Skip to Content

U.S. Tax Reporter Year End 2016

Hello community,
This is our U.S. Tax Reporter Year End 2016 blog.
If you have questions about 2016 Year-End reporting, you can post it here.
This blog will be updated with tips and SAP Notes related to this subject.

2356352 – U.S. Tax Reporter Year End 2016 Announcement
2351628 – U.S. Tax Reporter Year End 2016
Thank you,
Kind regards,

Graziela Dondoni

You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.
  • Does SAP have any plan to add the 16-digit W-2 verification code that the IRS plans to strengthen anti-fraud efforts?  I don't see it in any of the 2016 W-2 form tested in our system.   From IRS Tax Tip #10.

    Thank you.

  • Hi Hello, Graziela and followers,

    The following exception error is occurring when we try to generate 941 and other quarterly forms  after note 2407757 (Wrong value in lines 5a through 5d for Form 941) was applied. Can you please let me know are there any subsequent note to be applied to resolve this issue?

    Exception Error: The FORM call for RE5UTI is incorrect : The actual parameter (number 3) has different data type in the PERFORM requested by FORM "RE5UTI"  in program RPCTRCU0


  • Graziela,

    Do know if SAP is working on the 2 1099R errors below?

    "We also applied the Phase III note and are still having the sequencing number issue in the mag media file for 1099Rs.

    Also, the box numbers on the 1099R, employer copy, are repeating in boxes where the box description flows to a second line  (Boxes 2b, 3, 5, & 6).  We did not have this error after applying the Phase II note.

    For example, Box 2b is:

    2b Taxable amount
    2b not determined"

    Thank you,



      Hi-  We worked with SAP on a note for the record sequencing issue for 1099R- SAP Note 2409387- they released this to us as a pilot note- it did fix the record sequencing issue.  However, after Phase III we noticed that in the employee 1099R form-  box 13 (State payer box) is blank and is not populating data.   Does anyone else have this issue?    Thanks.



        Hi Paula,

        We opened an OSS message for the 1099R mag file record sequencing error and SAP's response is to add us to the Pilot note as well.  Since you have added this pilot note, have you found any new issues that this note might have caused?

        Thank you,



      Hi Linda,

      We also have the second issue you mentioned where the box description flows to a second line. We have an OSS message opened with SAP and will post in this area if they supply a fix. In the meantime, we copied the form and made the corrections ourselves. Please let us know if you get a fix from SAP first!

      Thank you,



        Hi Mark,

        We did not get a fix from SAP.  Their response was this is the new format that they deliver and this is the standard. We created a custom Z form correcting the errors.

        Thank you,


  • After upgrading to Enhancement Pack 7 and applying the year end support packs, we are no longer getting the street address (P0006-STRAS), City (P0006-ORT01) and State (P0006-STATE) on the W-2 forms and mag media files.  The zip code is still there and does print on the forms and in the files.  I have checked the PCL4 and the data is not there at all now.  Is it possible some configuration was overwritten?  Can someone point me to where this is set up to pull into the forms and reports. 

    • Hi Debbie,  I saw you gave Note 2385169 as a solution for this.  Is this related to Table T5UX9 Type of Information 01 fields being ignored?  We're missing Contact Name, Contact Phone, Kind of Employer, Preparer Code, etc. that we have in T5UX9.  We applied Note 2387893 but it didn't seem to help.
      Lou Ann

  • Hello -

    We are having an issue with our W-2 totals matching the payroll results and was wondering if anyone else may have come across this issue.  It appears that if we have an IT0221 where we have adjusted wages as a NEGATIVE for an employee, that this IT0221 is not being considered for the W-2.  It's actually in the TR error log as "negative amounts converted to zero" --- and this is for both wages and taxes to a tax authority.  The payroll results appear to have the correct total for the year (including this negative adjustment), but the W-2 is dropping it.

    Thanks for any input anyone may have as we are sort of in a panic mode with the number of IT0221 adjustments that we do throughout the year. 🙁

  • Encountering the same issue as Debbie above - after applying year-end support packs, the street address, city, and state fields are not being populated on W-2 forms or magnetic media files, but the ZIP code is still there.

    • Well I'm sorry you are having the issue too, but glad I am not alone.  Please let me know if you find a resolution and I will do the same.  I have searched the SAP Support Portal but can't find anything that will resolve the issue.  We have also applied the Year End Phase II and III notes but still have the issue.


  • Hi Graziela Dondoni and Others,
    We have two isolated systems, each on 608 HRSP 30 and US CLC 33.  The Phase 2 and correction notes are all applied up to date.

