SAP Community - Settlement Management

Unable to delete product cost collector due to unsettled variances from May this year

2025-11-19T14:42:16.247000+01:00

I am trying to delete a product cost collector so I can revert a part from REM to discrete, but there are unsettled variances from May that is blocking it.

I stupidly deleted the variance from MF47 so no longer able to process it, and have cancelled the material documents that caused the variance which hasn't helped.

Finance have run K088 and cleared everything they can, but these variances from May are still there.

Is there any way to get these variances cleared?

SAP SD Rebates migration to SAP S4 HANA Settlement Management historic data

2025-11-21T04:44:07.946000+01:00

Hi Gurus,

We are in middle of system conversion from SAP ECC to SAP S4 HANA. Client has a requirement o migrate entire billing from past 10 years along with settled rebates document and rebate agreements for audit purposes.

Is it feasible to migrate closed agreements and settlement documents from ECC to S4 if we have the billing documents also migrated into S4.

Generally its not good practive to migrate closed agreements and archive and use reporting on archived data for future purpose is best practive but client wants to migrate the data.

Any help on how to approach this migration will be helpful and willit need a custom conversion program or which tool will be apt for this conversion. Any direction on this is much appreciated.

Thanks,

Santosh

@Lakshmipathi @NagarajP @Chris1973

Portugal settlement document number range is not in sync with digital signature number range

2025-11-21T05:39:57.072000+01:00

During settlement, the sales rebate document is being created with correct sequence number as per country wise number range maintained in basic functions but the reference field in the settlement document is copying the number from digital signature number range (NR status). We have manually synced the number range of digital signature with country specific number range by changing the NR status of number range.

But whenever we are doing reversal of a settlement document, digital signature number range is not getting consumed and this is causing number mismatch between settlement document number and reference field number in the settlement document when we create the next documents.

Kindly share your inputs as i'm unable to understand what went wrong.

Settlement Management SAP S/4HANA

@Lakshmipathi @GauthierVictor

Different Settlement Material to be used for single contract

2025-11-28T06:03:55.676000+01:00

Hi All,

In Condition Contract Management we can maintain only the settlement material at the header level, but we have a requirement wherein in single Sales rebate condition contract with Business volume is maintained at Product hierarchy level then for every product hierarchy we need to have a seperate settlement material.

I checked the split criteria for Business volume but its not helping with achieving complete solution.

Any guidance will be much apprecited.

Thanks,

Santosh

Settlement Management #SAPS4HANA

Hello experts, I am working for settlement managements in SAP and I am new to this module.

2025-12-02T18:47:10.686000+01:00

User reported an issue for the CCS process, when trying to create a settlement (Sales rebate delta accrula document )he is getting the the gross and net amount in Negative values instead of the postive value.
For ex: 51.005,71- (negative amount) EUR instead of the positive value.
Could anyone suggest how can check the root cause of the issue and si there any config to validate ?

Incorrect Sign orientation for the sales rebates

2025-12-02T19:04:04.298000+01:00

Hi CCS Experts,
User reported an issue for the CCS sales rebate, where the SIGN is inverted, like coming NEGATIVE for even an postive case.
Monthly Accruals and the a bunch of Incoming invoices posted in September and another bunch in October, where for the month end 30.11.2025, the incoming invoices are being considered as the partial settlements.
This is working fine till October month end and some how the logic got changed.
How can check with developer, like where exactly I have to check in case of this issue ??

Item from the previous manual delta accruals flowing into the manual delta accruals settlement doc

2025-12-03T16:30:50.337000+01:00

Hi Experts,

I have created two manual delta accruals settlement documents(ZS4B and ZS4C) which are copies of 0S4B. ZS4B has "Distribution" active and for ZS4C, "Distribution" is inactive. For ZS4B, distribution type is "3 - Distribution Based on Accruals(CCM)". The problem I am facing is that after the distribution in ZS4B, a line item is generating for the item from ZS4C. Is there a way to distribute the manual delta accruals only with the materials from the Business volume.

ZS4C:

ZS4B - with Distribution:

The second line item in the distribution is generated for the previous manual delta accruals. This should not come in the distribution.

Regards

Hari

@MichaelWerner , @GauthierVictor

Accrual reversals before final settlement

2025-12-10T08:07:35.810000+01:00

Hi All,

We generally reverse the remaining accruals at the end of the CC validity i.e., once CC is fully settled and status is set to "Locked". However, sometimes, business wants to release the accruals much earlier partially without waiting for final settlement to run to release the remaining accrual at the validity end of the contract.

What is the best way forward for it?

Regards

Samier Danish

RES1 smaller than accrual REA2 same value as RES1

2025-12-17T12:13:21.978000+01:00

We are having Z Conditions :

Problem is that payout will be smaller than the builded accrual but we won't balance the complete accrual value

Tried to use the REA5 (YEA5) but then the deducted value is double so on this case I will payout 5 € the REA2(YRA4) is the complete amount of 197,40 and the YEA5 is the accrual minus 2*5 € do left in the accrual account 187,40 from my opinion this is not correct. Does anybody have a solution or explanation for me?

