Skip to Content
Product Information
Author's profile photo Graziela Dondoni

TaxFactory 11.0

Hello community,

Update on 03.05.2022:

Important change with US HCM Tax Calculation and BSI TaxFactory 11 Cyclic H. Apply at the earliest HotNews SAP Note 3088446 (BSI: Updates to TaxFactory 11.0 reverse engine processing) to your payroll systems. It is required for BSI TaxFactory 11 Cyclic H.

Blog Reverse Tax Engine – Payroll USA

———————————————————————————————————————————

BSI TaxFactory and TaxFactory SaaS released version 11.0 is available.

After our partner BSI has extended the maintenance for their offering/Product BSI TaxFactory 10.0 up to April 30,2021. SAP has also decided to provide support for BSI TaxFactory 10.0 up to April 30, 2021.

Regardless of the extended support period for BSI TaxFactory 10, SAP strongly recommends not to postpone your upgrade to BSI TaxFactory 11 and still plan to complete the upgrade during this year.

As announced on BSI website JAVA/Tomcat 32bits is not supported anymore by BSI after TaxFactory 11.0 cyclic C and TaxFactory 10.0 cyclic X.3. For any query about this, please contact BSI Support.

Upgrade 
your payroll system to the corresponding BSI TaxFactory 11.0 product way before the decommissioning of BSI TaxFactory 10.0 support.
There are NO options to extend the support for TaxFactory 10.0 after the decommissioning date.

If you have any questions about BSI TaxFactory 11.0, you can post it here. I´m going to keep this updated with tips, best practices, and, SAP notes.

Important SAP notes:

2760305 – BSI: Tax Factory 11.0 – Main Note

As a prerequisite, you must apply the following SAP Notes:

2760918– BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 – DDIC Changes

2763228 – BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 – Function Modules Changes

2770832 – BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 – General Technical Changes

2780204 – BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 – Changes required for TaxFactory SaaS

2868617 – BSI: Tax Profile Factory SaaS correction

2780716 – BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 – BSI Tools

2790902 – BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 – Payroll Driver Changes

2844516 – BSI: TaxFactory 10.0 – Additional Configuration Options While in Transition to BSI TaxFactory 11.0

2852878 – BSI: Technical Correction changes

2854888 – BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 – Configuration Option

2860747 – BSI: Tax Factory 11.0 – system not able to run TaxFactory SaaS

2864644 – BSI: Tax data synchronization error during transition from TaxFactory 10.0 to TaxFactory 11.0

2855926 – BSI: internat error US_UPDATE_TXIT_FROM_TAXES in BSI Tax Calculation

2865938 – BSI: Tax Factory 11.0 – system continues using TaxFactory 10.0 after upgrade – SaaS

2876817 – V_BTXRATE & V_BTXOVFR: not saving Experience Rate and incorrect number of digits for Tax Type

2853869 – TAX: Additional withholding not considered and Regular wages classified as Supplemental

2878074 –  BSI: Update to BTXRATE reader class usage

2904103 –  BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 – Missing Changes in Structures for Release 600

2915653 – BSI: Unemployment Override not Being Considered on TaxFactory

2948446 – BSI: installation instructions for TaxLocator 11.0.

3008339 – TAX: Community Safety Payroll Taxes for Eugene

3013127 – BSI: Enablement of Tax Type 106 for Concurrent Employment

Important:

Before applying SAP note 2915653, you must apply note 2844646 – Ignore the local class definition, implementation, definition deffered, definition load , definition local friends changes this notes contains a fix to SNOTE transaction and without this you will get an error.

2919499 – TAX: Experience Rates Calculated Incorrectly in Tax Result Log

2920181 – TAX: TaxFactory Version Source in USVERS

2934419 – TAX: TaxLocator not proposing Tax Areas in TaxFactory 11

2944465 – TAX: Full refund of Unemployment tax when using BTXRATE override

Further irformation about the installation can be found on:

2844034 – TaxFactory 11.0 – On-Premise Installation

2843977 – BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 – SaaS Installation

2948446 – BSI: installation instructions for TaxLocator 11.0.

2977383 – BSI: Changes in Sync Tool Tax due to incorrect State

2988140 – IT0208: Performance issue when using Tax Locator

Frequently Asked Questions – FAQ

 

1) Which are the options for transition from TaxFactory 10.0 to TaxFactory 11.0?

