Cost of Goods Sold Split in Make to Order Scenario

(MTO) with SAP S/4HANA

5127,617

Objective
Cost of Goods sold (hereinafter will be known as COGS) also known as “Cost of Sales” and refers to the cost of goods that are
either manufactured or purchased and then sold. COGS is part of income statement and accounted as part of sales process.

COGS Split is breakdown of single value of cost of a sale-able product into cost components which are relevant to business for
analysis and management reporting. The items that make up costs of goods sold include:

 Cost of items intended for resale

 Cost of raw materials
 Cost of parts used to make a product
 Direct labor costs
 Overhead costs, like utilities for the manufacturing site
Etc.

This blog explains the various options that are available in SAP S/4HANA to report COGS split information in account-based
COPA environment when Sale Order/item is a cost object in Make to Order (hereinafter will be known as MTO) production
process.

What will you learn from this Blog

Overview of COGS split accounting during Post Goods Issue and later during its periodic revaluation in case of MTO.

Details of possible options which can be leveraged in SAP S/4HANA system to report Actual COGS split in Account based
COPA

Know more about system setup in Account based COPA in SAP S/4HANA environment.

COGS Split Accounting in case of MTO

Make to Order (MTO) is a production process where product is manufactured to meet customer specific demand. To meet the
process requirement in SAP, customer order (sale order/item) is treated as primary cost object to book cost of sales & revenue
and it triggers the production/logistic requirements.

In case of MTO, initially when produced product is delivered to customer, accounting of COGS is done which is at standard
price. Later at month end, relevant variances are loaded on COGS to achieve actual COGS information.

In costing-based COPA, COGS split information is used to update value fields depending on “Valuation Strategy” concept.
While now, in case of Account Based COPA in S/4HANA, instead of value fields, COGS split information is posted to different
GL Accounts depending on “Define Accounts for Splitting the Cost of Goods Sold” concept.

Below are the events when & how COGS split is accounted in account-based COPA in S/4HANA:

Goods delivery to customer (Post Goods Issue – PGI):

Along with conventional PGI accounting document, additional accounting document generated, at standard price | COGS Split
GL Accounts are Cost Elements (hereinafter will be known as CE) and COGS split is booked to Sale Order/item
COGS Revaluation during Periodic Actual Costing (CKMLCP):

Actual Costing is one of the functionalities of Material Ledger which revalues the standard cost of a material based on the
cumulative variances that exist in a period. This revalued cost applied to achieve COGS / Inventory at Actual price.

Thus, as part of periodic actual costing process, variances such as Production variances, Purchase Price variances, Activity Price
variance etc. which are associated to Customer order are reclassified to revalue Customer order COGS and true up its standard
price into actual price |General Ledger Accounts (hereinafter will be known as GL a/c) determined for Actual Costing task are
cost element and COGS revaluation is booked to Sale Order/item

In the given example, total variance is 217.68 made up of 143.68 (Production variance) + 74.00 (Purchase Price variance) and
assumed no produced stock is in hand.

Thus complete 217.68 is considered to revalue the COGS and generated a Closing Document to reclassify the variances and
transfer total variance to COGS Revaluation GL a/c (GBB-COC)

Additional accounting document generated to split variances considered for COGS revaluation | GL a/c determined for actual
cost component split are same which are setup for COGS split posting during PGI. They are cost elements (CE) and COGS
revaluation split is booked to Sale Order/item
Configuration setup for COGS Split
In SAP S/4HANA, limitation of account-based COPA of not being able to split COGS as per cost components is addressed.

With the functionality of “Define Accounts for Splitting the Cost of Goods Sold”, COGS split is populated to different GL
Accounts which are mapped to Cost Components for every Source Account (COGS a/c).

For each Source GL a/c (COGS a/c), different valuation can be assigned which helps in determining cogs split details as per
valuations (Legal/Profit Center/Group)

With Strategy key for each Source GL a/c, a rule can be built to determine cost estimates: Released or Upcoming Released.
Reporting options for Actual COGS split in Account Based COPA
COGS split of MTO, can be reported in account-based COPA either by settling Sale Order/item cost object to COPA or by
using Attributed COPA functionality. These options are explained below along with possible use cases.