Two different subtotals for a Rebate condition contract

2025-12-18T01:32:48.718000+01:00

Hi All,

We have a requirement where for some items Net value should be the rebate basis. Whereas for other items it should be gross price. Is it possible to have two different Rebate basis's for a Contract. In the Settlement data Tab, we can select only on value. Also, let me know how the "Amount Fields - Split Criteria" in the Business volume profile works.

@GauthierVictor@MichaelWerner

Actual Costing settlement completed with CKMLMV-039 / CKMLMV-042 warnings after upgrade

2026-01-07T15:14:44.105000+01:00

After upgrading our SAP S/4HANA system, we started receiving the following warnings during the Costing Cockpit / Settlement step:

CKMLMV-039 – Iteration of cycle diverges in currency/valuation
CKMLMV-042 – Cycle recalculated after removing critical edges

Key points:

Settlement completes successfully
No errors
FI postings are balanced
Actual prices and cost component split look correct in CKM3N

System setup:

Single company code
Multiple plants

Before the upgrade, the same setup did not produce these warnings.

Is this expected behavior after the upgrade, and can these warnings be considered informational only if settlement completes without errors? What causes it and how can i do removed it?

Multi‑Payee Scenario – REA2 Condition Type Not Determined

2026-01-07T16:33:54.222000+01:00

Hello Experts,

In the multi‑payee scenario, when the Sold‑to and Bill‑to are different, the system is not determining the REA2 condition type. However, at the contract level under Condition Usage, it does not show any open accruals — all accruals appear as reversed.
Additionally, at the accounting document level, the accrual reversal is also not reflected.

Request you to please share your inputs.

Amount field Group 0S01 - NETWR defaults in the Condition Contract

2026-01-21T05:53:17.872000+01:00

Hi All,

I am using only 0S02 - BONBA and 0S03-KZWI1 as amount field group fields in the business volume profile. However, 0S01-NETWR is defaulting in the Condition Contract. But in the dropdown, I am seeing only 0S02 and 0S03. Any idea why 0S01 is defaulting into Amount Field Group. How to correct this.

Below is the error message i am getting

Below is the dropdown(Initial)

When I select ZS02 or ZS03 and then hit dropdown, I don't see 0S01 in the dropdown list.

Regards

Hari

Error posting reconciliation account on condition contract – Settlement Management

2026-01-23T20:38:30.118000+01:00

Hello SAP Community,

We are facing an issue with a condition contract (chart of accounts NSCF) in SAP S/4HANA Settlement Management.

Current flow:

Provision (Accrual): 709100 / 419211
Final Settlement: 419221 / 411xxx
Issue:
During the settlement run, SAP throws the following error:
The account 419221 for company cannot be posted directly Recording with settlement category F (Subsequent item load) Revenue recording procedure: P (via pricing determination) Document type created: AB (Accounting document)
Additional information:
KORS is configured correctly with 419221 as the reconciliation account
Expected behavior:
Settlement should post provision and final settlement:
Provision → 709100 / 4192é1
Settlement → 419221 / 411xxx
419221 should never be directly posted

Question:

What Settlement Management parameters or account determination settings are required to post 419221 correctly in Settlement, without SAP attempting to post it directly (and causing an error)?

We want to ensure:

Provision and Settlement entries are correctly generated
Reconciliation account 419221 is used as requested by accounting
The postings remain auditable and automatic
Any guidance or best practices for handling reconciliation accounts in Settlement Management would be greatly appreciated.
Any guidance or best practices for account determination in Settlement Management for this scenario would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Djamila

Replacing Allocation Structure in a Work Order

2026-01-28T02:28:13.977000+01:00

Hi All,

I am trying to find a BAPI or a BADI to change the allocation structure inside a work order (IW32).

I am not able to create a new order type due to business restrictions and need to settle costs using a different allocation structure than the one assigned to the settlement profile.

Requesting help with creating an enhancement for the work order.

Thanks!

Tani

Settlement Management - Condition Contract - system external sales documents in Business Volume

2026-01-30T12:23:06.836000+01:00

Hi community,
one of my customers would like to add system external sales volumes (they are getting these via excel sheets from partner companys) to the sales table VWB2_VBRKVBRP_1 for sales rebates - in addition to the normal S4 internal SD invoices.
Do you have any advice on how I can proceed?
Thanks in advance
Dan

How to get tax to determine based off tax material classification in Settlement Management

2026-02-09T17:32:07.350000+01:00

From research I understand the

Tax condition type RETX has reference condition type TTX1 and has access sequence RET1 assigned to it. In the standard content for condition type TTX1, access sequence TTX1 is assigned. The two access sequences (RET1 and TTX1) have one access in common, called Domestic taxes, which contain the following access fields:

Technical name of the condition	Field description
ALAND	Departure Country/Region
TAXK1	Tax Classification 1-Customer
TAXM1	Tax Classification Material

I understand by default the tax classification material is set to 1 - How do I get the tax classification to read from the product master data in the settlement management type 0S01 - Sales Rebate ?