  • In transaction SU3, define the user parameter BSI_TF_VERSION with value 11.
  • In transaction PE03, configure the BSI Tax Factory Version (10BSI) feature with value 11.
  • In transaction SM30, open table view Customer values for configuration options (V_T5F99K2) and set the value of constant BSI TAX FACTORY: CUSTOMIZING SWITCH (BSITF) to 11.Once your company switches to TaxFactory 11.0, you may no longer use TaxFactory 10.0, nor may you switch back to it later.

2) Which is the start date to be used in table V_T5F99K2 and constant BSITF?

The start date should be 01.01.1800, once you decide to upgrade the system to TaxFactory 11.0, as the system should use the version 11.0 for all the tax calculation, even in retroactive scenarios, where TaxFactory 10.0 were used.

 

3) When there is a negative value the system is not calculating taxes after the upgrade to TaxFactory 11.0, what is the cause?

Check if the Reverse Tax Engine is turned ON in your system, table V_T5F99K2, constant ADTMD, further information can be found on the KBA 2984562 – Reverse Tax Engine TaxFactory 11.0

4) Filing status/Marital status is missing or not updated in T5UTK. What should I do?

As T5UTK has delivery class C, you can update this table manually. To find the filling status that should be update in T5UTK you can go to MYBSI Portal (https://mybsiconnect.force.com/CustomLogin) with your credentials:

· Select Product Maintenance > TaxFactory ->  11.0
· Under Maintenance select Cyclic Bulletins -> BSI TaxFactory 11.0 Cyclic Bulletin
-> Bulletin Data nformation

 

5) There is a syntax error in LPBSUD01 after implementing SAP note 2915653, what is the cause and what are the steps fix it?

This is because SAP note 2844646 is not implemented in your system, or was applied after note 2915653.

To solve this SAP note 2844646 must be applied.

Detailed steps:

1) Perform the de-implementation of SAP note 2915653
2) Apply note 2844646
3) Retrieve the version of objects LPBSUD01 -> To do it go to transaction SE38 select LPBSUD01 -> Utilitiles -> version -> version management -> select version prior the note implementation
4) Re-apply note 2915653

 

6) Is it possible to extend the validity date of TaxFactory 10.0?

There is no extension to TaxFactory 10.0. Support for BSI TaxFactory 10.0 will be decommissioned on April 30, 2021.

7) How Local Reciprocity is working in BSI Tax Factory 11.0?
Detailed information is available on the KBA 2973907 BSI TaxFactory Local Reciprocity Process (Basic Local Reciprocity and Advanced Local Reciprocity)

 

8) I don´t see the WF parameter in BSI script, why?

The parameter WF: 0,0 is not being sent in all scenarios in the BSI script, as BSI considers it as WF: 0,0 if there isn´t this parameter in the BSI script. Parameter WF: 1,1 or 1,2 is always being sent in case the employee has an IT0210 record that follows the new W-4 Form Model for year 2020.

For further information, please check the KBA:
2985123 – The Parameter WF on the BSI Interface


9) Parameter WF is not in the correct line in BSI interface in TaxFactory 11.0?

There is a change in TaxFactory 11.0 cyclic B the parameter WF should be placed in other line in BSI script. This change has been delivered in the W-4 notes for States, after you apply the notes this parameter will be send in the line BSI expects to do the calculation for FED taxes.

The change in the parameter has been delivered in SAP notes:
2895426 – Prerequisite objects for SAP Note 2878657
2878657 – 2020 State Withholding Tax Calculation – Based on the State (or State-equivalent) Withholding Certificate (SAP_HR) – Phase I

For further information, please check the KBA:
2985123 – The Parameter WF on the BSI Interface

10) After the Support Package the system is calculating higher taxes when employee has IT0161, why?

After SAP notes 2888094 TAX: Lock-in letters override for W-4 exempt and 2880846 TAX: Lock-in letters not overriding New W-4 is now considering the values of IT0161 and now the system is calculating more tax, which is expected.

Refer to KBA for further details 2984188– Tax calculation for an employee with both IT0161 and IT0210.