Cost Object Settlement:

The settlement process allocates the actual costs/revenue incurred for a general cost object to another receiving objects (such as

a profitability segment) using either GL Account with cost element (CE) category 21 or using original GL Account itself. In
addition to Financial Accounting document having Balance Sheet or Profit/Loss GL a/c, you will find additional accounting
document for Integration of Controlling with Financial Accounting which are posted due to change in Cost Objects. They are
either posted with same Primary GL Accounts or GL Accounts with CE Category 21.

Use Case 1: Both Result Analysis (RA) & Settlement are required to report cost /revenue in COPA

If business case requires cost/revenue recognition as per Result Analysis (hereinafter will be known as RA) task then, RA setup
and Allocation Structure need to be maintained as per cost component split.
Key configuration notes:

 RA Line IDs & RA GL a/c (CE Category: 31) are to be maintained as per different cost components needed for COGS
split explained above.

In this example:

Separate Line IDs & RA GL Accounts are created for each COGS Split GL a/c. For instance: GL a/c 40000028 is for Material
Cost thus mapped to LID “MAT”.

 Maintain Assignment Lines in Allocation Structure as per COGS split need and assign Settlement GL a/c (CE Category
:21) by cost components

In this example:

Separate assignments are created for each cost component, for instance: Assignment 20 which is for Material cost, Material
related COGS split GL a/c is assigned as source and separate settlement GL a/c is assigned. Showing below a setup of one of
the assignments
Accounting & Reporting: 

 Perform RA after Actual Costing task completed

As part of Actual costing task, variances are reclassified to COGS split GL a/c and booked to sale order/item.

In this example, it is shown in Sale order/item account assignment, that both COGS split at standard price and with variances
are clubbed to COGS split GL a/c.
When RA task is performed, all COGS split relevant GL a/c as well as other cost GL a/c which are relevant for capitalization
are considered for Cost/Revenue recognition.

In this example, Revenue recognition is Cost Based thus Revenue in Excess of Billing is getting computed
  Perform Sale Order settlement

Each COGS split line, settled from separate RA GL a/c (CE Category :31) to its respective Settlement GL a/c (CE Category :21)
as mentioned in configuration notes above.
1st Accounting Document generated to recognize revenue which is based on RA results.

2nd Accounting Document generated is for FICO integration with Settlement GL Accounts (CE Category :21), as values
transferred from sale order/item account assignment category to PSG account assignment category

GL Account Line item browser report (FAGLL03H) in SAP S/4HANA shows both Primary & Secondary cost elements. Thus,
for this example, COGS split can be seen with COPA characteristics using settlement GL a/c.
When checked in COPA Actual line item Report (KE24), it would show COGS breakdown information which is aligned to GL
a/c line item report

Use Case 2: Result Analysis not required to record to cost/revenue. Direct Settlement to COPA.
If business case doesn’t require cost/revenue recognition as per Result Analysis (RA) task, then only Allocation Structure needs
to be maintained as per cost component split.

Key configuration notes:

 Maintain Assignment Lines in Allocation Structure as per cost components needed for COGS split
 Maintain “By Cost Element” instead of assigning Settlement Cost Element (CE Category :21) for cost components
assignment lines.

In this example:

Separate assignments are created for each cost component relevant to COGS split. Showing below a setup of one of the
assignments

Accounting & Reporting:

 Perform Sale Order settlement

As part of Actual costing task, variances are reclassified to COGS split GL accounts and booked to sale order/item. When Sale
order settlement is performed with feature “By Cost Element”, COGS split information will be available with same set of
COGS split GL accounts along with COPA characteristics

In this example, it is shown in Sale order/item account assignment, that both COGS split at standard price and with variances
are clubbed to COGS split GL a/c.
When the Settlement is performed, all cost line items are transferred from Sale order/item to COPA with same GL Accounts as
sender and receiver

Accounting Document generated for FICO integration with Primary GL Accounts, as values transferred from sale order/item
account assignment category to PSG account assignment category
GL Account Line item browser report (FAGLL03H) will show COGS split with COPA characteristics using Primary GL
accounts.
When checked in COPA Actual line item Report (KE24), it would show COGS breakdown information which is aligned to GL
line item report
Attributed COPA:

It is also termed as Simplified Profitability Analysis which ensures cost and revenue information in COPA is always current and
100% reconciled with the income statement. COPA characteristics are derived either based on Derivation Rules (like in case of
Cost Center) or Settlement Rule where receiver is Profitability Segment (like in case of Internal Order/Sale Order). As and
when Cost and Revenue are posted, statistically COPA characteristics are updated. Thus, financials with COPA characteristics
are only shown in reports but not available in follow-on process in COPA like Top Down Distribution.

