 105 Clientes

2 105.1 Clientes Nacionales

2 105.2 Clientes Extranjeros

- SAP standard solution is using the Financial Statement Version (FSV) as a basis to build the chart of account; I have encounterd some problems for this solution desing since you should use GL account ranges, you cannot block specific "old" accounts and depends on "transport orders" to update the GL structure on productive environment.

- Check whether your chart of account are updated, you need so many work session with the end users, also the GL account description it should be provided on "Spanish Language".

- You should sent "the most recent version" of your chart of account each time

- Not a rule, but chek whether to create the memo accounts (cuentas de orden).

Trial Balance

- The trial balances covers the initial balance, movements (S/H) and end balances for each month of each company code.

- Check your company general ledger(s) functionality, the periodic balance of your company code must be sent each month. The last rule said January 2015 Balance it should be sent on March 2015 and so on (two month later), but due "time extensions" or prorrogas, the delivery dates can change. Check the SAT page.


- The SAP standard solution are assuming you are using the MXN local currency as a company code currency, also the K4 fiscal year (January to December months), NO consolidation figures are covered here.


- It is not a rule, but the numbers of the GL accounts reported on the Chart of Account is should match the Trial Balance; you should not sent a balance of a GL account without coding group.

- Currently there are no information or general guidelines about the "closing Trial Balance 2015" to be sent next year 2016 (period 13).

Journal Entries

- This is the most complex file, first at all, this is not a report! it is an "accounting document extractor". Consider the size and time of the file you are about to create!

Each company code has their business rules, in my opinion, no standard solution is possible. You need to spend time to define:

- What data will be shown on the journal entries

- Where the solution will get the Folio Fiscal!?

- Where the solution will get the payment receipts (transfer/checks)!?

Due most of SAP Implementation does not cover Electronic Invoicing within the SAP landscape, you need to give a big review of your Electronic Invoicing solution (in and out interfaces) and by this, I mean where the vendor and customer electronic invoicing information will be recorded within and outside SAP!?.

Folio Fiscal is the UUID you found in your Electronic Invoice Receipt (36 characters) and it should appear on the invoice and also the clearing.

SAP does not have a standard solution to record the folio fiscal in a "automatized" way.

The standard solution assume you will copy+paste the Folio Fiscal whithin an specifi text field.

both Vendors and Customer Invoices. See note: 2042663

Personally, I rather SAP standard solution should create an specific tax document called "Folio Fiscal" such as the "Nota Fiscal" document on Brazil"... but is a distant dream. a really distant dream, there are no plans so far.

I hate "text fields" since this are "not-true fields". Is just a single text.

When this data is treated as a text,you cannot define complex warning, error validator, reports, etc, etc.

I definitely encourage you to analyze a Z custom solution in order to automatize this process between Journal Entries and get the right Folio Fiscal on time.

There are not general guidelines so far about the text on the header or line items (Concepto), but it should be "descriptive" according the transaction, it cannot be blank!

The Journal Entry are asked by request (is not sent periodically) the last update on annex 24 said will ask for journal entries from June 2015 up to date.

Other Auxiliaries

The same rules from above.


XML Files

Buy and learn about XML editors!, you will used them so many times from now!.

Not all fields are mandatory; but when is mandatory do not leave it in blank!

You should show data only if you have it! Check the XML definitions (XSD)!


SAT fails about the XSD definition several times:


The first time when published the Annex 24on July 2014, they skipped the XSD file!

Practically it means the SAT office just ask for data information but miss about how

That's an incomplete and inappropiate specification from SAT office! if you ask me.

The second time does not declare the name space and schemma location properly on the file definitions December 2014, so the files cannot be validate it properly!

You can found the righ name space and schemma location on the following web page Preguntas frecuentes de la contabilidad electrónica

These were published the last day, just about we are going to send the first electronic accounting submission.

Finally the "test postal" were delay up to late march; here you can "validate whether the file is right or not"

Validador de Forma y Sintaxis de Documentos Digitales

However this validator is limited to a specific number of errors, so I encourage you to buy specialized software to analyse your several errors.


It will be more Electronic Accounting updates?

Yes, I think so many updates, since SAT ask for so much data and never publish a clear general guidelines or "form" rules, it is likely to be more clarification or rules in the future.

Currently Sello SAT and CSD SAT are optional (on the standar SAP solution is left blank).

At the end of the day, I think the SAT Electronic Accounting it must be managed as new module within SAP Landscape, and it will cause many headache if you need to implement a new procedure or module within this.

For example if you plan to add the Travel Expenses functionalities, therefore you also need to plan and analyse the impact on the SAT Electronic Accounting Module and so on.

It is likely a new and specific position called "FI-TAX consultant" it should be desing and considered to cover future requirements such as on Brazil. Because of the specific knowledge and attention to cover this.

It is likely the SAT auditotarye power increase and ask for other information areas in the future such as bank statements, inventory, purchasing data, etc, etc, etc.

Up to March 2014, only less than 8% of mexican entities is able to build and send the electronic Accounting files, so many "prorroga" or additional time to deliver your electronic accounting has been announced each month (the last one at the end of April). Also it is really difficult to submit the "XML files" on the buzón tributario web page (the web page crashes on peak dates).

Further more, some legal figures on defense of the tax payer on Mexico has issue "protection" (amparos) to declare electronic accounting as a unconstitutional (acto de molestia), but this... is another story for other kind of experts.


Best Regards and thanks for your comments all this time.


Fernando Luna Fukumoto

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Fernando, thanks for the summary (and sorry for "hijacking" your thread ). Just a thought - you might want to mark your post as 'correct answer", then it'll show up below your original post on the 1st page.

Note that marking this thread as answered won't lock it from the further replies (only moderators can lock threads). However, since it's grown a lot, we can open a new discussion on the subject - sort of "Part 2". If anyone has other suggestions - please post them.

Thank you.

reburujado
Participant
0 Kudos

Electronic Accounting - Localization Latin America - SCN Wiki

Offical SAP Wiki with all the SAP Notes related

akimol
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hello,

Has anybody noticed endless loop in JE report for no-leading ledger and where New GL is active.

The change was introduced in 2161386 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General Correction (N6), but is there any new note released?

Thanks,

Amit.

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Amit, yes - see 2127273 - Mexico Electronic Accounting - Journal Entries Corrections. The issue we had was resolved by it.

akimol
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hi Jelena,

Actually that note 2127273 and additional changes with note 2161386 have created the issue I am having. It has to do with the condition to stop the Do loop for fetching data from cursor set on BSEG. Anyway since we have copied all solution to Z programs I could correct it. I just wanted to check if there are any additional corrections.

In any system with New GL activated and running report with non-leading Ledger (instead of 0L) will go in endless loop.

Thanks,

Amit.

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Sorry, I thought it was the last one (it solved our issue and we don't care about the rest ).

Well, simple keyword note search also finds 2168066 that appears to be more recent but the symptom is different. Why don't you open an incident with SAP? From what I've seen, this particular team seem to do pretty bad job at testing different scenarios.

akimol
Explorer
0 Kudos

That's another issue. Our client has stopped SAP support.

Answers (144)

Answers (144)

0 Kudos

Hello Forum.

We finish to implement EHP8 and now I have a problem in the program and the logical file path, the original configuration is done in transaction FILE.

My problem, the program now is taking directly:

Logical file path: FI_ROOT

Instead to take the correct information.

Logical file path: FI_RPFIMXEAACT_PATH

FI_ROOT is used for another process, and I don't find where is necessary to update again the configuration and enter FI_RPFIMXEACT_PATH.

I will appreciate any comment related to assign correctly the Logical file Path: FI_RPFIMXEAACT_MX,

Thanks and regards.

ARTURO

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Arturo, open an incident with SAP Support on this.

anil_singh19
Participant
0 Kudos

Hello

We are doing Sample Invoicing with Zero Value in Mexico. Now since Invoice is of zero value , No Accounting Document is generated for this zero invoice.

Now since no accounting document is generated this entry does not come in Journal Entry Report for Mexico along with UUID and RFC number.

Is this ok... Should Invoices be reported with UUId and RFC number for ZERO Value Sample Invoices..

Regards

Sanjeev

former_member512834
Discoverer
0 Kudos

Thank You! was very helpful.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello

After applying all the SAP notes and reading through this insightful thread we were able to generate Chart Of Accounts and Account Balances in XML Report.

I have two questions here :

(1) In the Account Balance Report, should Credit Values i.e Haber be represented with a sign

(2) Also in Chart of Accoutns Report what should be the value for Level i.e Nivel reported 1 or 2

Is there anyway I can upload these two xml files and check validation also.

Regards

SAnjeev

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi guys,

I'm new on the subject of electronic accounting. Recently was assigned me the task of implementing the SAP notes to comply with the requeriments of the Mexican authorities.

I implemented the notes "2180085 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: Badi has been provided for journal Entries report to add additional documents" and "2185878 - RPFIGLMX_JE_DETAILS: Performance Improvement" , but when I run Tcode FIGLMX_EACCT show me the error program ABAP RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING.