Regards,

Graziela

Assigned Tags

      526 Comments
      You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.
      Author's profile photo Sheetika Bhat
      Sheetika Bhat

      Hello. Can anyone please tell me the steps which i should follow for upgrade to bsi 11 from 10.
      As i read many blogs and its confusing

      If someone can please suggest steps to go from start to end that will be very helpfull.
      we have to upgrade asap as its already late.

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Sheetika,

      The main details of the upgrade can be checked on note 2760305 - BSI: Tax Factory 11.0 - Main Note.

      For the upgrade itself, you can refer to one of the below notes, depending if your enterprise has an On-Premise or SaaS installation:
      2843977 - BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 - SaaS Installation
      2844034 - TaxFactory 11.0 - On-Premise Installation

      Kind Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Greg Zifchock
      Greg Zifchock

      Oregon has approved new withholding taxes for Metro District CIty and Multnomah County. Will SAP be releasing Notes to support these? The taxes are subject to Live or Work requirements.

      Employees could be subject to multiple authorities for taxation how would these be configured?

      Example:

      We have employees that are subject to the Tri-Met District tax (OR01) but now they could also be subject to Multnomah (OR07) and Metro District City (?? SAP creating authority?)

      Thanks for any advise.

      Greg

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Greg,

      Please refer to the following KBA for details on this change: 3060362 - Multnomah County and Metro District City Oregon Taxes.

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Chandramouly Veeramony
      Chandramouly Veeramony

      Hello Carlos Accorsi  the KBA 3060362 appears not available for public use; not sure if it has been withdrawn. Could you let us know?

      Thanks

      Chandra

      Author's profile photo Graziela Dondoni
      Graziela Dondoni
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Chandra,

      We are checking what is happening with the KBA.
      Meantime I´m copying the information from it here:

      BSI Has released TUB 53 for TaxFactory 11d that will allow it to calculate taxes for Multnomah County and Metro District City
      The opt-in / opt-out for these new OR localities will be done through IT-210.
      If no extra information was provided in IT210, BSI will follow their regular calculation as described in the Quickformulas on BSI’s page

      Resolution

      • Run the synch tool after installing the TUB 
      • Add these tax authorities to your Tax Model as needed
      • Create an IT0210 for the locality (ie: OR31)
      • To opt-in use the Additional Withholding field in IT0210 
      • To opt-out use the exemption field in IT0210

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Chandramouly Veeramony
      Chandramouly Veeramony

      Great!! thank you..

      Thanks

      Chandra

      Author's profile photo Graziela Dondoni
      Graziela Dondoni
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Chandra,

      A new KBA has been created to handle it.
      3071303 

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Greg Zifchock
      Greg Zifchock

      Graziela,

      I think SAP is missing something. I believe I've configured the new tax correctly but it is still not working:

      Regards,

      Greg

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Greg,

      Would you please open an incident reporting this scenario? Please use component PY-US-TX.

      I believe that this is being caused by a misconfiguration, but we'll have to check the case on your system to localize it.

      Thank you,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Thumma Chakradhar
      Thumma Chakradhar

      Hello Team,

      We are newly implementing ECP and BSI TaxFactory, as per the standard document provided by SAP document "SF_ECPAY_BSI" we have configured and We have tested the connection to BSI Saas in ECP, the connection test is successful. But while running the payroll I am seeing the attached error.

      Also while checking HRPAYUS_TAX_SYNC_DT transaction we are not seeing the TUB levels.

      I also checked in SOAMANAGER --> Web Service Configuration --> details of consumer Proxy:CO_HRCUSCL_T11_BSITF11SERVICE  --> DEFAULT_LPORT is active but when I ping web service throwing an error message with (RC=404) error

      Please advise on this error. Appreciate it if you could respond with the resolution.

      Regards,

      Chakradhar Thumma

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Chakradhar,

      Please check the following:

      1. 2843977 – BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 – SaaS Installation
      This note was the one which has delivered TaxFactory 11.0 for Saas customers.
      Please review it carefully and make sure that you have followed all its instructions on your system.
      I believe that the missing Sync Tool information is being caused due to a missing point of note 2843977.