Impact of Not Settling a Maintenance Order in SAP S/4HANA Public Cloud

2026-02-10T12:13:30.688000+01:00

Dear experts,

I would like to ask for your guidance regarding Maintenance Orders in SAP S/4HANA Public Cloud.

If costs or expenses have been posted to a Maintenance Order, but the order is not settled, what would be the impact on the system?

Specifically, if the order is processed up to Technical Completion (TECO), but Settlement and Business Completion (CLSD) are not performed, could this cause any issues or limitations?
For example:

Impact on Month-End or Year-End Closing
Open balances remaining on the Maintenance Order
Effects on Financial Reporting or Controlling
Any system checks or errors during period-end activities

I would appreciate any insights or best practices on whether settlement is mandatory before closing periods, and what potential risks may occur if settlement is not completed.

Thank you very much in advance for your support.

Best regards,
Jessada

SAP HANA Rebates: Partner determination for Contract Rebate

2026-02-10T21:05:25.458000+01:00

Hi Community!

I have a customer in SAP HANA requesting that in Contract Rebates could be by SHIP TO PARTY instead of PI Invoicing Party. In configuration I see that I can change the partner but I'm not sure if all Invoice documents will be taken into account since Invoice documents have not Ship to party partner.

Could you please help me to understand if I change Contract Rebates partner to SH will be take all Invoice document for Settlement?

Regards

Mirtha

Reversal of partial settlement incorrect on account assignment for accrual reversal condition

2026-02-19T16:12:53.317000+01:00

Dears

I am facing a problem that the system does not reverse a partial settlement (or final for that matter) because of unbalanced document.

For a French Sales Org the original document is as Z* condition types copied from standard

Header:

Item with accruals reversal:

Account assignment for this item

00000001 _________________________________________________________________________
00000001 Tax accounts will be determined for item 000001
00000001 Tax account will be determined for account key ESA
00000001 Tax account 0000015452 found and posted with posting key 50
00000001 _________________________________________________________________________
00000001 Tax accounts will be determined for item 000001
00000001 Tax account will be determined for account key ESE
00000001 Tax account 0000015401 found and posted with posting key 40
00000001 _________________________________________________________________________
00000001 Vendor 0000100248 posted with reconciliation account and posting key 31
00000001 _________________________________________________________________________
00000001 Account determination for condition type ZCA2 ()
00000001 Account determination: acc.key, ZC1 val.grpg code Acct Mod. val.class
00000001 Account 0000048610 will be posted with posting key 50 (transaction ZCA2)
00000001 Account determination for condition type ZCA2 (Commission AccrRev)
00000001 Account determination: acc.key, ZC2 val.grpg code Acct Mod. val.class ZCA2
00000001 Account 0000009696 will be posted with posting key 40 (transaction ZCA2)
00000001 _________________________________________________________________________
00000001 Account determination for condition type ZCS1 (External Commission)
00000001 Account determination: acc.key, val.grpg code Acct Mod. val.class ZCS1
00000001 Account 0000048610 will be posted with posting key 40 (transaction ZCS1)

The reversal document looks like:

Header:

Same item as before:

Account assignment for the same item including main messages with the error

FI/CO Interface: Balance in Transaction Currency 28.101,00- (EUR)
Document INT0000001 has status C and is complete
Chart of accounts SGL determined for company code FR01
The posting document is created with transaction RMRP (Incoming invoice)
_________________________________________________________________________
Tax accounts will be determined for item 000001
Tax account will be determined for account key ESA
Tax account 0000015452 found and posted with posting key 40
_________________________________________________________________________
Tax accounts will be determined for item 000001
Tax account will be determined for account key ESE
Tax account 0000015401 found and posted with posting key 50
_________________________________________________________________________
Vendor 0000100248 posted with reconciliation account and posting key 21
_________________________________________________________________________
Account determination for condition type ZCA2 ()
Account determination: acc.key, ZC1 val.grpg code Acct Mod. val.class
Account 0000048610 will be posted with posting key 40 (transaction ZCA2)
Account 0000048610 will be posted with posting key 50 (transaction ZCA2)
Account determination for condition type ZCA2 (Commission AccrRev)
Account determination: acc.key, ZC2 val.grpg code Acct Mod. val.class ZCA2
Account 0000009696 will be posted with posting key 50 (transaction ZCA2)
_________________________________________________________________________
Account determination for condition type ZCS1 (External Commission)
Account determination: acc.key, val.grpg code Acct Mod. val.class ZCS1
Account 0000048610 will be posted with posting key 50 (transaction ZCS1)

As you can see in the reversal - the red marked line is trying to post to the same G/L account with posting Key 50 (besides the 40) and because of this the document is unbalanced.

The settings for the condition contract are shared amongst several sales orgs and if I do the same for a German Sales Org (again same settings - same G/L accounts) the system reverts the document without any issue.

This occurs only in reversal of partial settlement and not in any other cases.

Any idea on how we can see why the system is trying to post with that other account key 50 besides de correct one of 40 (that reverts the original document posting)?