    One system has been updated when needed to keep the Production system operational (in general Finance, MM, HR) over the last couple of months.  The second system is a Production copy as of October, and has only had the HRSP and CLC, notes, etc. applied.

    Any TEST W-2 generation works fine in the second system.  However, any type of W-2 TEST run in TR in the first system gives a short dump for a raised exception "OPTION_DOES_NOT_EXIST" in program SAPLHR99S00_TOOLS.  The exception occurs specifically in function HR_99S_LEGAL_INTERPRET_OPT on line 34, due to no valid entry found in table T5F99K1, because the value in im_option is 'TEXSE'.

    Any help is appreciated!!

    • Hi Mark,

      We had a similar issue after applying Note 2371705 - Year End 2016 Phase II for U.S. Tax Reporter.  We received Runtime Errors with class CL_HRPAYUS_TR_EXSE.

      Here's what we did to resolve the problem:
      1.  De-Implement 2371705
      2.  Apply Note 2342505 - TR: Box 16 code E for Form W-2 PR does not consider amounts from multiple tax companies for limit check.  (This note introduces class CL_HRPAYUS_TR_EXSE.)  Be sure to complete the manual configuration which includes the TEXSE options.
      3.  Re-apply 2371705.

      Hope that works for you.

  • Good morning -

    We have 3 errors on the Maryland Mag Media file.

    1)  The RV record MW508 filed must have the NAICS Code.  This happened in 2015 as well, and figured there would be a fix this year.  Any ideas on where to configure this?

    2)  RV record partial file indicator for W2s is blank
    3)  RV record partial file indicator for 1099's is blank.

    Both of these appear to be new for 2016.



      We file to Maryland and use the "Maintain Additional Information for tax Reporting" for these codes and then link the fields in the form HR_F_MMREF_1_MD for the RV record.  Hope this helps!


  • We have implemented Online W-2 functionality available in Note 2379107, where UTREL parameter "DEFAULT" is set to "3" to output both paper and online W-2 form if employee does not elect. We are not offering online W-2 election, but will be printing paper forms for all employees, and also making the online form available in Employee Central ESS.

    After generating the productive W-2 run for a Tax Company, online forms were available for all employees.  However, if we generate a W-2 correction for one employee, then the W-2 for that employee is the only one available in online spool.  The online form for the other employees in Tax Company are no longer available.

    We have reported to SAP.  Is anyone else experiencing this situation?   SAP suggested deleting PCL4 results and reprocessing productive run for Tax Company, but that is not a good long term work around.

    • Hi Cindy, we are experiencing the same issue now. SAP released a note for this as I'm sure you are aware already. I’m wondering if anyone has applied the note after the Online forms were deleted and knows whether the note provides a way for those forms to be regenerated (I can’t think this will happen auto-magically); or knows of a way to regenerate them? We are considering running program RPCTRPU0 via SA38, but unsure of the selection parameters to use. How did you get the missing forms back?



  • Hello community,

    Has been posted at Product rollout section from SAP service market place, the link for a new video and the link to the online “Online W-2 User guide”.

    This new video provides you an overview of the Online W-2 functionality which enables you to make the Form W-2 available online reducing your administrative and printing costs. This video also shows the Online W-2 enhancements.

    Roger Oliveira

  • Hi All,

    Has a Note been released to fix the 1099R sequence numbering on positions 500 to 507 on form HR_F_1099R_TAPE?

    **Another thing, I have been trying to generate a Correction 1099R with zero amount to eliminate original remittance for an employee that should not have been included on the original run. Program is coded to reject amounts in > $10 even in correction run. The only information I found was creating constant TR99R on V_T511k with value 0, but that did not worked. Has any body have this issue?



      We worked with SAP to get note 2409387 released to fix the sequence number issue with the 1099R tape.   But we still have an issue after Phase III with box 13 of the employee 1099R form not filling with data-  (state) have you applied phase III?  We have an urgent incident with SAP but we have not gotten a fix for box 13.   Thanks

    • Hi Paula,

      SAP made available note 2409387 for us and the error was corrected. We implemented Phase III but we fill Box 1 and Box 2b (taxable amount not determined). We do not whithhold any tax at state level so I can not tell if its not working. What im having trouble now is getting Box 2 checked.


  • Hello,
    In our system, the table T5UTX – Tax ceilings and rates in SAP does not contain the 2017 rates for tax type 10.  Has this already been released for all states.  Is there an SAP note that is yet to be released/updated (we have already applied Q4 2016 functional changes and Additional Changes for 2016 Year End) .