My guess is that when we implemented the note 2180085 for Badi, it was generated the shell for own code, but at present we won't use this Badi.

Did anyone have a similar problem?

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Susana, this might have been mentioned on one of the earlier pages here, try Google. In any case, the short dump provides very detailed description of what error happened where. You can use this information for troubleshooting.

Please make sure to do ALL the manual activities described in the notes, there are plenty of them and I guess you might have missed one. I vaguely recall there was one activity I thought was needed only for BADI implementation, but it didn't work without it. The description was a bit misleading.

If you still feel there is an error, please open an incident with SAP.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

When to register two emails in the vendor master, indicates a serial number for each mail.


E-mail Adress ID

calderón@yahoo.com 001

Erasmo@hotmail.com 002


When an email is deleted and then add a new mail, not continuing with the consecutive number will skip number.


E-mail Adress ID

calderón@yahoo.com 001

Erasmo@hotmail.com 004


I need to change the parameters of the program to take the ID emailed and not just take the ID 001, but I will specify another ID, example ID 004.

Can you help me to know how to change the ID to take sending email that I require?

0 Kudos

Hello Forum.

I have a problem with the XML for payments, when it is done by "Transfer" there is an aditional line to add the Tax Id "RFC", this field is: Transferancia RFC

By standard is looking for Tax Id in LFA1 / STCD1, but in the company is saved in LFA1 / STCD4.

Does someone has this escenario? where the Tax Id "RFC" is not saved in LFA1 / STCD1?

Thanks and regards.

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Arturo, try STCD3. We have a "dummy" RFC there for the foreign vendors and after applying all the notes it's coming out in XML now. Otherwise try BADI.

0 Kudos

Thanks Jelena.

Excuse me, do you have the Badi of a specific note? I review with Abap the available Badis and we fix the case of Tax ID of XML of MIRO, but not the XML of payments.

Regards.

ARTURO

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

BADI was described in one of the first notes (see FAQ note 2041490), but in later notes it looks like more BADIs may have been added. Laurent's post on the previous page had a good list of the notes missing from the FAQ one, take a look there.

0 Kudos

Thanks for your comments Jelena, I will look for it.

Best Regards.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Jelena, can you share me the FIGLMX_JE_DETAILS code, the ABAP said that the notes are applied correctly, but i still have the error CFD_CBB tag can even be Split whit ¨".

I need compare the code.

Thanks in advance.

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Fernando, it's a long program with many includes, so I don't think comparing the code is a worthy exercise. I'd suggest to disable BADI, if you implemented it, run the program, get the error message from the validator and open an incident with SAP with the error and XML file sample.

We actually have a bit of a problem (different one) ourselves with the most recent version. I'm still waiting to double-check that and may have to open an incident as well. SAP might even have something in the works already - these corrections seem to never end...

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello

I've a question to the community.

Currently SAP is releasing notes (at least one - 2203797) that are not linked directly to Annex 24, RME 24 or other key words. More, references within header notes (2041490 & 2042663) are missing.

Do you know if based on list below, there are some other notes that are published as standalone notes ?

Thx for your reply.

Saludos. Laurent

Here is the list of notes I've identified so far.

OSS NotesTitleRelease
2041490FAQ - Mexico's Electronic Accounting Anexo 2430
2042663[MX] Announcement for Electronic Accounting in Mexico26
2050349Mexico Electronic Accounting - Chart of Accounts/Account Balances3
2066631Mexico Electronic Accounting - DDIC Note4
2075584MX E-invoicing: UUID field for Vendor invoice verification2
2091656RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING General correction1
2093023RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING General Issues4
2093189Mexico Electronic Accounting 2015 – Journal Entries3
2096590RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING General correction N14
2104844Electronic Accounting DDIC Note D1 (New SAP Note)3
2105358Mexico Electronic Accounting 2015 - JE CFDI Details2
2105359Mexico Electronic Accounting 2015 - JE Travel Expense Details2
2117491General correction N23
2123987RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: BAdI FIGLMX_ACC_BAL3
2125164Mexico Electronic Accounting - Auxiliary Accounting5
2127273Mexico Electronic Accounting - Journal Entries Corrections4
2127291RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General correction (N3)2
2132684Mexico Electronic Accounting - DDIC Note (D2)3
2132684DDIC Note D23
2133659Mexico Electronic Accounting 2015 JE CFDI Details (N1)1
2133660Mexico Electronic Accounting 2015 - JE Travel Expense Details (N1)1
2135616Mexico Electronic Accounting - Journal Entries Correction(N2)5
2136377RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING General correction N41
2142967MexicoAuxiliaryReporting (FIGLMX_AUXACCT) - Performance Tuning and XSLT Upgrade5
2143807Electronic Accounting and SAP_FIN 7202
2144380Validation Anio parameter missing3
2145283RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General correction (N5)2
2145556Validation SaldoIni parameter missing3
2148062Validation Invalid nomenclature1
2148209Validation XML document cannot be read1
2148995Wrong account information in XML files3
2152894RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: Change in length of the Order number and Incorrect tag name 'Concepto'.1
2155001Error FIGLMX011 No data exists for the specified3
2161386General Correction N64
2174591RPFIGLMX_AUXACCOUNTING : G/L Accounts with no transactions should be eliminated2
2172934RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General Corrections (N7)3
2180085RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: Badi has been provided for Journal Entries report to add4
2185878RPFIGLMX_JE_DETAILS: Performance Improvement4
2191852RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General Corrections (N8)1
2186530Mexico - Option to execute Auxiliary report from main report; Flexibility to se2
2197112RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING : General Corrections (N9)3
2200807RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General Correction (N10)1
2202741RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: Legal change for Incoming Payments2
2193006RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General Corrections N(11)8
2201402released to pilot
2203797RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General Corrections (N13)7
Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello there,

we are currently almost up to date with SAP notes.

However, I do not remember any solution proposals for following cases:

1. postings with several UUIDs, should these postings be done separately by every UUID? is this the only solution? or it is possible somehow to link UUID to each line in for example FB60 transaction?

2. regarding the content of the exported XML file from SAP, do we need to exclude some type of postings? and when yes is this possible using only the filters like GL account, document type from the selection screen?

3. I guess everybody will prepare a Z report which can be used to generate a list of invoices with corresponding UUIDs. I have not seen anything from SAP on this topic right?

4. what about auxiliary reports? are these to be used in case for example of payroll files? I have not seen the necessary layout for these files. Does anybody have this payroll files already generated?

Many thanks for any input on these topics.

Miroslav

Former Member
0 Kudos

I got a problema, when I run the FIGLMX_EACCT report, the UUID and RFC from income invoice do not appear related in the XML report, I record the UUID and RFC in the Head text like the SAP notes.

Some one has the same problema?, how can i fix that?, some one can share the reading code.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello Fernando,

One question : have you modified the exit and bapis delivered by SAP ? We had same trouble before to overwrite these elements.

Saludos

Laurent

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Miroslav,

1. One invoice per UUID, thats the way it should be, before we were able to make one invoice for different payments, but now it is supposed to be one invoice per UUID, except for travel expenses and payroll.

2. Is this about JE?

3. SAP scope includes JE report also this includes invoice + UUID. The same program includes Account Balance, Chart of Accounts and JE.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello Cristina,

1. how do you book then travel expenses? Each invoice with a separate UUID and there will be only one payment involved?

2. my second question was regarding the JE report, I was just wondering if there are any postings which should be excluded.

3. this z report is intended to be used to check that every invoice has a corresponding UUID: Of course can be done exporting the JE report but that option is also somehow more complicated.

Thanks

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Laurent - this is a great question. I started using 'RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING' as a keyword in search, but I agree that other keywords, such as 'Anexo 24' should be used consistently in the related notes.

Ideally, I believe SAP should keep the FAQ note updated as they release new notes, but it looks like they stopped doing that at the correction N6 (we are already on to N13). It is very difficult to keep track of myriad of notes. (Of course, it would be even better if more testing was done and there wouldn't be so many corrections needed, but that's another story.)

Former Member
0 Kudos

I have the next error when validating.

Someone experienced the same error?

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Fernando, did you implement all the notes (see Laurent's post above)? Some of the notes contained manual XSLT changes, make sure those are done. If they are not done it might not cause a syntax or runtime error, but you'd get a wrong XML format.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Thanks Jelena, I will review this point.

Regards.

0 Kudos

Hello Cristina, Do you know if it's necessary to build a z program to join Payroll with "Auxiliar de folios (Tax receipt auxiliary)"? I only see the "Auxiliar de cuentas (Auxiliary Accounting)" option. Or this program includes both options? RPFIGLMX_AUXACCOUNTING.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello Jose

Yes. You need to build a Z program.

Discussing with Monica some weeks ago, she told me that this report was too close to company's activities and IS urbanization to be delivered by SAP. Even if I think that at least a kind of shell framework (XML generation + screen selection) could be delivered by SAP, whatever is the way to gather data later on, depending on your IS urbanization.

Saludos

Laurent

sharmilab
Discoverer
0 Kudos

This message was moderated.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Laurent,

Hopefully you can help me.