      2. BSI Credentials
      The error on the payroll log states that the authentication of the password and username has failed.
      Therefore, you need to ensure that you are imputing the correct information (user, password, dataset name...) when configuring your system.
      You should be able to check this data by accessing your BSI Portal. In case you would like to confirm if this is the correct data, this would need to be checked with BSI team directly.

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo time and payroll team
      time and payroll team

      Hi Team

      We have upgraded from TF 10.0 to TF 110.0.d, TUB #49 and with the live payroll, we are seeing that the Unemployment taxes (/410) are overstated. SAP Incident have been submitted # 410321 for troubleshooting

      want to check if anyone have experienced the same ?

       

      Thanks

      Lakshmy

       

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Lakshmy,

      I took over your case.

      Kind Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Santino Neri
      Santino Neri

      Hello,

      We just updated our TF11 to Cyclic D1 and we noticed it is not being reflected correctly in the initial screen of HRPAUUS_SYNC_TAX_DT.  Under "Regulatory Bulletin Information" it shows:

      Level in BSI Client: TaxFactory 11.0.d | Cyclic D1 | Regulatory 053 | TaxLocator N/A
      Cross-client Tables: TaxFactory 11.0.d1 | Cyclic D1 | Regulatory 053 | TaxLocator N/A
      Client-specific Tables: TaxFactory 11.0.d1 | Cyclic D1 | Regulatory 053 | TaxLocator N/A

      As you can see the "Level in BSI Client" is not consistent. Is anyone else seen this in their Production systems?  We had no issues in our DEV and QA environments.  Is there a way to resolve this or somewhere we can look for further info?

      Thanks,
      Santino

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Santino,

      I believe that you should be facing this issue due to the program that was not updated on BSI side.
      Refer to KBA 2443834 - TaxFactory cyclic upgrade doesn´t show the new version.

      The following blog may also help on this check: BSI TaxFactory 10 Cyclic Update (it's for TaxFactory 10.0 but still valid for TaxFactory 11.0).

      Kind Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Santino Neri
      Santino Neri

      Hi Carlos,

      It was my error.  I thought I had updated the server files with the D.1 version and instead I still had the D cyclic version in place.  Once I updated those files, the versions showed all in synch with D.1.

      Thanks,
      Santino

      Author's profile photo Thumma Chakradhar
      Thumma Chakradhar

      Hello Team,

      We are newly implementing ECP and BSI Tax Setup 11, unable to see the Cross Client and Client Specific data in Sync tool, and If I execute the Sync tool in a test run, getting the Data Set connectivity error.

       

      Could someone help with this resolution?

      Regards,

      Chakri

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Chakri,

      Please refer to KBA 2325349 - BSI TaxFactory Saas Application Error.

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Fojan Moini
      Fojan Moini

      Hi Team,

      We are seeing missing WF parameters in the BSI Interface after implementing the BSI Tax factory 11. Is this expected? We are having an issue in off-cycle year-end adjustment payroll for the Non-Cash Gross-up supplemental wage types not populating the /4** tax wage types during the payroll run. When this is raised to the BSI vendor they referred to the missing WF 'CRSVD1' parameter related to the Cyclic-b API enhancement. Could you please assist here?

      BSI

      Regards,

      Shiva.

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Shiva,

      Is the employee being maintained with a W-4 record that follows the old format?
      If so, it would be expected the parameter WF to do not be sent on the BSI Interface.

      You may refer to 2985123 - The Parameter WF on the BSI Interface: TaxFactory 10.0 and TaxFactory 11.0.

      As per the zero calculation for /4xx, were you able to validate this calculation via batch test?
      If so, BSI team should be able to appoint on the script what's triggering the zero calculation.

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Fojan Moini
      Fojan Moini

      Hi Carlos,

      Yes, the W2 record is from the old format and we see that it is sending a blank identifier for the WF (0,0) as per the BSI TF11 cyclic b.

      We are processing the gross-up supplement OC year-end adjustment. In the payroll run, BSI has calculated the gross-up tax amount and the custom wage types (GrossUp gross and tax) are populated accordingly. However, it didn't generate the /4XX wage types for the individual tax authorities.

      We could see the tax amounts for the individual authorities in the Batch test.

      Regards,
      Shiva.

      Author's profile photo Euna Lee
      Euna Lee

      Hello,

       

      Hope everyone is well. It's not about 11.0 upgrade, but I was wondering if there's a way to validate the table contents.

