SAP for Utilities Discussions
Connect with fellow SAP users to share best practices, troubleshoot challenges, and collaborate on building a sustainable energy future. Join the discussion.
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Inclusion of line items before previous document due date passed

Former Member
0 Kudos

Hi All,

I am having below mentioned scenario:

1. I am invoicing a consumer in Aug-14 with periodic billing order. Document is having due date of 10-Sep.

2. Further I am doing interim billing and invoicing (before previous document due date expired) with posting date say 05-Sep.

The recent document of 05-Sep is not including all line items of document invoiced in Aug-14.

How do we include Aug-14 bill line items in next invoicing.

Saurabh

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Private_Member_7726
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi,

I don't know without looking in detail if it's achievable, but I do know - the requirement must be much more specific than simple "include" on the bill/in invoicing. "Include" as in:

- include in bill total amount (bill the already billed but not yet due amounts once again, in other words, which IMO opens up a "can of worms", confusion and challenges at the receiving end, when the system has to do electronic bill presentment, but which I've seen practiced at more than one customer), or

- "include" as in list the open amounts informatively, without including them in the total bill amount, but adding to "account balance" or perhaps the amount payable?

cheers

Jānis

View solution in original post

5 REPLIES 5

Private_Member_7726
Active Contributor
0 Kudos

Hi,

I don't know without looking in detail if it's achievable, but I do know - the requirement must be much more specific than simple "include" on the bill/in invoicing. "Include" as in:

- include in bill total amount (bill the already billed but not yet due amounts once again, in other words, which IMO opens up a "can of worms", confusion and challenges at the receiving end, when the system has to do electronic bill presentment, but which I've seen practiced at more than one customer), or

- "include" as in list the open amounts informatively, without including them in the total bill amount, but adding to "account balance" or perhaps the amount payable?

cheers

Jānis

0 Kudos

Hi Janis,

How can we include in bill total amount, if we go by 1st solution given by you?

Regards,

Saurabh

0 Kudos

Hi,

I'll look into it - to make it easier, can you tell what have you tried thus far and where you ran into problems? The first place I'll be looking will be integrated Account Maintenance/Sub Item settings under IMG SAP Utilites=>Invoicing->Invoice processing->Item selection in Invoicing.

cheers

Jānis

0 Kudos

Hi,

Our current configuration in item selection in invoicing is for open item selection is "All New Open Items Entered in Current Invocing".

We changed it to "All open items for contract acct (w. and w/o ref. to cntrct)" also in open item selection, but same also didn't helped.

Regards,

Saurabh

0 Kudos

Hi,

If you are not using Integrated Account Maintenance, under "Item Selection for Bill printout (Subitems)" it should be as easy as leaving Open Items Selection restriction blank - meaning "All open items for contract acct (w. and w/o ref. to cntrct)", setting the "Interval days for the due date of items to be printed" to 999, and choosing the "Consider Items in Bill Sum Total" setting - once or always, I believe. If it doesn't work, I'd be looking at FQEVENT R410 FMs to see if the Items are passed that far.

<rant on>I can't to this day get how come so many Utilities (in my experience - all I've worked with) practice this "double" or even multiple billing of the same amounts (even if the amounts do not multiply in FI-CA postings, you have invoiced the amounts to customer multiple times). Or rather - nobody has been able to tell a valid and irrefutable reason, why things need to be done that way - it's usually "that's how we have always done it" reason. The accounting people don't even care that the previous invoice remains valid in the system (as long as their precious FI-CA postings do not multiply), because there is nothing in IS-U that automatically reverses or invalidates it... And I don't get why the regulators even permit it...<rant off>

cheers

Jānis