Use Case 3: Both Result Analysis and Settlement are not required 

If business case doesn’t require cost/revenue recognition as per Result Analysis (RA) and nor order settlement is part of value
chain, then functionality of Attributed COPA / Simplified COPA available in SAP S/4HANA can be leveraged to report
financials with COPA characteristics.

In the given example, COPA characteristics are derived from SO/item settlement rule and update along with primary posting
like Purchase Price variance during goods receipt, Production variance settlement, Goods Delivery to Customer etc.

Key configuration notes:

 Leverage Attributed COPA / Simplified COPA feature and activate it for Sale Order
Retrieve COPA Characteristic information from Settlement Rule

Accounting & Reporting

 Purchase Price variance during Good Receipt

COPA characteristics are updated but COPA is not a real cost object. In a GL line browser report, we can notice that field
“Object class” is not assigned with “Profit Analysis” and field “PA Obj CO” is not checked.
  Production order settlement

Attributed COPA updated during production order settlement and variance split which is transferred to sale order/item is
updated with COPA characteristics

 Good Delivery to Customer (PGI)

Attributed COPA updated during PGI and COGS split is booked to sale order/item and same time updated with COPA
characteristics
  COGS split Revaluation when periodic Actual Costing task performed

Attributed COPA updated during COGS Revaluation accounted as part of periodic actual costing and actual cost component
split is booked to sale order/item and same time updated with COPA characteristics

Final Notes
As demonstrated above, account-based COPA gives more flexibility in SAP S/4HANA to deal with COGS split requirement.
Thank you for going through the post. I hope, I have been able to summarize the way-forward approach to deal with COGS split
requirement in MTO scenario.

Your feedback will help me in making this post more useful and relevant to many more business use cases.

S/4HANA Account based COPA and Actual Costing

51326,489

Actual Costing and Account based CO-PA in S/4HANA

Warning: This blog gets into certain nitty-gritties of the Controlling module. It is ideally suited for people with knowledge in
this area.

The basics
The blog written by Shakeel Ahmed titled “Has Account based CO-PA evolved enough to be recommended in S/4HANA”
details some of the features of Account based CO-PA in the context of S/4HANA and also espouses his views on the usability
of the functionality.

I would like to supplement his thoughts with certain other insights as well. But before that, a few generic impressions…

Firstly the unified Financials backbone provided by S/4HANA is one of the most important simplifications. It addresses one of
the key concerns that the Finance departments had in terms of having to deal with external and internal (management)
accounting data separately in SAP.

In hindsight, the design of separate data structures for FI & CO seems like a convoluted complication thrust upon customers. It
enhanced the “value” of the CO consultant on whom depended the implementation of the most complex concepts of managerial
accounting. The design and structuring of various aspects of the CO module played an important role in its effective utilization.

However, the complexities (especially those related with reconciliation between FI & CO) relegated usage of CO functionalities
to the bare minimum, necessary to sustain the overall accounting (E.g. Cost Center Accounting, Product Costing, etc.).

With the opportunities provided by HANA, SAP has rightfully unified the separate modules and their data structures. On the
one hand this relieves the Finance users from redundant and non-value adding work of reconciling and at the same time also
tries to bring in some of the special features of the separate data structures into the unified module (e.g. Cost Component split in
Account based COPA, etc.).

Has Account based CO-PA evolved enough to be recommended

While Shakeel has given a detailed comparison and concluded that while his heart is still with Costing based CO-PA his
thinking mind would go with Account based CO-PA as that is where the future developments lay, here are a few more points to
consider regarding the new advancements in Account based CO-PA (in specific scenarios) :

Cost Component Split: In S/4HANA, it is possible to split the COGS Account into its Cost Component Split posting the
respective Cost Components to Account based CO-PA. The solution provided is that after the usual entry is posted debiting
Cost of Goods sold Account, the same account is reversed and the split is taken to different accounts as per their assignment to
Cost Components in the new configuration.

