FMF0-RFFMS200 not working

[mauro_blanc3]

Hi all.

We are trying to make payment program for FM to work properly. However we are unable to do so.

In our test system we posted several invoices for the same vendor and paid all of then un one payment. We have entries for all of these invoices FMIFIIT with VT 54.

When we run RFFMS200 nothing happens, there is no message whatsoever, and there are no VT 57 entries in FMIFIIT.

Please kindly provide any suggestions on how to track down what could be the problem in the invoices or payment or the program itself.

Is there any customizing steps I should check (either in FM or FI)?.

Profile update is 0000101, we have no settings in OF29 for our FM Entity and we have no entries in OF39 for neither VT54 nor VT57.

Any help will be appreciated.

Regards, Mauro.

[iklovski]

Hi,

Please, consult OSS note 400924 - Recommendations and rules for the payment transfer in FM

and make sure that your settings comply to what is described there.

Regards,

Eli

P.S. If you have New G/L, why don't you use online payment update?

[mauro_blanc3]

Thanks. I'll take a look at the note.

Regards, Mauro.

PS: We do not have New G/L enabled in our company code yet.

[mauro_blanc3]

Dear Eli, after reading the note I'm unable to find a logic in FMN0. We have posted invoices either by MM (MIRO) and FI (FB60) then we paid those invoices using F110 and F-53, always the same procedure, always filling the same fields on every transaction. But for some reason, son invoices/payment are processed by FMN0 and some are not. Some are shown as pending invoices in the output report and some don't even seems to be processed.

I'm completely lost here. Any help will be appreciatted.

What tables/fields should I check on invoices and payments to make sure I comply with the requirements of note 400924?

Thanks in advance.

Mauro.

[Former Member]

In OF29, you have to check the box 'S200 original functions'. That is the flag for transferring payment to FM with batch program RFFMS200.

[iklovski]

Hi,

You have, first of all, to see what type of commitment items participate in the payment process and check if their financial transactions correspond to the eligible combinations described in the note.

Second, you have to check what S200 you use: is it enhanced or simple one. Keep in mind, that there are numerous OSS notes which rectify different cases with this program and some of them are quite recent. So, you have also to check that your SAP release (what is it, by the way?) is adequate in this perspective.

Unfortunately, long-distance analysis of S200 performance is practically impossible, under assumption that all other settings, I mentioned above are 'descent'. It is essential to see the data and sometimes debug the program to understand why it does not 'catch' this or that document.

Regards,

Eli

[mauro_blanc3]

Hi Eli, we are using the enhanced version of S200, and our release is ECC 6.0 EhP 4.

Regards, Mauro.

[mauro_blanc3]

We do not have that option in OF29.

Our sap release is ECC6 EhP 4

[iklovski]

As from certain release, this option is not visible any more, and the flag is updated directly in FM01D table.

[iklovski]

I see... Well, even for 6.04 there are plenty of notes for S200. Considering the fact, that for some documents it works and for some it is not, and given the check you made to make sure that commitment items in question are defined correctly, I'd repeat my previous remark and suggest you to raise a ticket to OSS, so they can enter the system and see the problem.

In order to analyse, what's going on there is a minimum need to see your relevant entries in FMIFIIT and BSEG tables.

Regards,

Eli

[mauro_blanc3]

Thanks!

I checked the table, and the flag for the S200 Enhanced function is checked.

[mauro_blanc3 · Accepted solution]

Dear all.

Problem was solved!

The error was in the withholding tax accounts. The commitment item assigned to these accounts had the financial transaction set to 40 and was not flagged as stat.

I made the changes suggested by the thread below in the commitment itme assigned to these accounts and now everything is working properly.

Thanks to everyone for your help!.

Mauro.

Message was edited by: Mauro Blanc