April 2016 I have a request that "Auxiliar de Folios" is requested by Mexico Tax Authority. SAP Business One is offering this option.

Any idea of SAP ECC offering this too?

Note in DEC 2015 states what you mentioned:

E - Report of Auxiliar Folios:

Auxiliar Folios is not supported by SAP. This specific file is optional. For example, if you have your billing system outside the SAP system and you do not want to import into SAP system the UUID data, then you can generate this Auxiliar Folios file in your billing system. In this scenario, your company would send to SAT the Journal Entries' file without the UUIDs and the Auxiliar Folios, which contains all the UUIDs of the invoices you created. SAP is not providing the Auxiliar Folios because normally this would be done in a non-SAP system and we are not able to support it.

Any idea will be appreciated.Thanks

0 Kudos

Hi Tomas,

I'm afraid that there are no plans to provide the "Auxilar de Folios" in the ECC.

Best regards, Monica

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Tomas, perhaps you might want to consider bringing UUID data into SAP ECC instead of trying to create "Auxiliar de Folios".

Former Member
0 Kudos

Thanks a lot Monina and Jelena.

I'm a bit lost here. "Auxiliar de Folios" is only needed if I don't capture de UUID inside Sap?

I have electronic invoice implemented, so I think the uuid for sd is capture there and the uuid of incoming invoices will be captured using text fields as described in the note.

But I appreciate a lot if you can give me some light here with auxiliar de folios.

as I can see that the report has 4 options: Coa, acct blz, j entries, aux acct. just missing the auxiliar de folios.

Again thanks a lot for your guidance.

0 Kudos

Dear Tomas,

The "Auxiliar de Folios" is optional and is used in case the UUID data is not available in the system from where you generate the e-Accounting files. In your case, because you do have the UUID in your SD and MM documents, you don't need to generate this aditional "Auxiliar de Folios" file.

Best regards, Monica

marcosluis_vegamontes
Participant
0 Kudos

Hi Tomas,

One possible scenario where you might need to provide more additional details about the Journal Entries by using the "Auxiliar de Folios" is when there is not a 1:1 relationship between one Accounting Document (Journal Entry) and one Tax receipt because the UUID is maintained at header level for SD, MM & FI documents under the SAP standard solution. A typical example of this scenario is payroll receipts; an exception is travel expenses, where you maintain the UUID at item level under the SAP standard solution, provided that you use SAP transaction PR05 for these travel expenses.

Kind Regards,

Marcos

Former Member
0 Kudos

Thanks Monica and Marcos.

So, it means that if I need to post "payroll" documents, there I will need the "Auxiliar of Folios" because I won´t be able to identify by positions the UUIID.

But TE is supported by the oss notes at item level.

Please correct me if I´m wrong. Thanks again!

Former Member
0 Kudos

Monica,

Hope you are fine.

Do you know if there´s a partnership or standard solution in SAP for automatically load a XML for an incoming vendor in MIRO/FB60 so UUID is loaded automatically?

SBO has something like this I understand, but I can´t find anything about this in ECC.

I understand that manual procedure of loading in TEXTS in FB60 and in HEADER of MIRO is available by notes but my client is asking me about an automatic way reading from the XML.

Thanks. Hope you can help me.

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Tomas, I can't speak for the SAP plans but I doubt there will be a standard program provided for that. The legal requirement is the reporting piece and SAP also recommended the way to store the data.

How to get that data in is up to the customers. Quite frankly, I would actually much prefer SAP concentrating on the reporting piece where they are having enough challenges already.

Data upload / update can be easily done by a custom ABAP program, it's not a very complex task.

GCET
Explorer
0 Kudos

HI Tomas I think you should put in contact with provider's in Mexico who have PAK certification to process the incoming invoice from vendor. DETECNO and EDICOM are 2 of them.

I'm not sure is complety automatized but for sure take in mind you will need PI connection and makes job's to automatize the process.

Hope this help you

Kind Regards!

rolandogerardo
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hi Tomas, just trying to add, As Susan and Gaspar mentioned there`s no for the moment an automated update, I know that the PAC Edicom can make the program for you and update the UUID in the documents if they are your CFDI provider if not ask yours, remember that you must to have configured the text fields on your documents following the SAP proper notes first however.

Best Regards.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello everyone

I´m checking the Closing balance of the year using the 13 period and I notice this:

1- With the Calendar Year setup and the Non-Calendar Year setup options, the Opening Balance column is the Closing Balance from the 12 period, in my opinion it should be from the 11 period because:

The fiscal rule 2.8.1.6 in the Resolución Miscelánea Fiscal 2016 Contabilidad en medios electrónicos, says: "En el caso de la balanza de cierre del ejercicio se deberá incluir la información de los ajustes que para efectos fiscales se registren." and then I think the period 13 should be 12 plus Special Periods (12+13+14+15+16).

2- With the Non-Calendar Year setup option if I try to enter the 12 to 16 period it shows error (invalid month with 14, 15 or 16), I think because the Anexo 24 only consider until 13 period BUT; if you enter the 12 to 13 period It not takes the movements from the special periods.


In my opinion there is a issue with the first option with the 13 Period or a issue with the special periods with the second option because the transaction should work like the Tcode F.08

What is your point of view?

Regards

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi team,

Hope you are all fine.

I do not have T&E in my client.

Is there any workaroud or how can i load multiples UUIDs and RFCs of documents of the expenses of the employees by using FB60 agains the employee as a vendor?

Because in my client we will be creating the employees as vendors and loading FB60 or similar to them to be able to credit the VAT of this operations, but we have various invoices. How can we load them in 1 open item to the employee-vendor and capture the uuid and rfcs of those companies that the employee has paid?

Similar situation I have with payroll files. That they receive from a 3rd party the xml and they load in sap business one with the possibility to add the uuiid and rfc. How can i track this in SAP ECC?

Thanks to all again. Hope Monica you can help me.

Tomas

GCET
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hi Tomas, It's only 1 UUID per document. You have to posted one vendor/employee per document.

reburujado
Participant
0 Kudos

As I mention before on early posting, one year ago approximately, the SAP standard solution does not take the "folio fiscal" as a new document class within the SAP landscape; current SAP solution apporach is to take folio fiscal as a single text within the FI document that cannot be validated or reported!

Most of us have to create Z tables or programs with a plenty number of fields to cover current or future scenarios such as folio fiscal (uuid), RFC, the amount value of the folio fiscal, dates, etc,

Electronic Accounting it should be considered as a sub-module on your scope for the rest of your life cycle. We are not certainly sure whether SAT new rules will be published the next years, so be proactive and generate a custom solution and study the SAT youtube channel to be one step ahead (available only on spanish unfortunately).

You have to save relationship about the folio fiscal on the invoice and the payment document, and some FI documents certainly it should contain more than one folio fiscal.

To take only the UUID on the header text approach its just a limited and workaround solution in my personal opinion.

Unfortunately to have a "Z table approach" even with a automatic upload charge functionality, is not a "functional" also since you have to maintain an additional transaction that are not natural on the document flow (users will usually hate it).

I really some day, SAP re-disign the "standard solution" on the future, but I think there are not plans for this on the short-time. No updates on the SAP notes has been published for months.

Happy Z ABAP programming

former_member512834
Discoverer
0 Kudos

Fernando,

Thank you very much, will definitely check the YouTube videos.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello,

In the Mexican Company Code we only have installed the Finance Module,

in which we have implemented the electronic accounting. We would like

to know what is needed to generate the digital signature for Electronic Accounting and to stamp the XML file generated from tx. code FIGLMX_EACCT which is needed to present to SAT.

rolandogerardo
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hi Cesar

what we did it was work with our CFDIs vendor they helped us to obtain from SAT our digital seal to be included at the moment you generate the xml file from the FIGLMX_EACCT

Actually I understand that your Tax departament could obtain the seal directly from SAT

Hope help

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Rolando,

Thanks for your Reply.

We have files provided to SAT (.sdg .key and security certificate .cer). What is the procedure?

If we fill the selection screen with the Company's certificate Number, is it necesary fill any field more? The user tell us they need digital signature of the file, because in the SAT validation it is necesary.

Other question, is it possible to generate digital file label without resorting to "PAC"?

Best regards.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello

We've implemented all OSS notes available today.

It seems we are facing an issue with customers payments within the JE report. Data are not retrieved properly, and it seems we are missing elements.

As an info, we're using FF.5 transaction for automatic clearing.

Thx for your feedback, ideas, etc ..

Best regards

Laurent

0 Kudos

Hello,

Someone could share examples of XML - journal entries of payments in local and foreign currency?

I have doubts how should be the final/valid structure.

Thanks in advanced.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Arturo,

I only had local transfers XML file validated. Hope it is helpful.

Foreign transfers XML file is not validated. I have to investigate further.

Regards,

Maria Eugenia

0 Kudos

Thanks Maria Eugenia, I really appreciate your help, now I know a couple of fields missing in the XML.

Regards.

ARTURO

0 Kudos

Hi Guys,

I have the following situation.

I need to report my Journal Entries related to our Sales Invoices. Even I have all information available for reporting it, my concern is about how must be the CompNal/CompExt Line.