    Please advise,

    • Hi Sonia,

      Please check your current version of BSI Tax Factory.  We upgraded BSI Tax Factory 10.0 to Cyclic N back in November and have since applied all Cyclic N TUBS through TUB 97.  The 2017 tax ceilings are now in table T5UTX.  TUBS 98 and 99 have also been released to date (01/23/2017) and contain additional 2017 updates which we are in the process of applying.




  • Hi Graziela,

    Can you please confirm that Puerto Rico approved the SAP version of W-2PR?  I would presume that they would prior to SAP releasing the form, but our Payroll department was requesting confirmation.



  • Hi,

    MO SUI reporting using the EFW2 format is not accepted by MO without modifications.  You have to strip off all records (RA. RE, RT, etc.) except the RS records and upload only the RS records.  MO indicates that the extension should be .dat.


    Don Weber


  • Hello,


    I am running my state W2 mag media files but it does not seem to be creating the mag media.  I am in tax reporter, W2 and "generate mag magnetic tape" is chosen. Anything I am missing?




  • We are currently having an issue when running our Q4/2016 SUI Report. The amounts on the report are all double what we are expecting. We know the numbers are double because we have verified the results against the Wage Type Reporter for the SUI Wage Type. Has anyone experienced this issue?

    Also, while trying to debug this issue, we attempted to recreate the scenario in our sandbox. In our sandbox we are on Support Pack A9. There is a bug in the release that is causing PU19 - SUI report to dump. There is a conversion error on field TAXTY in program RPCTRCU0 / RPCTRCU4 form GET_EXPERIENCE_RATE. They changed the conversion from N(2) to C(2). This is creating an error.  We have only applied A8 and A9 in our sandbox. Since A8 and A9 is not in our DEV, QAS, or PRD system we are not having the dump issue... I am going to send this issue to SAP. Potentially note 2407757 created this issue.


  • We are experiencing a problem with Puerto Rico.  The Phase 2 note delivered this code:

    Method: split_exempt_code.

    *   Save in internal table all exempt codes Tax Form Fields
    LOOP AT ct_frmfld INTO ls_frmfld
    WHERE pernr mv_pernr
    AND txfrm mv_txfrm
    AND txcmp mv_txcmp
    AND txitm(3gc_tax_form_field-code_init
    AND value 0.

    The line bolded above allows the system to process field T140 since we have values calculated for T140 (GTL) and that amount is being picked up in this code and placed into TXA1 (Box 16 amount) even when the person does not meet the criteria for Box 16 to be filled in.  I will report this as an incident to SAP to hopefully resolve urgently.  But wanted to share as well.

    If anyone else has already run into this and has created an incident/has a pilot note released to them I would appreciate knowing.

    Tawnya Willits



      I have opened a Very High incident with SAP, requesting that they add code to skip Tax Form Field T140 (Group Term Life) as it is not an exempt field and therefore should not be processed through the logic that  comes after the select above.  They are working on a fix today.

      You may want to check your Puerto Rico Box 16 numbers if any of your employees have $$ for Group Term Life as Box 16 could be wrong.

  • Hi Everyone,

    Can you tell me what the Software Vendor Code is for SAP?  Our North Carolina W-2 electronic file submission is failing because we don't have this code in our file.  It's a 4-digit code that goes into position 20 of the RA record of the file.  The code is issued by the National Association of Computerized Tax Processors (NACTP).  Their website is

    The field is blank in the file.  I don't think we have had this issue with any other state so far.



      • FYI,

        Since the RA record is optional for NC, we just removed that line from the file in order to upload and file the NC W-2 mag media as a workaround.



      I think in the past when we've run into this issue and the state we are submitting to doesn't require the RA record, we've modified the RA record to send a code of 98 (in-house) instead of 99 (vendor) since the vendor code is only expected when the code = 99.

    • Hi Larry,

      As far as I know this code is not necessary and this is not mandatory.
      As per the requirement:

      RA Submitter Record Information: The National Association of Computerized Tax Processors (NACTP) code is only needed for companies that sell their software to others. Companies that develop their own software should not request an NACTP code.

      Hope this helps.

    • Larry


      The chair person @ NACTP wrote me: In order to correct the problem, SAP will need to contact NACTP (just as you did initially) and then we can assign them an ID.  Currently, SAP does not have an ID.  It may be helpful for SAP to know that they do not need to be a member of NACTP to be assigned an ID (although SAP is more than welcome to apply for membership if they choose to do so).  Please let me know if you have any other questions.


      • Larry

        Just received another email from the chair person @ NACTP: I just found out another piece of information relating to this issue.  Apparently, NC does not require the RA record (making the need for a vendor ID not applicable); however, when testing with NC, the state was requiring the RA record.  NC realized their error and has now fixed the problem.  Long story short…neither you nor SAP should need a vendor ID.