Std Cost of Product A 1000

Cost Component Split
Material 700
Activity 200
Overhead 100

COGS for 10 nos of Product A

COGS A/c Dr 10000 Regular Entry at the time of
To Inventory A/c Cr 10000 Goods Issue for Delivery
Material Cost Comp A/c Dr 7000 Split of COGS into Cost
Activity Cost Comp A/c Dr 2000 Components – new functionality
Overhead Cost Comp Dr 1000 in S/4HANA
A/c
To COGS A/c Cr 10000

In Costing based COPA In A/c based COPA

Value Field Account
Material Cost Comp 7000 Material Cost Comp A/c 7000
Activity Cost Comp 2000 Activity Cost Comp A/c 2000
OH Cost Comp 1000 Overhead Cost Comp 1000
A/c

Effectively, with the accounting of the Cost Component Split, SAP has brought A/c based COPA to the same level as Costing
based COPA in terms of this functionality.

Now, let us assume that Actual Costing is activated.

Assume Actual Cost for Product A is: 1200

Cost Component Split
Material 800
Activity 250
Overhead 150

For Costing based COPA, we run the Periodic Valuation (Transaction KE27) by which the Actual Cost Components can be
taken to new and separate Value fields. The Revaluation of Consumption for COGS option in Actual Costing will not be used in
this case.

In Costing based COPA

Value Field
Actual Material Cost 8000
Comp
Actual Activity Cost 2500
Comp
Actual OH Cost Comp 1500

Hence for reporting based on Actual Costs, these Value Fields can be chosen

For Account based COPA however, the Periodic Valuation will not work. For that, only the revaluation of Consumption option
in Actual Costing will come into play. At the time of revaluation of Consumption posting, the delta amount is taken only to the
original COGS Account.

Account
COGS A/c                                Dr 2000
PRD Variances A/c                  Cr 2000

This means that the Actual Cost reporting in A/c based COPA will look like this:

Account
Material Cost Comp A/c 7000
Activity Cost Comp A/c 2000
Overhead Cost Comp A/c 1000
COGS A/c 2000

Needless to say, this representation is problematic whereby the total variance accrued to the goods sold is shown as a
consolidated amount and not split into the Cost Components though that split is available in Actual Costing.

This simplification item thus becomes redundant in the wake of activation of Actual Costing

Splitting of Production Variances: In S/4HANA, it is possible to split the Production variances into their respective categories
while posting to Account based CO-PA. The solution provided is similar to the Cost Component Split solution mentioned
above, in that, after the usual entry is posted debiting (or crediting) respective Variance Account, the same account is reversed
and the split is taken to different accounts as per their assignment to category in the new configuration.

Prod Variance in production of Product A 2000

Input Price Variance 1500
Input Qty Variance 500

Accounting entries:

PRD Variance A/c Dr 2000 Regular Entry at time of settlement of

COGM A/c Cr 2000 Prod Order (Accounts determined from
OBYC)
Input Price Variance A/c Dr 1500 Split of Variance into Variance
Input Qty Variance A/c Dr 500 categories  – new functionality of
PRD Variance A/c Cr 2000 S/4HANA

Now here is a crucial question… how do we deal with the CO Account assignment for these postings?

Well, at the outset, the GL accounts assigned to the different categories will obviously have to be taken to CO-PA. As for the
main Variance Account determined from MM-Account determination (OBYC), it is redundant as the account gets nullified – so
it can either be taken to a Cost Center (using default account assignment) or can be created as a non-cost element.

But herein comes the twist… when Actual Costing is activated… the period end Actual Costing run, basically reverses the
Variances and takes them to Inventory or Consumption (including Cost of Goods sold). So continuing with the above example,
assuming that all quantity of product A was sold, the total variance will have to be taken to COGS.

Account
COGS A/c                                Dr 2000
PRD Variances A/c                  Cr 2000
In this case, taking the Production Variance split originally to CO-PA becomes detrimental as these amounts are effectively
nullified (in terms of value) by the Actual Costing run and taken into either the Consumption accounts or Inventory Accounts.
Multi-level settlement in Actual Costing is able to allocate these variances to the final product that is sold.

Hence the original split postings remain at the respective material level whereas their reversal happens using another account. In
CO-PA, then COGS is already loaded with the proportional variance whereas the split is still redundantly shown as a cost.

The solution then is to not activate the Variance Split if Actual Costing is activated.