According to SAT Document Ma24_041214.pdf, the origin of the journal Entry will determinate if the CompNal or CompExt must be used in Polizas XML

For Vendor Invoices (MIRO), there is no problem since the Origin of the Journal Entry is determined by the Vendor Country, which is totally clear for us.

But… how must it work for Customer Invoices (Sales). If My customer is a domestic customer, there is no problem because all information (Example the RFC) is available. And due the source of the Journal Entry is always MX (I understand reading the SAT Documentation that my company is the source), the CompNal must be used.

What about if I am doing foreign sales. The source is still MX, and due it, I am supposed to report it as CompNal, but there is no RFC here… at least I have the foreign customer Tax ID. When we send our test XML through the SAT Validator, it says that the RFC (Cannot be send empty because is mandatory), is not correct, and has sense because the TaxID format does not match against the RFC Format.

I agree this information could be sent using CompExt (In fact there is no SAT Validation problem here), but seems to be for me that, according to Ma24_041214.pdf, must not be.

Do you have this scenario?, how are you handling it.?

Your input will be appreciated.

Regards,

Roberto

marcosluis_vegamontes
Participant
0 Kudos

Hi Roberto,

Would you care to try using the "generic RFC" ( XEXX010101000) on STCD1 rather than the VAT number?

Regards,

Marcos

0 Kudos

Hi Marcos,

Thanks for your quick response. In fact, i did it for my tests, but my concern is if this is a valid procedure using the Generic approved and suggested officially by the SAT.

I was trying to get a confirmation from SAT about using the Generic RFC for Foreign Sales, but still waiting....

Regards,

Roberto

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Roberto

See in below link it talks about generic RFC.

We are very pleasure to try to answer questions in this forum however for those kind of questions and, if you are in SAP or IT side I recommend you to contact you Mexican Finance manager, normally those kind of questions should be answered by business process leader since they must know the game rules .

http://m.sat.gob.mx/informacion_fiscal/preguntas_frecuentes/Documents/PyRCFDFiscales.pdf

I hope this helps

marcosluis_vegamontes
Participant
0 Kudos

On an environment where all (so far known) notes have been applied, I have the following issues with the Journal Entries XML:

  1. Non-domestic (LFA1-LAND not equal to 'MX') Vendor invoice (created from MIRO Tx) Accounting Document does not contain the "CompExt" (Foreign receipt) node, but the "CompNal" (domestic receipt) node.
  2. Domestic (KNA1-LAND equal to 'MX') Customer Invoice (created from VF01 Tx) Accounting Document "Monto" (Amount) attribute is reported as "0", the receipt (Invoice) Total Amount should be reported
  3. Same as previous for a Non-Domestic (KNA1-LAND not equal to 'MX') Customer Invoice (created from VF01 Tx)
  4. Payment (created from F110 Tx) Accounting Document to a Domestic (KFA1-LAND) Vendor equal to 'MX') Vendor does not pull the UUID from RBKP-YUUD and the BancoOriExt (non-Domestic issuing Bank) attribute is pulling the Bank ID (BNKA-BANKL) rather than the Bank name (BNKA-BANKA)
  5. Same as previous for a non-Domestic (LFA1-LAND not equal to 'MX') Vendor Payment (created from F110 Tx)
  6. Payment received (created from F110 Tx) Accounting Document from a Domestic (KNA1-LAND equal to 'MX') Customer pulls incorrect RFC (Tax ID) data, issuing Domestic Bank is reported as Foreign (BancoOriExt) and non-Domestic receiving Bank is reported as Domestic (BancoDestNal)
  7. Payment received (created from F110 Tx) Accounting Document from a non-Domestic (KNA1-LAND not equal to 'MX') Customer pulls he Bank ID (BNKA-BANKL) rather than the Bank name (BNKA-BANKA) and the "Monto" (Amount) is reported as "0", the corresponding receipt (Invoice) Total Amount should be reported

Has anyone encountered similar issues?

Is SAP aware of this?

Any idea on how to solve it?


Thanks In Advance,

Marcos

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Folks, just to let you know that for auxiliary report note 2201402 was released. We're still testing but it looks like it should resolve our issue. There are no manual steps, fortunately, just straight-forward SNOTE.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Dear Jelena,

It seems that the note is not released yet. This auxiliary report will help us with documents that have multiple UUIDs?

Regards,

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Note 2201402 is released, at least right now:

http://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/2201402

Not sure if it'll resolve your particular issue, but it'd make sense to apply it and, if it doesn't, open an incident with SAP (or update your existing incident). Our symptom was not listed in the note but looking at the code changes I noticed that the problematic code was updated.

It's funny that the note says "performance" while in fact it's more like a bug fix. But whatever they call it I'm a happy camper as long as it solves our problem.

Former Member
0 Kudos

When I try to open note 2201402 this error message appears.

Do you know why is the reason that you can see and I cant?

Thank you for all your help,

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Hmm, that's odd. The only thing I've just noticed it has the status 'Pilot release'. Maybe I somehow got to be in the "pilot" and it's available only to certain S-users or installations...

Sorry about that, I thought it's available to everyone already.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Jelena,

Since you have the OSS message open, you are able to see the note. I tried just now and it says "Document not released". I guess it is going to be available in a day or two.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello Cristina

So far, my understanding is that Auxiliary reports for folios are used in case you have a posting with several UUIDS (for example a posting for all salaries managed outside SAP area).

This report is not managed by SAP thru OSS notes (Source SAP). Therefore, we have to build our own solution to cover it.

In the company I'm working for, travel expenses and salaries are managed outside SAP, and we have only general postings covering several UUIDs. We upload thses UUIDs wtihin a dedicated table which is synchronized with postings. Then the report will mainly work on this dedicated table to issue the report properly.

Saludos.

Laurent

Former Member
0 Kudos

Thanks for your reply Laurent,

I made two different developments for travel expenses and salaries. For travel expenses a Ztransaction for mass upload verifying companycode, fiscalyear, RFC and introducing the document number, I found a place to paint all the UUIDs needed for the document, as well a Ztransaction to pull out the report.

For salaries a Ztable to introduce the RFC and all the UUIDs of the employees and also a Ztransaction to pull out the report linked to the document.

I dont know if SAP has in the SCOPE this requirements, apparently they dont .

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi All,

I'm testing the JE report and found out an issue in Payments with checks done via F-58.

For some reason, the payment method (C) is not populated in the Payment document created with F-58. Because of this, the JE report doesn't recognize this payment document as a cheque and hence is not completing the Check part of the XML.

If I print checks with F110 it works perfectly but my Client uses F-58.

Anyone of you has faced this issue?

Thanks in advance,

Maria Eugenia

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Maria,

I just realized that we also have that problem. Did you find cause and/or solution? Did you reported to SAP?

Thanks

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Mario,

I see there is a SAP note that should fix this issue. I haven't applied it yet. I will ask the abaper to do it.

SAP Note: 2079637: F-58: Payment method is not saved.

Regards,

Maria

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello,

I have been following this post for fixing issues for Mexico Electronic Accounting and it is really helpfull that all question and answers are in one place.

I tried searching similar thread for CFDI process about Customer addendum - complemento that is required when sending XML file to customer. I havent found any such thread if anyone knows please advice.

Regards!

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Manjiri, please search the OSS notes and open a new discussion if there is a specific question. It's a different subject and this thread is too long already, unfortunately. Thank you.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Good morning,

I have an issue with travel expenses, we have travel expenses through FI. So our employees have a vendor number and we post all the expenses on the same document, we need to attach all the UUIDs to the FI document (food, transport,hotel, etc) . I know that developing a Zprogram that wont be a problem, but I want to know if some of you have a solution that you can share.

Regards!

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Christina

We had same issue in our mexican subsidiary, the only workaround was to post one invoice per UUID, that was suggested by Mexican tax consultants because one UUID represents one invoice and they mentioned we can't have more than one UUID in the invoice.

I know this is a lot of workload however so far this was the only resolution we found.

Regards

Carlos dB

Former Member
0 Kudos

Carlos,

It is possible to have different UUIDs or Folios fiscales in the same document.

Cuando el contribuyente tiene diversos módulos como gestión de materiales, ventas, distribución, gastos de viaje, etc., por lo que no se puede vincular el UUID directamente en la póliza contable, ¿existe alguna forma de vincular los UUID con la póliza?


Sí, se podrá vincular el UUID con la póliza mediante el reporte auxiliar de folios fiscales conforme a la Regla 2.8.1.4., la cual señala que : “Cuando no se logre identificar el folio fiscal asignado a los comprobantes fiscales dentro de las pólizas contables, el contribuyente podrá, a través de un reporte auxiliar relacionar todos los folios fiscales, la clave en el RFC y el monto contenido en los comprobantes que amparen dicha póliza, conforme al Anexo 24, apartado E.”

Fundamento legal: Regla 2.8.1.4., de la Resolución Miscelánea Fiscal de 2015.

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

All, just to give you an update - below is the list of all the notes we've applied since around April. It looks like there were changes for both JE file and auxiliary one. We are still testing the latest one but if you have not applied these you might want to go ahead and do so.

