Account determination: GBB error and an asset receipt that touched nothing
Material 4712 (material type HALB) has valuation class 3000, standard price, plant 1010, company code 1000. A planner posts a goods issue of 50 PC to cost center 4110 with movement type 201. The system refuses with 'Account determination for entry GBB ____ 3000 not possible'. Goods issues of the same material to production orders (movement type 261) post without error. Separately, a purchase order with account assignment category A for a laptop was received, and the requester is asking why the goods receipt did not create any financial document at all. The consultant's proposal for the first problem is to copy the account used for 261 into the missing entry.
1. Explain how to diagnose the GBB error precisely, and evaluate the consultant's proposal.
Read the worked answer
The message names the transaction key (GBB, the offsetting entry for inventory postings) and the valuation class (3000). The blank is the account modification, which is not typed by the user: it comes from the movement type's configuration (OMJJ, field 'account modification'). So the diagnosis is:
- In OMJJ, read the account modification for 201 and for 261. They are different values, which is exactly why 261 works and 201 does not.
- In OBYC, open GBB and check which modifications have a rule for valuation class 3000.
- The missing row is GBB + the modification belonging to 201 + valuation class 3000 + the relevant general modification (e.g. plant/valuation grouping code).
On the proposal: copying the 261 account is a reasonable starting point but not a decision. The account modification exists to separate business purposes; if the client wants cost-center consumption and production consumption on the same P&L account, copy it - but confirm that with the controller rather than assuming. Two technical traps: the target account must accept a cost center (in S/4HANA the GL account must be usable as a cost element and its field status must not suppress the cost center), otherwise the posting still fails after you fix OBYC; and valuation class 3000 may be shared by many materials, so the new rule affects all of them.
Also verify the valuation grouping code: if plant 1010 is assigned to a different grouping code than the plant the consultant tested in, the rule will appear to exist and still not be found.
2. For the asset purchase order: why did the receipt create no financial document, and what would you check to decide whether that is correct?
Read the worked answer
With account assignment category A the item is not posted to stock; the debit target is the asset, taken from the account assignment, not from account determination. But a GR only produces a financial document if it is valuated. If the item carries the 'goods receipt non-valuated' indicator (or is a service/text item), the receipt is a pure logistical event: quantity and, if relevant, the asset assignment are recorded, and the FI document is created at invoice time when the asset is debited.
What to check:
- The PO item: account assignment A, asset number filled, and the GR non-valuated indicator.
- The asset master: it must exist, be in the right asset class, and the capitalization rules of that class decide whether the invoice debits the asset or an AUC.
- Whether the receipt was valuated: if it was, an FI document debiting the asset (or AUC) must exist, and the offset is GR/IR clearing. If it was not, the asset is only debited on the invoice.
Judgement: non-valuated GR for asset items is a legitimate design (no accrual until invoice), but it means the asset is not recognized at receipt and there is no GR/IR balance. Pick one policy per asset class and document it; mixing both within one class makes period-end accruals impossible to reconcile.