      I've started supporting two different companies and noticed that some tables are not identical, like missing tax authorities and mismatching.

       

      Thank you,

      Euna

       

      Author's profile photo Cassiana Giani
      Cassiana Giani

      Great blog, very helpful!

      Author's profile photo Graziela Dondoni
      Graziela Dondoni
      Blog Post Author

      Thank you for the feedback, Cassi!

      Author's profile photo Rosette Vaughn
      Rosette Vaughn

      This question is regarding Service Packs -

      We’ve loaded service packs SAPKE60884 – SAPKE60893 in our test system and we’re experiencing issues when we retro payroll back to beginning of the year.

      • In retro, PA LST tax is refunding.
      • In retro, NY SDI tax is refunding.

      We experienced issues with WTA; splits were removed in table TAX with retro which displayed error message “Entry in TAX for Authority XX is missing.”  We loaded Note 3060814 – WTA: Payroll hard stop when ALP Override is removed in retro which fixed the issue.

      We also experienced issues with additional withholding amounts being taken at the local level but Note 3056767 – TAX: Additional withholding fields from state W-4 incorrectly used for localities fixed the issue.

      Can you advise us on what’s causing refunding of PA LST tax and NY SDI tax in retro?  And what is required to fix these issues.

      Thank you,

      Rosette Vaughn

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Rosette,

      The refund issue should have been caused as a side effect of SAP Note 3033143 (TAX - Flat Taxes are taxed twice in off-cycle execution).

      However, SAP Note 3054376 (TAX: Flat taxes refunded in retrocalculations) has been released to correct this refund issue.

      Would you please apply it on your system and retest the scenario? I believe that it'll solve the incorrect behavior you're seeing.

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Jaikishan Biradar
      Jaikishan Biradar

      Hi Carlos,

      I had similar issue, SAP note 3054376 fixed LST tax refund issue.

      However I could see a different behavior for withholding tax PA locals. any thoughts?

       

      Thanks and Regards

      Jaikishan.

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Jaikishan,

      Would you please provide more details on which is the different behavior you're seeing for PA locals?

      Sincerely thanks,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Jaikishan Biradar
      Jaikishan Biradar

      Hi Carlos,

      Withholding 001 tax is refunded for PCB2 - Whitemarsh Township in retro calculations.

      There is no change in tax data or anything but still along with TT 084, TT 01 is also refunded.

       

       

      Thanks and Regards

      Jaikishan

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Jaikishan,

      Would you please check if there is any BSI Message on the payroll log?
      I believe that it may be something related to Reciprocity behavior.

      You may refer to 2973907 - FAQ - Reciprocity for Payroll USA.

      Kind Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Jaikishan Biradar
      Jaikishan Biradar

      Hi Carlos,

       

      No Message in BSI, Not sure if this is related to reciprocity as there is no change in residence/work tax area.

       

      Thanks and Regards

      Jaikishan

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Jaikishan,

      I see that you've opened a SAP Case.
      A colleague took it over.

      Thank you,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Jaikishan Biradar
      Jaikishan Biradar

      Yes, I am yet to hear back from SAP on the case.

      However, after applying SAP note - 3054376 - TAX: Flat taxes refunded in retrocalculations, system retros back to 12/31/2020 to all employees, this is expected after applying the note?

      But we don't want it for all employees, we will do force retro to impacted employees.

      Thanks and Regards

      Jaikishan

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Jaikishan,

      My colleague will proceed with the analyzes of this scenario on the ticket you've opened.

      Kind Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Stanette Balser
      Stanette Balser

      Hello,

      I am working to implement TUBS 54-60 and am unable to locate any notes for new tax type 108 and 109.

      Any idea when those notes will be available?  It appears TUB 60 has an important change for Massachusetts with a retro needed and looks to be a state deadline of 8/31/2021.

      Please advise.

      Thank you,

      Stanette Balser

       

      Author's profile photo Graziela Dondoni
      Graziela Dondoni
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Stanette,

      I just talked to Developer and they are working on this now.

      Once I have any new information I will share here.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Jaikishan Biradar
      Jaikishan Biradar

      Hi Graziela,

       

      Please let us know by when new tax types will be available?  New tax type will be part of next tubs or it will be through SAP note?

