For those who are new to the Latin America reporting requirements, I think it is important to understand that the issue goes beyond SAP application updates. More importantly, it is critical to understand that no ERP vendor can provide a reporting solution for every single one of their customers. This is not just an SAP issue, it reflects to any ERP provider.
Why you ask? Answer is simple – every company takes the ERP system and customizes it to their business process and needs including their financial reporting timelines.
When you examine what SAP does as an example, they release notes and updates as best they can for the masses – meaning:
- They release the solution for standard ERP deployments, not customized deployments
- They often release solutions for their latest releases, not older versions as expected by them. They often get ported back to versions, but not always initially, and this is the case for eContabilidad which discusses ECC 6 – What if you are 4.6c – consider the issues a company running that version will have.
- And most important, they release what is under their control rather than thousands of customers customizations, upgrade paths, and unique 3rd parties. And in Mexico:
- every company is using a 3rd party signing provider to get their invoices approved and validated
- most companies are using 3rd party payroll providers to do their Nomina Electronica and receive Standard Interface files to update their G/L
- 95% of companies I have spoken with process their inbound invoices from local Mexico RFC vendors via the paper PDF as the XML has process gaps (i.e. PO# is not a standard field unless you can force an Addenda like a Retailer or Automotive OEM).
- And T&E (Gastos) is all over the place from local 3rd party portals, to SAP Travel Management to cloud providers such as Concur and believe it or not – Excel is the most common tool used.
So here is what you need to know – I have complied a summary of weeks of conversations from the SAP Community Network: http://scn.sap.com/thread/3582838?start=165&tstart=0
OUT of SCOPE – in other words if you fall into these categories – an OSS note strategy will not work and you will be forced to do Z-programs or look at a vendor such as Sovos who can solve not only the eContabilidad requirements but also the SAP CFDI issuing and SAP CFDI XML validation from suppliers as a single package.
The standard SAP Electronic Accounting solution for Mexico (eContabilidad) does not support:
- Companies that can’t create an FSV
- SPL: Special Purpose Ledger data – here is a direct quote from the community: ”I have been telling you this since the beginning, our GL ledger is Oct – Sep so we use Special Purpose Ledger for Mexico Reporting, so this doesn’t work for us and we started a Zprogram instead”
- FI-CA: Contract Accounting data
- Report data in a second currency
- Balance report executed by dates ranges, it can only be executed for a specific period. This is a larger issues as even if you run 12 periods, many companies don’t run them exactly to the calendar month as requested by the Mexico SAT. What if the January period ends January 23rd as an example? It is also possible that you run up to 16 periods – again standard OSS notes will note work for you. Here is a direct quote from the community – “I’m also confused why “report executed by date range” is suddenly out of scope. It’s a legal requirement, so how can it be just declared “out of scope” and still count as if SAP “supports” this?”
- Grouping code at 2nd level. This is still an open point but the Mexico SAT did outline their catalog definitions to the 2nd level and it is likely they will want data at that level, not just Level 1. If I have learned anything the government will want their detail and these legislations will change. Look at e-invoicing in Mexico. In 2008, it was all about CFD XML with summary reports monthly. And everyone said, there is no way that the gov’t will implement real-time e-invoicing. We are now on version CFDI v3.2 and every company above 250K Pesos in annual revenue has been transitioned to CFDI XML.
OSS Notes for the Journal Entries are not out as of this date! And projected release will not leave enough time to implement and test.
The most important issue is the UUID and the Polizas and those notes aren’t even released – the first two reports just trigger audits – the third report is what is used to justify deductions, avoid penalties and allow you to take a tax refund.
From SCN: For Electronic Accounting, you need 3 XML, GL, balance and accounting document files are needed, the first two are very simple to keep track of. The last file which is the accounting document with the UUID of customers, suppliers, expense accounts, payroll is the complicated one.
The report to generate the XML file for the Journal Entries is being developed. The release of this report is planned by the second week of December.
Part of the data needed for this XML file, in case of income or expense Journal Entries, is the CFDI information: “UUID” (e-invoice number), the “RFC” (Tax Number of the issuer of the e-invoice) and the amount.
– The UUID* is a 36 char data. To be able to enter this information, header texts need to be defined:
1) In Sales&Distributions and in FI Accounts Receivables and Payables: If the CFDI standard functionality is used, the UUID field already exists. If the functionality is not used, there is no need to setup the CFDI solution, only the field has to be defined.
2) In Material Management (transaction MIRO), an analysis is being done to determine the corresponding field
3) In Travel Management (transaction PR05), an analysis is being done to determine the corresponding field
So in closing, you need to understand the realities of SAP OSS notes and the lessons learned from the easy reports, let alone the difficult one (the Journal Entries) that will have to consider 3rd party solutions. Ensure you spend time looking at your back-up plans and additional vendors who can handle these customizations are part of their solution approach.
The post SAP eContabilidad – Will SAP OSS notes work for your company? appeared first on Sovos Compliance.