        • Our payroll administrator changed the code from 99 to 98 and was able to successfully submit the file.  We also understand that SAP is updating the TR program to default 98 instead of 99.

          Thanks to John, Graziela, Tawnya and Anthony for your input and help.

  • Hell Everyone,

    This is the first time we are creating PR MMMREF File using HR_F_MMREF_S_PR.

    We have Maintained View: V_T5UX6 for Maintain ranges for Puerto Rico W-2/W-2C control number

    Our issue is related to Control Number not getting populated on Loc 356. its mapped to TCNR.

    What are we missing ?






      Control numbers only populate on a production run, not on a test run.  Is this on a production run?
      Are you certain you have updated V_T5UX6 for year 2016 and have the control numbers entered for tax form 1 W-2 (and not for 2 W-2C)?

      FYI - We have not performed our production run yet for Puerto Rico due to an issue with Box 16 when a person has $$ in Group Term Life (those dollars were mistakenly being placed in box 16).  I have a Very High incident open with SAP and they are working on a fix today.


    Has anyone else had an issue with the OR W2 Mag Media file not formatting correctly?  Our file has all of the records on one long continuous line.  The RA/RE/RW/RS records all run together and are not reported on separate lines.  Can anyone tell me how to correct the formatting or do we have to manually go line by line and separate?


        Hi Juli,

        We had the same issue with Oklahoma and Iowa.  Adding a CRLF just before the start of each record code (RA/RE/RW/RS, etc) resolved the problem.  I used Notepad++ to record a macro where I started at position 1 of the first line, then scrolled to the right to position 513 and then pressed Enter (creating the CRLF value).  Then I replayed the macro multiple times.  That process quickly formatted the document.




  • Hi community,

    Some specifications for customer base under Missouri Employment Security law

    Customer reporting State Unemployment Insurance quarterly contribution and wage report with MODES (Missouri Division of Employment Security) are required to use ICESA format.

    Employers registered as a bulk filer, must use the ICESA format to upload the report and wage information for multiple companies. Authority has programmed their new system to accept only RS record for SSA/EFW2 (MMREF-1) format. In addition, multiple tax companies with a single file, upload using MMREF/EFW2 format which is not accepted online (externally). They do accept the MMREF format with multiple tax companies as an internal upload if employers submit a CD-RW by mail, but only with RS record. We are working with authority to make them update their Specification book. Once authority makes the change, SAP will update the EFW2/MMREF format.

    Kind regards,

  • Received error when uploading the PA W2 mag media file to the PA website.  Tax team stated issue was because the RW record should not have been included on the file.  Has anyone else ran into this problem?  Is there a way in config to setup the RW record to not report on the file?  I have seen several notes on here about stripping other records types from a file but I am guessing this is once the file has been created.  I was curious if there an option I can setup so the record will not report on the file so we don't have to strip?


  • I believe I saw where this blog would end but I wanted to ask is there another blog where we can list an questions regarding W2c or other reporting issues to get a group response?

  • Another W-2 – related blog would be helpful.  Payroll just brought a W-2 issue to my attention today:

    When W-2s were run, some employees were included with the message “Payroll result ignored; result after created after control record.”

    These employees had IT0211 adjustments for 2016 keyed in January 2017, after the first 2017 payrolls were run but before W-2s were printed in Production mode.  The adjustments were not reflected in their W-2 values when they were printed.

    Payroll says this was not an issue in the past since they often keyed IT0211 adjustments for the prior year after the first payrolls have been run for the new year, and the W-2s printed correctly.  Has anyone else seen a similar issue starting this year?  Is there a resolution to updating the W-2 or will these adjustments come through when printing forms W-2c?



  • Hi Everyone,

    We are having issues uploading the magnetic media file in AccuWage for employees with foreign addresses.  Position 148 - 170 State/Province is not being populated. I found note: 849255 - Error in province of residence on RL-1 and RL-2.  However, this note is for SAP_HR 600 and we are 608.

    Please let me know if you came across this issue and what was your solution.



  • Hello everyone,

    Do you know if the Form 941 PDF was updated in Phase I note 2360637? We have a PDF version HR_F_941_14, but it is not matching what we see currently on the IRS website. Line 11 has been modified for 'Qualified small business payroll tax credit for increasing research activities. Attach Form 8974', and lines 13-15 have been added to the first page. The revision date is 1-2017.

    Thanks in advance for any help.

    Beth Matthews




      IT was updated in note 2459608 TR Form 941 FED and Form 941 PR update for 2017, but when you try to active the form, it generate error because some field don't exist.