There were some hickups - note 2191852 prompted to install 2174591 (we already had it but SAP released a new version) but did not prompt to also install 2161386. So we got a syntax error at first. I noted in the incident that this happened but response from SAP was that other customers didn't complaint about this. Let me know if anyone runs into the same issue.

Also don't be surprised if you can't open the ZIP file attached to 2161386 after downloading - instead of Download chose Open and then it works (extension gets truncated when saving).

Several notes required manual steps, but most were just text changes and one XSLT change.

Here is the list:

2050349 Mexico Electronic Accounting - Chart of Accounts/Account Bal

2135616 Mexico Electronic Accounting - Journal Entries Correction(N2

2142967 Mexico Auxiliary Reporting (FIGLMX_AUXACCT) - Performance Tu

2161386 RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General Correction (N6)

2174591 RPFIGLMX_AUXACCOUNTING : G/L Accounts with no transactions s

2191852 RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General Corrections (N8) (empty object list)

2197112 RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING : General Corrections (N9)

Former Member
0 Kudos

more notes released.....

2200807 RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General Correction (N10)

2202741 RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: Legal change for Incoming Payments

2193006 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General Corrections N(11)



someone knows when are we going to have a final version of this "neverending story" ? (it's a rhetorical question )


i have been looking at the note 2042663 and i cannot find as out of scope the generation of the XML file auxiliary for document posting ("auxiliar de folios"), is it out of the scope? someone can share a Z program to generate the xml file?


regards

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi everyone!

We have implemented all notes released to 10th August.

But when I try validate the 'Auxiliary Accounting file' I obtain the next errors...

Any of you, have the same errors? Thanks!

Regards,

Sandra M.

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Sandra, did you do all the manual activities? There was a manual XSLT change in one of the notes.

There are still some issues with auxiliary file (ours has to do with non-leading ledger), but I believe we don't get such validation errors.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Jelena

Do you know what specific oss note has the changes for auxiliary XSLT?

We have a mix of zprograms with std programs and we don't want to apply all oss notes delivered by SAP because we have succesfully created reports for balances and COA, we are almost to complete the JE report using Zprogram, so we don't want to break any of the existing reports by applying OSS Notes from SAP, however we are having same issue than Sandra, SAT doesn't like the Auxiliary report out of SAP.

Best regards

Carlso del Bosque

GCET
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hi All, These are all the SAP notes at the moment from SAP Mexico:

Apreciable cliente de SAP,

Se liberó una nota liberada con el código para incluir el método de pago en los pagos de clientes es: 2202741 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: Legal change for Incoming Payments

Es importante revisar que se tengan aplicadas las últimas versiones de las notas ya liberadas antes de aplicar esta nota.

Las notas liberadas a la fecha son:

- 2050349 - Chart of Accounts/Account Balances

- 2066631 - DDIC Note

- 2091656 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING General correction

2093023 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING General Issues

2096590 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING General correction N1 (New SAP Note)

2104844 - Electronic Accounting DDIC Note D1 (New SAP Note)

- 2093189 - Mexico Electronic Accounting 2015 – Journal Entries

- 2117491 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General correction (N2)

- 2105359 - Mexico Electronic Accounting 2015 - JE Travel Expense Details (solo si se usa el módulo de Gastos de Viajes).

- 2105358 - Mexico Electronic Accounting 2015 - JE CFDI Details (solo si se usa la funcionalidad estándar de CFDI)

- 2075584 - MX E-invoicing: UUID field for Vendor invoice verification

- 2123987 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: BAdI FIGLMX_ACC_BAL

- 2127291 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General correction (N3)

- 2127273 - Mexico Electronic Accounting - Journal Entries Corrections

- 2133659 - Mexico Electronic Accounting 2015 JE CFDI Details (N1) (solo si se aplicó la nota 2105358)

- 2133660 - Mexico Electronic Accounting 2015 - JE Travel Expense Details (N1) (solo si se aplicó la nota 2105359)

- 2132684 - Mexico Electronic Accounting - DDIC Note (D2)

- 2125164 - Mexico Electronic Accounting - Auxiliary Accounting

- 2136377 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General correction (N4)

- 2135616 - Mexico Electronic Accounting - Journal Entries Correction(N2)

- 2152894 EA Order Number and tag name Concepto

- 2145283 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General correction (N5)

- 2142967 - Mexico Auxiliary Reporting (FIGLMX_AUXACCT) - Performance Tuning and XSLT Upgrade

- 2161386 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General Correction (N6)

- 2165795 - Mexico Electronic accounting - Validation: "TipoSolicitud" parameter missing.

- 2168066 - Mexico Electronic accounting: Syntax error "CFDI_RESP_MX" is unknown in program

- 2172934 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General Corrections (N7)

- 2174591 - RPFIGLMX_AUXACCOUNTING : G/L Accounts with no transactions should be eliminated

- 2180085 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: Badi has been provided for Journal Entries report to add

2185878 - RPFIGLMX_JE_DETAILS: Performance Improvement

2186530 - Mexico - Option to execute Auxiliary report from main report; Flexibility to se

2191852 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General Corrections (N8)

2197112 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING : General Corrections (N9)

2200807 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General Correction (N10)

2193006 - RPFIGLMX_EACCOUNTING: General Corrections N(11)


Kind Regards

Gaspar

Former Member
0 Kudos

Thank you Jelena

I talked with our abaper and he said that OSS note is applied in our system, however SAT still shows error on file generated by our system.

We will keep working on this.

Thanks again

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Carlos - I confirmed that our file validates just fine. We only have one data issue there (incident still open with SAP). Let me know if you'd like a copy of the file - my email is in the profile.

By the way, our issue in this report has to do with non-leading ledger. Our corporate fiscal calendar is 4-4-5, so we had to introduce a non-leading ledger just for the eAccouting reports (which are by calendar month). If you are in the same situation make sure to test the auxiliary report RPFIGLMX_AUXACCOUNTING - it is incorrectly pulling documents from BKPF based on the period in the main ("leading"?) ledger.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Jelena,

Thanks for your recommendation. We had a mistake in the SAP note 2142967. The new validation is OK.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi All Experts,

my Accounting team is telling me that we have to connect the UUID to the Expense P&L account.

We do not post Expense in MIRO but in MIGO.

Example:

MIGO:

Expense 100 Invoice to be receipt 100

MIRO

Invoice to be receipt 100 Supplier 100

I think this is the standard SAP settings.

Is your accounting departement telling the same?

I see very difficult to connect the UUID to the Expense in this business scenario, expecially with transport and duties managed as additional conditions in the PO.

Pelase let me know if someone else has the same business scenario and how to handle it.

Many thanks

Elisa

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello

We are going to implement Anexo 24 on SAP via OSS notes. Looking forward, we face some issues, because part of legal information (Supplier invoice, Salary, Travel expenses) are managed or partly externally.

Discussing with Monica Marcellin earlier in July, it seems we will have a new Badi in August that will help to take into consideration external legal data, at least for salaries. We will probably use this solution to integrate travel expense as well. Will see.

My question today is more about Item nature within the journal,under node Elementos Hijo. Within notes, do we have some customization tables, guides to implement specific nature management to cope with our business processes.

Many thanks for replies...

Laurent

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello,

First of all many thanks to all for this amazing thread that cleared out a lot of problems and doubts.

I´ve been implementing this solution for a while and it is working fine for all except 1 particular case that is a Finance company code. Does anybody have a example of the FSV specific for finantial companys ( setor financiero 000 ) in order to extract sucessfully the chart of accounts ? My client says that we have to categorize some acounts with A or D but i cant for the same Grouping Code = 000 to have both natures.

Best regards,

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi all.

i am here with a question that i cannot see answered as i am following this topic from the beggining.

is regarding JE file and what to do when we post a document referred to several UUID numbers in the same document. As the relationship between posting document and UUID is 1 to 1 in the case of posting document wich should include several UUID we have to find another solution.

For example in payrolls payments. for payrolls we have to detail all the UUID related to the posting and we only have 1 document post for payrolls .

as this cannot be done in the normal JE file i have the following answers.

1.- have we to create a new file called "auxiliar de folios" ? (i think yes)

2.- is this covered by the standard? (I think No)

3.- how are you solving or creating this XML file for auxiliar de folios? some can share the code or help increating the new file?

former_member38225
Participant
0 Kudos

Zarach,

This is covered in the postings but to respond

1. Yes it is covered by the auxiliary file you can provide that supplements the JE.

2. Yes the SAT standard covers this in Regla 2.8.1.4

3. Typically if you are using a payroll service they can provide the file.

Later.....

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello Phillip,

I think Zarach meant SAP standard in his second question. As far as I know, no, SAP is not covering this requirement because I think it is very specific depending on each client's processes.

And no, we haven't started creating the "auxiliar de folios" file.

Regards

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Philip, thanks for your answer,

in point 2 i was talking about the SAP standard. the program that SAP provide us to generate the files for the goverment.

in that program i only see trial balace, chart of account and journal entries .

this "new" file for auxiliary information about posting is not covered by standard sap solution.

then we have to create a Z report for creating this xml file and i was trying to know if someone has done an approach to this issue.

former_member38225
Participant
0 Kudos

Yeah I think Arturo caught that. For reference there are 4 programs that SAP delivered as part of their solution you can see this all in the detailed notes.

