Count on 31 December, movements in January
On 31 December the warehouse counted material 4711 in storage location 0001 at 480 PC. The physical inventory document was created the same day with count date 31 December, but the counter entered the result only on 4 January. In between, a goods issue of 40 PC to a cost center was posted on 2 January and a goods receipt of 20 PC against a purchase order on 3 January. Book stock on 31 December was 500 PC. Material 4711 is valuated at standard price 12.00 EUR per PC; current book stock in the system is 480 PC. When the count was entered, the system proposed a difference of -20 PC, and the warehouse clerk insists the count was exact and the system is wrong.
1. Reconstruct the numbers so that the -20 PC proposal is either confirmed or refuted. What would the proposal have been if the goods movements had been blocked during the count?
Read the worked answer
The system does not compare the count to today's book stock. It reconstructs the book inventory as of the count date by reversing the movements posted after that date.
- Current book stock = 500 - 40 (issue) + 20 (receipt) = 480 PC.
- Book stock at count date = 480 + 40 - 20 = 500 PC.
- Count 480 PC versus book at count date 500 PC → difference -20 PC. The proposal is correct.
The trap is the naive comparison: 480 counted against 480 in the system looks like zero difference, and that is what the clerk is doing. The -20 is the 40 PC issued and the 20 PC received after the count, netted out.
If goods movements had been blocked for the count (posting block indicator in the material master plant data, or a plant-level block), the issue and the receipt would have been rejected and book stock at count time would have been 480 PC, giving zero difference. That is the cleaner control, but it is decided before the count, not afterwards.
Before posting, check that no further movements slipped in after the count entry: the system re-checks the book inventory when the difference is posted, so late movements change the proposed difference again.
2. The controller asks what the -20 PC does to the books, given standard price 12.00 EUR, and whether a recount is warranted. Answer both.
Read the worked answer
Posting the difference removes 20 PC of unrestricted stock:
- Stock account (transaction key BSX, valuation class of 4711): credit 240.00 EUR.
- Offsetting account (transaction key DIF, inventory difference): debit 240.00 EUR, i.e. an expense.
Because the material is at standard price, the 240.00 EUR cannot change the price and must hit the difference account in full. With moving average price the stock account would also be reduced by 20 x current MAP, and the MAP itself would stay unchanged as long as stock does not fall to zero - a distinction worth stating, because it explains why MAP materials can absorb count differences with no P&L impact.
Recount: yes, if the business has a recount policy for differences above a threshold. Use the recount function on the physical inventory document (set the recount indicator, print a new count list, freeze the original count) rather than changing the counted quantity in the document by hand. Overwriting the count quantity destroys the audit trail and, in a stock shortage investigation, the evidence. Also confirm before posting that the 40 PC issue was not itself the error - a cost-center issue booked to the wrong storage location would explain a real 20 PC gap plus a valuation problem elsewhere.