This simplification item thus becomes redundant in the wake of activation of Actual Costing

Kitting process: Now here is a scenario for which, I would like to say that I haven’t been able to find a solution… Kitting
process is one in which a Sales Order is created for an item that is basically a set of other items. The pricing is for the header
item whereas the supply is individual quantities of other items together. Technically, the first Sales Order item contains this
“header” material and the subsequent Sales Order items are linked to this first “header” item as the higher level item. The
pricing and billing is for this 1st item (the header material). The Delivery and Goods issue happens for the lower level items.

In Costing based CO-PA, it was possible to view the revenue and cost of goods sold (COGS) at the level of the header material
by using the “VPRS” condition type of the header level item to post the cost to CO-PA. However, in Account based CO-PA, the
posting of COGS happens alongside the Goods issue. The ACDOCA table has a field called MATNR (representing the Material
number) and a field called ARTNR (representing the CO-PA characteristic. But since both of these fields refer to the same Data
element, the system disallows different values to be stored in these two fields. Hence, inherently, it is impossible to capture the
header material as Product value for CO-PA while posting the COGS. This then is a big gap in being able to do the Profitability
Analysis of such kitted items.

The unification into Universal Journal hence does not support an effective Profitability Analysis for kitting process

Conclusion
The issues mentioned above are specific scenarios in which either the simplification item is redundant or the concerned process
is just not supported. However the larger benefits accruing from Account based CO-PA over-ride these pitfalls. Clearly, there is
a simplification and this simplification has a significant improvement in not just the period-end activity of reconciliation, but
also on the way users / customers see CO-PA. I would strongly recommend going with Account based CO-PA for every
S/4HANA implementation as the benefits outweigh the issues.
FollowLikeRSS Feed
Alert Moderator
Assigned Tags

 SAP S/4HANA Finance

 FIN Profitability Analysis

Similar Blog Posts

 Cost of Goods Sold Split in Make to Order Scenario (MTO) with SAP S/4HANA
By Randeep SinghAug 26, 2020
 Has Account Based CO-PA Evolved Enough to be Recommended in S/4HANA?
By Shakeel AhmedFeb 04, 2018
 Profitability Analysis in SAP S/4HANA and subsequently in Central Finance (CFIN)
By Nitin GuptaFeb 27, 2019
Related Questions
 Configuring CO-PA in S/4FIN
By Former MemberApr 29, 2016
  S/4HANA Margin Based COPA - Migrating from Costing Based COPA to Account Based COPA in
S/4HANA
By Ambarish GangulyMar 23, 2021
 Margin Analysis v/s Costing based COPA in S/4HANA
By Ranjani GuruswamyAug 13, 2020
Join the Conversation

SAP TechEd

Tune in for tech talk. Stay for inspiration. Upskill your future.

SAP BTP Learning Group

SAP Business Technology Platform Learning Journeys.

Coffee Corner

Join the new Coffee Corner Discussion Group.

5 Comments
You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.

Abhinav Sinha
August 24, 2018 at 5:07 pm

Hi Sriram,

This is a useful document to bring out at least one point which I had raised with SAP. So here are my comments.

1. COGS Split in Account-based COPA – It is true that with actual costing, the revaluated cost does not flow to
COPA at the cost component structure level (only at the header COGS level) and therefore the ultimate
reporting in COPA can be a little misleading. I had raised this issue with SAP over a year back and was
given an impression that in one of the future releases, actual costing will support this (that is, actual costing
run will pick up the breakup of COGS accounts). Doesn’t seem like we are heading that way. So for now, I
believe this is a strong reason to favor costing based COPA over account based.
2. Production Variance Split in Account-based COPA – I may not have understood correctly, but are you
implying that the COPA will show production variance value erroneously although it has been absorbed in
COGS? Well, if you make COGS and production variance (main account) also as cost element and assign it
to PSG in OKB9, then net effect in COPA will be nullified at the material level.
 3. Kitting in sales order – Although I haven’t really tried it, I believe that ARTNR can be different from MATNR.
With a simple enhancement, you should be able to override the default value of ARTNR from MATNR and
replace it with the header material.