1 - Chart of Accounts

2 - Trial Balance

3 - Journal Entries

4 - Auxiliary of Accounts

But you will more then likely have to develop your own solution, our customers have the file being produced by their payroll service for this purpose if it is necessary.

Later....

rolandogerardo
Explorer
0 Kudos

Zarach

there's another program part of EA SAP standard solution

FIGLMX_AUXACCT

you need to install the correspondent Notes.

Like we don't need Auxs we didn't install them but check

2125164 & 2142967

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Rolando, thanks for your answer but if i am not wrong that program is for create the auxiliary file for accounts not for auxiliary of posting documents. , i am searching for a solution for "archivo auxiliar de polizas" not for "archivo auxiliar de cuentas".

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi There

Does any of you guys have an auxiliary file that was successfully validated by SAT, I tried to validate a simple file containing only two gl accounts and SAT didn't like the file and sent following errors (see attached screenshots).

Any help will be appreciated.

file

SAT

rolandogerardo
Explorer
0 Kudos

I got your point, I didn't realize the difference, great we don't need it sorry

marcosluis_vegamontes
Participant
0 Kudos

Re 846

Hi Carlos,

Please find example attached

Hope it helps,

Marcos

Former Member
0 Kudos

Thanks Marcos

I will compare both files.

I really appreciate.

Carlos del Bosque

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi All,

This is regarding the Journal Entry (JE) Report for which we are trying to use the BAdI ("FIGLMX_EXIT") to fetch UUID number, RFC and Invoice total from our Journal postings where all of the lines posted are to an account of type "S".

However we noticed that this BAdi works only when in the entire FI document there is a posting either to the account type "K" (Vendor) or "D" (Customer). Has anyone encountered this issue? Any solution for this? Is SAP planning to provide a BADI to cover such scenarios?

Ajay Lalai

Former Member
0 Kudos

I have the same problema the report only takes account "D" y "K" and record the UUID, but the "S" do not appear.

Do you find solution Ajay?

Former Member
0 Kudos

Carlos del Bosque, Did you solve the problema in the auxiliary filed? i got the same massage in the SAT validator.

Tengo el mismo error de validación, puedes mencionarme como resolviste este problema.

Thanks in advance.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Fernando

I compared my file against the file sent by provided by Marco (message 848) and found differences,

since I didn't want to wait for SAP to fix this issue in the next patch update I asked our abaper to change the xml format using as a base the file from Marco.

however since we are still dealing with JE reports, we haven't moved forward with fixes for auxiliary.

Please see correct file provided by Marco and compare with your file.

I hope this works for you.

Carlos dB

GCET
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hi All, I'm very close to finish JE report (very complex in my opinion). What I do not understand is why the TaxID from ComExt node, for instances, is comming empty? Someone had the same issue? SAP support this? Do we need to map it to LFA1-STCD1?

Thanks in advance for your help!

Gaspar Cetuné

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Gaspar, not sure if it's the case for everyone, but we fill in vendor's tax ID (RFC) in the same place where we fill in UUID (enhancement spot FIGLMX_EXIT).

GCET
Explorer
0 Kudos

But, Those has differents porpouses. Why you did that?

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Gaspar Cetune wrote:

But, Those has differents porpouses. Why you did that?

From what I recall, this is the only enhancement provided to the SAP customers to fill in any data that standard is missing. So it's not like there are any other options. Also, if memory serves, we sometimes receive invoices for one-time vendors that don't have a vendor master record. In those cases RFC is entered when posting an invoice. So we have some additional logic that reads RFC either from the invoice or from vendor master.

former_member294023
Participant
0 Kudos

Regarding the JE file, we applied the customizations suggested by SAP note 2075584 and we are close to having the JE file validate completely. The one issue we have is 'RFC' at the very beginning of the file that is created - just before the first detail line (Poliza NumUnidenPol) there is line for version, period, year etc. and also 'RFC' which is blank. I don't know where this RFC should come from and why it is blank

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?> <Polizas xsi:schemaLocation="www.sat.gob.mx/esquemas/ContabilidadE/1_1/PolizasPeriodo http://www.sat.gob.mx/esquemas/ContabilidadE/1_1/PolizasPeriodo/PolizasPeriodo_1_1.xsd" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns="www.sat.gob.mx/esquemas/ContabilidadE/1_1/PolizasPeriodo" Version="1.1" RFC="" Mes="06" Anio="2015" TipoSolicitud="AF" NumOrden="ASD6985555/98">

<Poliza NumUnIdenPol="0019000000" Fecha="2015-06-30"

Can anyone advise?

Thank you!

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Leslie,

This RFC comes from the company code configuration in the IMG. Go to: Financial Accounting> Financial Acctg Global Settings> Company Code> Enter Global Parameters. Select your company code, and then Click Additional Details. You will see the RFC field for your Mexico company code that will need to be updated. See screen shot.

I hope this is helpful.

former_member294023
Participant
0 Kudos

Thank you! That was the issue, and it is now fixed.

Former Member
0 Kudos

This is my first time posting to this forum so please forgive if I make an errors.

First of all thanks to all of you,, your information has been priceless and made all of the difference between meeting the COA and Balanza XML deadline with SAT. Kudos to all.

Now I'm dealing with the poliza validation and have applies all of the latest OSS notes, most recently 2161386 General Correction N6.

I am receiving the following validation error, for poliza related to vendor invoice documents generated by FB60 transaction. (KR doc type).

When I view the XML I see an extra line inserted where RFC and UUID tags are blank. But there are additional XML poliza lines where the RFC and UUID values are included.lines for the same

Has anyone encountered this error and found a fix for this? I'm preparing to create an incident with SAP but thought I would ask the group first.

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Michelle, we didn't encounter such issue, as far as I know, but how did you implement UUID/RFC for the vendor invoices? If memory serves, there was no standard SAP solution and it was covered by a "consulting" note, so if you did that you'd also have to implement a BADI in the report to fill in those values. Maybe some change is needed there?

Make sure to implement all the notes available for JE file and check your coding. If the issue still persists open an incident with SAP.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Jelena,

You were correct this was due to the custom coding per the consulting note. Once programmer removed the code to not check RBKP for UUID in the case of 'KR' doc type the extra line was not written for the XML.

Sorry for the delayed response.

Thanks for your help!

GCET
Explorer
0 Kudos

Michelle, I had the same issue and it was solve with oue ABAP. Basically the problem comes because when we implemented the UUID structure the XML came with two lines of RFC and UUID.

But as the document comes from MIRO or FB60, then onces of the lines cames filled and the otherone not. Our solution was checking in both structures and deleted the empty UUID field.

Hope help you!

Gaspar

Former Member
0 Kudos

hi i think the best way is: create a blog.

If we make a new thread, you may pass the same, why not create a blog and continue there, because this issue has a lot to follow.

Why not mine:

http://scn.sap.com/people/miguel.enriquez/blog/2015/05/15/mx-electronic-accounting-my-history

No problem, if is other but i am convinced the solution is a blog.

Thanks.

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Wiki format would actually work best, but it's kind of separated from SCN (I'm not even sure what future plans are there). Technically the "how-tos" are supposed to be posted as documents, not blogs (see here). I think the documents may also be updated by more than one person, but am not 100% sure.

gerardo_cantmuoz
Newcomer
0 Kudos

Hi,

I have implemented the JE notes, however I have trouble validating the XML information

Have you been able to validate the xml information correctly through the standard solution? or Does anybody know if there have been released new JE notes?

Thanks,

Gerardo.

former_member787999
Participant
0 Kudos

Hello everyone. I see we are all for the most part good with the COA and TB files and now struggling with the JE files. I read through the past several pages and have applied notes 2152894 & 2135616 and extracted some information from our DEV system and got quite a few errors when I tried to validate it. A majority of them are related to the test values that I put in the UUID field so that I could differentiate between the docs I was testing for however the other errors stood out.

I don't have any data yet for 2015 so all I have is 2014. I'm hoping that the error I have for the date is because they're validating it for 2015 and on information but will need to confirm. By chance has anyone already confirmed this?

In trying to resolve the first (red) error I read in post 775 that we needed to specify a Type of requirement (AF, AFC, DE, CO) when running the program. I wasn't sure which to run so I tried and was able to get it to run with AFC w/o having to put in an Order or Process Number. I then tried to validate that file on the SATs site however after doing so it came back with the error

Error: The 'TipoSolicitud' attribute is invalid - The value 'AFC' is invalid

according to its datatype 'String' - The Pattern constraint failed. - Línea 1

What value are we supposed to run the report under and any idea why I seem to be the only one running in to this issue?

For the remaining error (the green highlighted ones) the error seems to appear because the field is blank. This field seems to be presented if the CFD_CBB_Series field is populated with a value from the Reference Field yet there is no UUID. Is this not a real world scenario? I was told we have employee expense reports that have no UUID but they are MX vendors. Was wondering if that is what triggered it.

