FTO and LU assignment for plants in different countries

[former_member529492]

Hi Guys,

I'm hoping you can help me with a question.  I've seen a couple of similar questions in the forums, so im really looking for validation of my approach.

In summary I have a company code and plant both based in New Zealand with a sister plant based in Mexico.  From an ECC perspective both plants are assigned to the New Zealand company code with their respective country assignments.

In GTS when I try to make the assignment of the NZ FTO to LU for the Mexican plant I get the standard warning message telling me not to link entities with different country keys.

To get round this I have assigned the Mexican Legal Unit to a dummy FTO with the country key MX.  This FTO is assigned to a "spare" Mexican company code in ECC.  I've done a quick unit test and the my customs doc transfers ok and contains the correct legal unit and contains the New Zealand FTO.  Which when I think in terms of ECC is correct, however, before I go ahead and implement this I wanted to know if anyone had any experience of this or saw a reason not to build the org structure like this?

Cheers Andy

[former_member215181 · Accepted solution]

Hi Andy,

I think you're basically doing the right thing.  The Legal Regulation for Customs is generally picked up from the country of the FTO, and any compliance checks will also try to use that country code, so an NZ address would be a mistake.

But I'm not sure about mapping to a spare Company Code in ECC.  I would have thought you'd want to arrange for the ECC documents to map directly to the relevant FTO, by adding some ABAP code to the transfer BAdIs (/SAPSLL/IFEX_SD0C_R3, etc).  The logic would be that if the Plant in the first item is MXnn, then the Company Code should be changed (from NZxx) to MXxx.  And in GTS, map that MX Company Code (which could either be your spare one, or a dummy value to avoid any confusion) to the new FTO in Mexico.

I'm actually surprised to learn from you that it works, since the Billing Documents will presumably try to map their NZ Company Code to the NZ FTO in GTS.  I guess that mapping is somehow over-ridden by the Legal Unit, but I'd worry in case anything in that area got changed by SAP in the future.

Apologies in advance if I've misunderstood what you've done.

Regards,

Dave

[former_member529492 · Accepted solution]

Hi Dave,

Thanks for the advice/ solution, very helpful as always.

I thought this would end up in code.  It took some fiddling to get it working.  What I discovered is if you just have the dummy FTO on its own it doesn't work.  Its only when I assign the dummy FTO to my "borrowed" company code from ECC it works.

From a legal control point of view it determines my licenses ok.... (as long as you aren't checking on FTO).  The customs document looks pretty shonky though, I get the correct LU but the FTO is the NZ one not my dummy one.  Which, is correct from an org structure point of view as its correctly mirroring ECC.  This has a knock on effect in the customs module as GTS now thinks im in NZ when im really in Mexico.

Thanks once again.  Andy

[former_member215181 · Accepted solution]

Glad to be of service.  You could mark it as helpful?

[ramona_l_cavazos · Accepted solution]

Dave,

If you are creating your export declaration from the Freight Order, is there a BAdI in aTM that can be used for the logic you mention above (if the Plant in the first item is MXnn, then the Company Code should be changed (from NZxx) to MXxx. And in GTS, map that MX Company Code (which could either be your spare one, or a dummy value to avoid any confusion) to the new FTO in Mexico.)?

Regards,

Ramona

[former_member131774]

Hi Andy,

This is only warning message, you could ignore by pressing "Enter".

I have tested in my environment and works fine. Could you try it?

Best regards,

Vincent

[former_member529492]

Hi Vincent,

I did test this and the impact doesn't come in compliance module I think.  The problem is when you want to generate export docs in customs for that FTO.  It basically thinks its in NZ still.  Cheers for the help though, appreciate it.  Andy