Regards

Abhi
 Like 0
 Share

Sriram Sampath
Blog Post Author
August 26, 2018 at 4:59 pm

Hi Abhi,

Thanks for taking time to post the comment! Here are my replies to your points:

1. I don't necessarily imply the Costing  based COPA is better... just that we need to be aware of this small
inconvenience
2. Production variances: Well, if you have Actual Costing, the variance of lower level items get rolled up to the
higher level items thru multi-level settlement. Hence they get taken to the COGS of the FG even when the
Variances occur at lower level items. So taking the split of the variance to COPA is redundant because of
the following reasons:
i. the variance anyway gets nullified (conceptually) as it may be taken back to stock or COGS or
consumption during Actual Costing.
ii. More importantly, the variance at the time of settlement, even if taken to PSG will be taken at the
level of that material (say SFG). However after Actual Costing, the variance would have been rolled-
up at a higher level. Hence taking the variance split to COPA would completely mess up the
reporting.
3. ARTNR as a field is indeed different from MATNR. However they both have the same Data Element. And
since they are the same Data Element, the system does not allow different values for the two fields within
the same record. I already tried this derivation of the ARTNR from the header.

Regards

Sriram

 
 Like 0
 Share

Jarlei Nascimento Gonçalves

April 9, 2019 at 3:46 pm
Hi Sriram, I understood that COPA Costing is no longer supported in S4. But about historical information, do you
know it is possible to migrate to COPA Accounting?
 Like 0
 Share
Sriram Sampath
Blog Post Author
June 20, 2019 at 6:17 am

Hello Jarlei Nascimento Gonçalves,

I don't think that Costing based COPA is no longer supported in S/4HANA. You can still continue to use it. This will
be especially relevant when you want to bring statistical postings into COPA analyses.

As for migration to Account based COPA, I again do not think that there are any ready made tools for the same.
Such a migration will have to be planned as a special concept for each project. We would have to look at the
individual Value flows into Costing based COPA (from billing, FI, settlements, etc.) and then map them to the new
value flows in Account based COPA in the context of Universal Journal. Based on this concept then, we can define
the migration elements.

Regards

Sriram

 
 Like 0
 Share

john sun
September 12, 2019 at 9:04 pm

Hi Sririam,

Just try to do further discussion with you. Once actual costing activated, the variance will be reposted against
COGS. In COPA, we will only use the splitting COGS and variance to do analysis. Thus the original COGS and
variance will have a balance left there. those two GLs can be considered as statistical/interim GLs out of balance
sheet GLs. on the VPRS, it will be put as a statistical condition type without posting. How do you think?

Regards,

SAP Central Finance & CO (Secondary) Postings

133,996

In this blog the focus in on CO postings also called secondary postings which are generated out of COBK table from ECC
systems and are replicated via SLT. Error handling is via AIF however it is important to understand relevant steps, options and
how system works when the load is executed.

Below Business Transaction Types (VRGNG) are transferred with CO Secondary posting data transfer (till S/4HANA 2020)

 KAMV – Manual Cost Allocation

 KOAL – Actual Settlement of Internal Activity Allocation
  KOAO – Actual Settlement (Not for CO-PA scenario)
 KSI0 – Actual Cost Centre Split
 KSI1 – Actual Split Costs (Primary)
 KSI2 – Actual Split Costs (Secondary)
 KSI3 – Actual Split Costs Internal Activity Allocation
 KSII – Actual Price Calculation
 KZPI – Actual Overhead (Periodic)
 RKIU – Actual Overhead Assessment
 RKIV – Actual Overhead Distribution
 RKL – Actual Activity Allocation
 RKLN – Revaluation at Actual Price
 RKLT – Actual Template Allocation
 RKU1 – Repost Costs
 KZPR – Actual Overhead (Realtime)
 RKIL – Actual Inverse Activity Allocation
 RKS – Enter Statistical Key Figures
 RKLX – Predistribution of fixed costs
 KAZI – Actual cost centre accrual
 RKIB – Actual Periodic Repostings
 RKU2 – Repost revenue
 KTDA – COPA: TOP-DOWN: Actuals
 RRIU – Segment adjust.: Act. Assess.
 RRIV – Segment adjust.: Act. distrib.
 RKN – Actual non-alloc. activities
 KOLI – Collective order delivery
 RRIB – Seg. adjust.: Act.per.repost.
 RKU3 – Repost CO line items
 GPDP – Distribution Primary Costs
 GPDS – Distribution Secondary Costs
 JVIU – JV Actual assessment
 JVIV – JV Actual distribution
 JRIU – JV-Seg.adjustm.assessment
 JRIV – JV-Seg.adjustm.distribution

Any Primary CO document  (referred as COIN) is transferred along with FI document in the Initial Load as well as online
replication.