Thanks,

Dave

Former Member
0 Kudos

Dave

The possible combinations are specified in Annex 24

former_member787999
Participant
0 Kudos

Armando,

While I appreciate the reply I don't know what it means. If I put in AF as the Type of Requirement on the execution screen it requires me to put in an Order Number. What is an order number? If I put in 1 it errors out on the SAT validator, if I put in AF it errors out.

I guess my question is what would people put in the Type of Requirement (and any other field) if they were submitting the monthly JE file?

I should add that I loaded in some 2015 data and tried running it with a Type of Requirement as blank and also AFC and in both cases when I try and validate the file it returns an error of

Error: The 'TipoSolicitud' attribute is invalid - The value 'AFC' is invalid according to its datatype 'String' - The Pattern constraint failed. - Línea 1

After some playing around more I was able to get past the above error if I put in AF however as it's requiring me to put in an Order Number and I just put in 1 it errors on that.

Error: The 'NumOrden' attribute is invalid - The value '1' is invalid according to its datatype 'String' - The Pattern constraint failed. - Línea 1

Is there a particular value, or set of values I'm supposed to put in the Order Number? F1 help is non-existent, I don't speak Spanish nor can I discern from Annex 24 what the value should be. I'm guessing it's something simple, just what is it

The good news is that atleast the 2014 error I received before for Ano is gone.

Thanks,

Dave

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

David, no one has been able to validate the JE file successfully so far using the report provided by SAP. As far as I understand, there are still several outstanding issues there and hopefully SAP is working on them. We still have an open incident regarding the JE file, no solution has been provided yet. I'd advise to open your own incident with SAP.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Dave

Checking the documentation I can commen that:

- The "User_Manual_v2" (Note 2125164) say that this is the 'Number of the Fiscal Requirement'

- The annex 24 explain that the pattern is [A-Z]{3}[0-6][0-9][0-9]{5}(/)[0-9]{2}

I suggest that records a text that meets these conditions, like AAA0000000/01 (because I can't think of anything else and is only for validation)

One more thing, JE is not monthly report is by requirement.

Regards

Armando

former_member787999
Participant
0 Kudos

Armando,

Thanks for the follow up. I tried that as well as several other variations. As there are other problems with the file and the person here who does somewhat know Annex 24 is out for awhile I was just trying to work through some of the more simple ones. I'll load in additional test data and as Jelena suggested submit any issues to SAP.

Again, thanks for the help.

Dave

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Jelena, i have been able to validate correctly a XML file using the standard program for SAP.

i have used for testing type of requirement = 'DE' and for Process number "1234567890"

i think these data will be provided by SAT when they request to send you information but for testing process you can use these data and the file is validated OK without errors.

marcosluis_vegamontes
Participant
0 Kudos

In Response to 803

Hi Dave,

I used DE as Type of requirement and 0000000009 as process number (order number as "blank") and it worked OK.

Hope it helps,

Marcos

former_member787999
Participant
0 Kudos

Marcos & Zarach,

Thanks for the replies. I did what you guys suggested and I no longer get that specific error. I'm sure we'll find out exactly what it is later on but for now the fewer the errors the better

Dave

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi all, i provided some XML samples.

no official XML Sample Files but working (i personally validated)

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/vfp-factura-electronica-mexico/cRtCECSAnRw/Y7Gpl-V1sBQJ

too i mentioned use of Tipo Solicitud: AF and NumOrden for testing purposses:ABC1111111/11


Congrats Zararch.


Jelena, i cant put an incident, because my company where i work have a problem with contract ($$$) they talking with sap.


I understand your recommendation and the risk.


i too have errors:


CFD_CBB_Series and CFD_CBB_NumFol

trying understand why generate this values on my XML file.


Not Forget visit my Blog:

http://scn.sap.com/people/miguel.enriquez/blog/2015/05/15/mx-electronic-accounting-my-history

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Miguel,

I found that CFD_CBB_Series and CFD_CBB_NumFol are filled when the document does not have UUID, check out the following piece of code in RPFIGLMX_JE_MAIN include:


* To identify invoices posted in the year 2013 or less; this has to be reported in a seperate

* section in the XML files; has two different sections: Domestic Invoices, Foreign Invoices

IF ls_fi_item-koart = c_vend AND lt_sign IS INITIAL.

PERFORM cfd_inv.

ENDIF.

Regards!

marcosluis_vegamontes
Participant
0 Kudos

Hi David,

The Type of Requirement to select will depend on the reason for which you're submitting the Journal Entries XML (I'm not an accountant, you might want to ask some expert in Mexican regulations):

AF = Acto de Fiscalización: An Audit by the Tax Authorities, an Order Number will be provided by them, it will be mandatory in the XML, the Process Number is irrelevant.

FC = Fiscalización Compulas: An Audit by the Tax Authority to a 3rd Pty that derives in an information request to you, an Order Number will be provided by them, it will be mandatory in the XML, the Process Number is irrelevant.

DE = Devolución: A Tax Return requested by you, a Process Number will be provided as a response to you, it will be mandatory in the XML, the Order Number is irrelevant.

CO = Compensation: A Tax Compensation derived from a positive Balance in tax accounts, a Process Number will be provided as a response to you, it will be mandatory in the XML, the Order Number is irrelevant.

Hope it helps,

Marcos

Former Member
0 Kudos

Thanks Erick yes i see:

the


lt_sign IS INITIAL.

is the table with UUID


i am checking where take the values: CFD_CBB_Series and CFD_CBB_NumFol and this values was taken from this Field (on the Transaction FB03)

Referen.



Thanks



0 Kudos

Hello everyone


For any of you have requested to put the node "Transferencia" in the documents of sales or purchases fully cleared; This because in the description node " CompNal " on page 53 of Annex 24 says:
"Se considera que se debe identificar, el soporte documental, tanto en la provisión, como en el pago y/o cobro de cada una de las cuentas y subcuentas que se vean afectadas. Se convierte en requerido cuando se cuente con la información."

Thaks for your comments

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Erick I seen your post about the CFD_CBB_NumFol , CFD_CBB_Series, i have the next validating problem, how can i fix that? Can you help me?

Regards.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hello every One sorry for the late response, following the my post 774 I made a little test and change manually the value in the attribute TaxID from empty to 0 and now pass the validation, my basis team will send an incident to SAP,

what caught my attention is that in the XML file I didn't saw the UUID attribute but this information is in the system

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi

yes need have a value see the XSD:

http://www.sat.gob.mx/esquemas/ContabilidadE/1_1/PolizasPeriodo/PolizasPeriodo_1_1.xsd

<xs:attribute name="TaxID" use="optional"><xs:annotation><xs:documentation>Atributo opcional que sirve para expresar el Identificador del contribuyente extranjero. Se convierte en requerido cuando se cuente con la información </xs:documentation></xs:annotation><xs:simpleType><xs:restriction base="xs:string"><xs:minLength value="1"/><xs:maxLength value="30"/><xs:whiteSpace value="collapse"/></xs:restriction></xs:simpleType></xs:attribute>

if you see:

minLength = 1

this node: TaxID, is optional but if you want include then need put something string (alphanumeric string) with only this restriction length :1 to 30.

About the UUID, was explained in other posts.... adapt the BAPI if you dont use Standard Invoice, or create a Zreport.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi,

According to SAP standard solution, is there a way to update UUID number in MIRO document after posting?

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Yossi, please search in the thread before posting new questions. The whole "solution" for MIRO is consulting, so it's not difficult to deduct that you're on your own. It's already been discussed many pages earlier.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi friends i have a issue, in the JE report in the Transformation:

See the transformation FIGLMX_JE_DETAILS in STRANS Transaction.

<?sap.transform simple?>

<tt:transform xmlns:tt="http://www.sap.com/transformation-templates" xmlns:ddic="http://www.sap.com/abapxml/types/dictionary" xmlns:def="http://www.sap.com/abapxml/types/defined">

<tt:root name="JE_HEADER" type="ddic:FIGLMX_JE_HEADER"/>

<tt:root line-type="ddic:FIGLMX_JE_ITEMS" name="JE_ITEM"/>

<tt:template>

<Poliza>

<tt:attribute name="NumUnIdenPol" value-ref=".JE_HEADER.FIGLMX_NUMBER"/>

<tt:attribute name="Fecha" value-ref=".JE_HEADER.FIGLMX_DATE"/>

<tt:attribute name="concepto" value-ref=".JE_HEADER.FIGLMX_CONCEPT"/>

<tt:loop name="IN" ref="JE_ITEM">

<Transaccion>

<tt:attribute name="NumCta" value-ref="$IN.FIGLMX_ACCNO"/>

<tt:attribute name="DesCta" value-ref="$IN.FIGLMX_ACCTNM"/>

<tt:attribute name="Concepto" value-ref="$IN.FIGLMX_CONCEPT"/>

<tt:attribute name="Debe" value-ref="$IN.FIGLMX_DEBIT"/>

<tt:attribute name="Haber" value-ref="$IN.FIGLMX_CREDIT"/>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($IN.FIGLMX_JE_CHEQUE)">

