6 Answers

• 00

  

  Maike 10/20/23, 12:49 PM

  Hello Mike,
  I think it should be sufficient if you uncheck the Open Item Management box. So:
  1. balance = 0 + all items cleared (so no open items on the account, if necessary write off items)
  2. change account control
  3. if necessary, post new items (again).
  Old items may have to be removed by archiving.
  Since no line items have to be generated here, no report should be necessary.
  Is a new account not possible?
  _______________________________
  Many greetings
  Maike

  report
• 00

  

  mike2904 (Author)10/20/23, 12:50 PM

  Hello Maike,
  if it were that simple, I would not have posted.
  Archiving is not an issue, because it is not in use.
  New account does not work here either, because in this account group the determination of the classification term is the responsibility of an external application.
  Items were completely cleared (in HW and FW).
  If it is tried to remove the switch OP-guidance = error message FH190.
  To change this error message into a warning I don't think makes sense.
  A controlled transaction like the above would be desirable.
  Sincerely
  Mike

  report
• 00

  

  Maike 10/20/23, 12:50 PM

  Hello Mike,
  Without archiving, yes of course, does not work.
  Error message FH190 can also no longer be set to warning since a certain release.
  Have you read note 175960 carefully?
  "However, it is still possible to deactivate open item management using report ZFSEPA03 under the above-mentioned conditions."
  If I understand this correctly, you can continue to use the report, but only to deactivate open item management.
  Seems to be a bit of a hassle though and you have to be very precise.
  Unfortunately I don't have a developer key available right now, otherwise I would try it here on our IDES.
  _______________________________
  Many greetings
  Maike

  report
• 00

  

  mike2904 (Author)10/20/23, 12:50 PM

  Hello Maike,
  thank you very much for your effort!
  ZFSEPA03 is only a modification of RFSEPA03.
  ZFSEPA03 is not available for us, i.e. the note is not (yet) implemented and RFSEPA03 is no longer started by SAP.
  Should this still be a valid solution for this in EHP6 / EHP7?
  If it is indeed so, I will have to have the note installed.
  Sincerely
  Mike

  report
• 00

  

  Maike 10/20/23, 12:50 PM

  Hello Mike,
  that's how I understood it. But I would still try it on a test system first.
  As I said, unfortunately I don't have a developer key and our IDES insists on a workbench job, otherwise I would have tried it again here myself.
  The hint itself can be installed. But be careful. It may not find the object. You may have to get someone with a developer key to install the report as a Z-report.
  _______________________________
  Many greetings
  Maike

  report
• 00

  

  hans123 10/20/23, 12:50 PM

  In any case, with FB41 or FB01 (look before with FS10N) clear the balance to a special account per year, date should not be in the future and in the respective year of the entries.
  31.12.2017 for 2017
  10/11/2018 if today is 10/12/2018.
  Then clear all items per year F-03, select clearing date in the respective year, so for entries from 2017 a clearing date 2017.
  Furthermore, select a clearing date in the past.
  31.12.2017 for 2017
  11.10.2018 if today is 12.10.2018.
  If all years are cleared, then change to FS00, enter /h Debug and Save.
  Attention:
  For me it still found a balance, I then skipped generating the first error message in the error table.
  Waddle point on return[] table.
  By not generating the error message, it read save.
  Now FBRA clearing in 2017 and clearing back in 2018.
  Reverse the postings to the special account with FB08 reversal reason 01 real.
  I needed the whole thing in a test system, whether I would dare to do this on a production system is open to question.
  Note:
  Further I know that one could solve over the BSAS and BSIS also, I worked once on a mass balance resetting program, became then however not finished. But the program only moves lines from BSAS to BSIS and for K and D identical.
  Maybe someone will manage to fill the gaps.

  report