SAP post these documents to CFIN via below Functional Modules:

 FINS_CFIN_CO_CENTRAL_POSTING
o This updates the table ACDOCA rather COEP
o The related line item tables COEPL (for actual activity type) and COEPT (for actual price) are not updated
o Cost objects supported by this FM are:
 Production Order / Product Cost Collector / Internal Order / Maintenance Order / QM Order (OR*)
 Cost Centre (KS*) / Activity Type (KL*)
 CO-PA Segment (EO* & AO*)
o For other cost objects such as Project, Sales Order etc., BAdI ES_FINS_CFIN_CO_INTERFACE can be
implemented to map cost objects from source systems to cost objects in Central Finance system
 FINS_CFIN_CO_POSTING_BULK

In addition, it is clear that with S/4HANA SAP supports only Margin Analysis while source ECC systems might be using Cost
based COPA or Account based COPA

CO Preparation Step
   

What happens in CO Preparation step?

 System reads the table in source system – VCFIN_SOURCE_SET

        
 When initial load is marked as completed system starts capturing the documents (FI & CO) for real time replication
o For FI it sends to – CFIN_ACCHD. this is not the dsicussion topic for this blog
o For CO it sends (after transformation) to CFIN_COPA with document number referring to COBK
 System converts CO-PA line items and characteristics into the key-value pair structure in the CFIN_COPA
table
 System starts storing references of the original documents for the reposting documents using the RKU3 business
transaction
 Systems starts modifying the CFIN_CO_ADD table, moving elements from the COKEY table into the
CFIN_CO_ADD table

During this step the below tables that are updated are:

 CFIN_CO_ADD  –         For CO Document additional data mainly the cost object information
 CFIN_COPA  –             For the CO-PA data of the relevant CO Document being transferred
 CFIN_JOB_LOG_CO –     For logs the CO Initial load preparation steps
 CFIN_MIG_LOG_CO –    For CO Initial Load execution log

If source system is SAP S/4HANA, the table below is also populated:

 CFIN_COEP_ADD Transfer Table for CO Line Item Extended Fields

When SAP starts transferring CO data from SAP ECC system via CFIN to SAP S/4HANA the below tables are updated:

 CFIN_COPA
 CFIN_CO_ADD

These tables are used during ongoing replication as well as the initial load. During the initial load preparation step, these tables
are filled with information related to the CO document that is within the scope of the initial load, based on the set up of the
company codes in VCFIN_SOURCE_SET. Once the preparation step is complete, they are used to fill the values for CO online
replication document.

If in any case it is needed to undo everything done in CO Preparation step, it can be done:

Transaction – FINS_CFIN_CO_DEL_SRC
 

When the CO Initial Load starts via SLT system reads the CO tables – COBK, COEP, CFIN_COPA based on the filters
stated in SLT and then starts sending the data. Duration of load can be split into TWO parts:

 Data read – It takes time to read the data in these tables and if the volume is in millions/billions the time can span in
several hours like 12+ and if data volume is limited it can get complete in few hours
 Replication – CO documents are replicated via AIF. After data read step replication starts and duration depends on
system performance and volume of data.

Skipping CO-PA related information during CO secondary posting replication

SAP gives option to skip the CO-Pa related postings when data transfer happen to CFIN but it should be a business decision and
close consultation is required with business in order to take care of possible side effects. If its decided to skip the CO-PA
information the SKIP_COPA method needs to be implemented in the BAdI BAdI_FIN_CFIN_DOCUMENT in the source
system.

Check SAP Note – 2645712 – Skip COPA in CFIN CO Document

Clean-up of tables

During the replication their might be huge volume of data being accumulated in below tables so the periodic clean-up is
important.

 CFIN_COPA
 CFIN_CO_ADD

Execute this program –    FIN_CFIN_CO_CLEANUP in source system

When clean up happens system considers below:

  Whether the relevant CO document has already been transferred – Based on the SLT log table entry for the document
and
 Whether the retention period set for the relevant company code in the VCFIN_SOURCE_SET has already been passed.

Example of how CO tables store data (in ECC) with CFIN scenario:

CO Document # 301212848

Entry in COBK (01 line)

Lines items of same document in COEP (08 lines)

Entries in CFIN_COPA for same document (77 lines)

This is how you can plan for the CO data  – Initial Load and Replication in CFIN project.
Read here more about the table cleanup process for FI & CO
Hope you get the details of CO Initial load and replication along with some insights as how this process works behind the scene
within systems.