       

      Thanks and Regards

      Jaikishan

      Author's profile photo Graziela Dondoni
      Graziela Dondoni
      Blog Post Author

      Hello Jaikishan,

      This is planned to be released tomorrow.

      The note number is Note 3090748 - TAX: New Tax Types 108 and 109 (you will not be able to access it yet as it still in process, once released you can access it).

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Jaikishan Biradar
      Jaikishan Biradar

      Thank you for the information Graziela!

      Author's profile photo Euna Lee
      Euna Lee

      Hi Graziela,

       

      If we apply TUBs before applying the note, should we need to re-apply TUBs?

       

      Regards,

      Euna

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Euna,

      You can proceed rerunning the Sync Tool in productive mode on your system, as detailed on the manual steps of note 3090748.
      This is intended to sync the data between SAP/BSI as per the new TUB delivery and you should see the new Tax Types on your system.

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Rosette Vaughn
      Rosette Vaughn

      Hi Carlos,

      We're still having refunding issues of PA Local LST and NY SDI in retro after we loaded SAPKE60894 - SAPKE60897.  In  Service Pack 97, I see note 3068857-TAX: New BAdI to select tax authority for Local Service Tax (LST).  Would this have something to do with refunding?

      We previously experienced this issue of PA Local LST and NY SDI tax refunding in retro but your reply to load notes 3054376 and 3060814 fixed the issue.

      Can you advise what is needed to fix the issue now?

      Thank you,

      Rosette

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Rosette,

      Would you please let me know the values of the parameters BW, PW and PT that you are seeing on the BSI Interface of the incorrect case?
      I believe that the refund may be related with these parameters.

      Thank you,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Rosette Vaughn
      Rosette Vaughn

      Hi Carlos,

      here's the info you requested.  Let me know if you need additional information.

      PA LST -

      ADC TC: PA6S NR: 0 RP: 1 RC: 0 SE: 0 NX: 0

      HUD TT: 084 FN: 1 PW: 3115.20 HW: 94.80 MS: 1 NE: 0

      ADD TE: 0 YW: 28890.57 YT: 2.00 RN: 0 PW: 1.00 RF: 1 YG: 28890.57

      VDC AT: 0

      SDC SM: 9 BW: 2560.00

      EDC DE: 0 NA: 0

      LUD ES: 0 PW: 1559.20 PT: 2.00 SA: 0 QW: 11891.14 PND: 0 MND: 0 QND: 0

      YND: 0

       

      NY SDI –

      ADC TC: NY NR: 0 RP: 0 RC: 0 SE: 0 NX: 0

      HUD TT: 041 FN: 1 PW: 3958.33 HW: 88.00 MS: 1 NE: 0

      ADD TE: 0 YW: 260.00 YT: 1.30 RN: 0 PW: 1.00 RF: 0 YG: 39583.30

      VDC AT: 0

      SDC SM: 9 BW: 3958.33

      EDC DE: 0 NA: 0

      LUD ES: 0 PW: 780.00 PT: 3.90 SA: 0 ER: 0.005000 PND: 0 MND: 0 QND: 0 YND: 0

       

      Tks,

      Rosette

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Rosette,

      Thank you for the details.

      We have been checking this scenario internally and it seems that a bug has been identified.

      The developers are already working on a correction note and I'll update you here once this note has been released.

      Sincerely thanks,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Barbara Dillon
      Barbara Dillon

      Hi Carlos,

       

      Is there an ETA on when a note will be delivered to fix the bug for PA Local LST and NY SDI tax refunding incorrectly in retro processing?   Thanks so much!

       

      Barbara Dillon

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Barbara/Rosette

      The note has just been released for general availability: 3098271 - TAX: Considering incorrect payroll results for Local Service Tax calculation.

      Sincerely thanks,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Barbara Dillon
      Barbara Dillon

      Thank you Carlos!   Is this note just to fix the PA Local Service Tax and not the NY SDI tax?

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Barbara,

      The text of note 3098271 mentions LST, but some of the code which has been changed by this note is not specific to LST.
      Therefore, given the same scenario, this note may also fix the SDI tax.

      In case the issue persists with the SDI tax, please open a case on component PY-US-TX as we'll have to take a further look on it.