<tt:loop name="N1" ref="$IN.FIGLMX_JE_CHEQUE">

<Cheque>

<tt:attribute name="Num" value-ref="$N1.FIGLMX_CHNUM"/>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N1.FIGLMX_DMBANK)">

<tt:attribute name="BanEmisNal" value-ref="$N1.FIGLMX_DMBANK"/>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N1.FIGLMX_FRBANK)">

<tt:attribute name="BanEmisExt" value-ref="$N1.FIGLMX_FRBANK"/>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:attribute name="CtaOri" value-ref="$N1.FIGLMX_BNK_ACCT"/>

<tt:attribute name="Fecha" value-ref="$N1.FIGLMX_DATE"/>

<tt:attribute name="Benef" value-ref="$N1.FIGLMX_BENE"/>

<tt:attribute name="RFC" value-ref="$N1.FIGLMX_TAXID"/>

<tt:attribute name="Monto" value-ref="$N1.FIGLMX_AMOUNT"/>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N1.FIGLMX_CURRENCY)">

<tt:attribute name="Moneda" value-ref="$N1.FIGLMX_CURRENCY"/>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N1.FIGLMX_ERATE)">

<tt:attribute name="TipCamb" value-ref="$N1.FIGLMX_ERATE"/>

</tt:s-cond>

</Cheque>

</tt:loop>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($IN.FIGLMX_JE_BANK)">

<tt:loop name="N2" ref="$IN.FIGLMX_JE_BANK">

<Transferencia>

<tt:attribute name="CtaOri" value-ref="$N2.FIGLMX_SR_BNK_ACCT"/>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N2.FIGLMX_SR_BANK)">

<tt:attribute name="BancoOriNal" value-ref="$N2.FIGLMX_SR_BANK"/>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N2.FIGLMX_FSR_BANK)">

<tt:attribute name="BancoOriExt" value-ref="$N2.FIGLMX_FSR_BANK"/>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:attribute name="CtaDest" value-ref="$N2.FIGLMX_TR_BNK_ACCT"/>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N2.FIGLMX_TR_BANK)">

<tt:attribute name="BancoDestNal" value-ref="$N2.FIGLMX_TR_BANK"/>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N2.FIGLMX_FTR_BANK)">

<tt:attribute name="BancoDestExt" value-ref="$N2.FIGLMX_FTR_BANK"/>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:attribute name="Fecha" value-ref="$N2.FIGLMX_DATE"/>

<tt:attribute name="Benef" value-ref="$N2.FIGLMX_BENE"/>

<tt:attribute name="RFC" value-ref="$N2.FIGLMX_TAXID"/>

<tt:attribute name="Monto" value-ref="$N2.FIGLMX_AMOUNT"/>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N2.FIGLMX_CURRENCY)">

<tt:attribute name="Moneda" value-ref="$N2.FIGLMX_CURRENCY"/>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N2.FIGLMX_ERATE)">

<tt:attribute name="TipCamb" value-ref="$N2.FIGLMX_ERATE"/>

</tt:s-cond>

</Transferencia>

</tt:loop>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($IN.FIGLMX_JE_SIGN)">

<tt:loop name="N3" ref="$IN.FIGLMX_JE_SIGN">

<CompNal>

<tt:attribute name="UUID_CFDI" value-ref="$N3.FIGLMX_SIGN"/>

<tt:attribute name="RFC" value-ref="$N3.FIGLMX_TAXID"/>

<tt:attribute name="MontoTotal" value-ref="$N3.FIGLMX_AMOUNT"/>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N3.FIGLMX_CURRENCY)">

<tt:attribute name="Moneda" value-ref="$N3.FIGLMX_CURRENCY"/>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N3.FIGLMX_ERATE)">

<tt:attribute name="TipCamb" value-ref="$N3.FIGLMX_ERATE"/>

</tt:s-cond>

</CompNal>

</tt:loop>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($IN.FIGLMX_JE_DI)">

<tt:loop name="N4" ref="$IN.FIGLMX_JE_DI">

<CompNalOtr>

<tt:attribute name="CFD_CBB_Serie" value-ref="$N4.FIGLMX_PREFIX"/>

<tt:attribute name="CFD_CBB_NumFol" value-ref="$N4.FIGLMX_CFD"/>

<tt:attribute name="RFC" value-ref="$N4.FIGLMX_TAXID"/>

<tt:attribute name="MontoTotal" value-ref="$N4.FIGLMX_AMOUNT"/>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N4.FIGLMX_CURRENCY)">

<tt:attribute name="Moneda" value-ref="$N4.FIGLMX_CURRENCY"/>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N4.FIGLMX_ERATE)">

<tt:attribute name="TipCamb" value-ref="$N4.FIGLMX_ERATE"/>

</tt:s-cond>

</CompNalOtr>

</tt:loop>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($IN.FIGLMX_JE_FI)">

<tt:loop name="N5" ref="$IN.FIGLMX_JE_FI">

<CompExt>

<tt:attribute name="NumFactExt" value-ref="$N5.FIGLMX_INVNO"/>

<tt:attribute name="TaxID" value-ref="$N5.FIGLMX_TAXID"/>

<tt:attribute name="MontoTotal" value-ref="$N5.FIGLMX_AMOUNT"/>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N5.FIGLMX_CURRENCY)">

<tt:attribute name="Moneda" value-ref="$N5.FIGLMX_CURRENCY"/>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N5.FIGLMX_ERATE)">

<tt:attribute name="TipCamb" value-ref="$N5.FIGLMX_ERATE"/>

</tt:s-cond>

</CompExt>

</tt:loop>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($IN.FIGLMX_JE_OTH)">

<tt:loop name="N6" ref="$IN.FIGLMX_JE_OTH">

<OtrMetodoPago>

<tt:attribute name="MetPagoPol" value-ref="$N6.FIGLMX_PYM"/>

<tt:attribute name="Fecha" value-ref="$N6.FIGLMX_DATE"/>

<tt:attribute name="Benef" value-ref="$N6.FIGLMX_BENE"/>

<tt:attribute name="RFC" value-ref="$N6.FIGLMX_TAXID"/>

<tt:attribute name="Monto" value-ref="$N6.FIGLMX_AMOUNT"/>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N6.FIGLMX_CURRENCY)">

<tt:attribute name="Moneda" value-ref="$N6.FIGLMX_CURRENCY"/>

</tt:s-cond>

<tt:s-cond check="not-initial($N6.FIGLMX_ERATE)">

<tt:attribute name="TipCamb" value-ref="$N6.FIGLMX_ERATE"/>

</tt:s-cond>

</OtrMetodoPago>

</tt:loop>

</tt:s-cond>

</Transaccion>

</tt:loop>

</Poliza>

</tt:template>

</tt:transform>


You see in resume:

The nodes was displayed under <Transaccion> node, in this order:

1) <Cheque>

2) <Transferencia>

3) <CompNal>

4) <CompNalOtr>

5) <CompExt>

6) <OtrMetodoPago>

if i am NOT wrong, regardless of whether it is a transfer or a check or cash payment, if there is a UUID label:

COMPNAL

I should exist, I'm right?

if so, I generate my XML file (assuming it a transfer, we pay via transfer and an invoice is received), I mistakenly mark validator that appears first label (node):

<Transferencia>

and then:

<CompNal>

So if you manually modify the XML file investing nodes (with corresponding information), the file is valid.

anyone can comment your experience?

anyone have same issue? how to fix?

i am thinking on modify the transformation but not know if its the correct way (before i want wait your comments if is possible).


Thanks

Thanks.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Friends, i have other problem solved, not know if anyone had similar problem:

when generated the XML file in the Egress Section, it generate first:

<Transferencia>

and then

<CompNal>

the XML generated, have errors when validated, manually opened the XML file and interchange the nodes, and now the XML is validated.

How To Solve?

1) Accessed to STRANS transaction and Modified this Transformation: figlmx_je_details

Asked for a Key Programmer.

2) Interchanged the nodes: <CompNal> in first place, then <Transferencia> <Cheques>

3) Tested and now my XML is Validated

i am happy, continue testing diferent cases.

Thanks

Jelena
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Miguel, I would suggest to open an incident with SAP and point out the defect in XSLT to them. I would not recommend to anyone to modify standard SAP objects manually. The JE files are not due till July (I think), so there shouldn't be an emergency at this point that would call for such drastic measures. Allow SAP to correct this and it will also help other customers.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi all, someone has go ahead with the xml file "reporte auxiliar de folios" ?

we are going to use this format to support the uuid for payrolls as we have only one posting document each week for all the payrolls of that week.

then, as we have to be able to send the information for each payroll payment and we don't have this detail information in the posting sistem, we have to use this file "reporte auxiliar de folios" to give SAT the detail of all UUID for each weekyly payment for payrols

this xml is out of scope in SAP if i recall correctly , then a custom development is needed.someone is going to use this kind of file ? maybe we can work together to create a report for this file.

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi Zarach, you find some useful files here:

https://groups.google.com/d/msg/vfp-factura-electronica-mexico/cRtCECSAnRw/Y7Gpl-V1sBQJ

My Blog, visit please:

Thanks