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Raspreet Kaur
      Raspreet Kaur

      Hello Carlos,

      I am having same issue. We are on BSI 11.e and TUB 62, the NY employees when retroed, are getting TT41 refunded.

      Any insight on this one please?

      Thanks.

       

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Raspreet,

      There were some recent changes released, specially for the BW and PW parameters on the BSI Interface.
      I have listed the notes below and I believe that the scenario with Tax Type 41 may be related with those changes.

      Would you please ensure that all the notes are either applied or delivered by support package on your system?
      Afterwards, kindly retest the scenario and check the results.

      a) 3064588 - TAX: Incorrectly Not Filling Base Wages For Non-Federal Authorities
      b) 3036391 - TAX: Incorrect tax calculation for employees in the same payroll execution of an employee using Separation Aggregation method
      c) 2993565 - TAX: Base Wages parameter incorrectly used when Separate Aggregation Supplemental Method is defined
      d) 3098698 - TAX: Incorrectly deducting pre-tax amounts of base wages for Eugene Payroll Tax
      e) 3087604 - TAX: Incorrect Base Wages for Payroll Tax in Gross Up
      f) 3010085 - TAX: Incorrect Pay Period Wages when using Source Tax Authority
      g) 3054376 - TAX: Flat taxes refunded in retrocalculations
      h) 3098271 - TAX: Considering incorrect payroll results for Local Service Tax calculation

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Gina Auer
      Gina Auer

      Hello,

       

      I have looked all over and cannot locate any documentation on my question, possibly you can help?  We are beginning plans to upgrade our ECC EHP8 system running on Oracle, to ECC EHP8 running on HANA - We are currently running BSI 11.b, and will update prior to DB update - so my question is:

      Do we need to reinstall BSI 11 from scratch or can we simply reconnect the systems in the BSI website and in the instances?

      I need to answer this for the project plan, so any information would be very helpful!

      Thank you.

      Author's profile photo Rosette Vaughn
      Rosette Vaughn

      Hi Carlos!

      Thanks you so much!  Note  3098271 - TAX: Considering incorrect payroll results for Local Service Tax calculation fixed the issue with PA LST and NY SDI refunding.

      Rosette

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Rosette,

      Great to hear that 🙂

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Euna Lee
      Euna Lee

      Hello,

       

      I've just realized there's no Employee ID displayed in TaxFactory Messageviewer. To be frank, I can't recall if it was always this way. 🙁   Can anyone tell me what needs to be done in either SAP or TaxFactory or maybe both, please?

       

      Thank you,

      Euna

      Author's profile photo Jaikishan Biradar
      Jaikishan Biradar

      Hi,

      I am getting message "BSI TaxLocator is not configured as active" while running the  report - RPUTLTU0. do we need to active tax locator somewhere?

      we are currently running TaxFactory 11.0.e | Cyclic E | Regulatory 062 | TaxLo 27.

      Thanks and Regards

      Jaikishan

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Jaikishan,

      Please refer to the FAQ number 1 of KBA 3021541 - FAQ - Tax Locator for Payroll USA.

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Margaret Walter
      Margaret Walter

      We just completed our upgrade to TF 11 but we are noticing our payroll is running a lot slower.  Did anyone else have this issue and how did you resolve it?

      Regards,

      Margaret

      Author's profile photo Rosette Vaughn
      Rosette Vaughn

      Hello,

      Can you advise when Note 3103555 - BSI: Tax Types 113: WA Cares Fund LTC Tax -
      EE and 114: WA Cares Fund LTC Tax - ER  will be released?  The new tax types for Washington LTC Act Tax is in BSI TUB 62.

      Tks,

      Rosette

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Rosette,

      Note 3103555 has already been released for general availability.

      Sincerely thanks,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Rosette Vaughn
      Rosette Vaughn

      Hi Carlos,

       We loaded note 3103555 and I'm configuring the Manual Instructions for the note.  I'm at step 4 Creation of Wage Types - this is the information in Manual Instructions for step 4 -  CREATION OF WAGE TYPES NOTE: The system may display the warning message Copying to the reserved SAP name range is not allowed when copying these wage types. You can ignore this message by pressing Enter when it appears.

      I've entered all wage types (entering though the warning message mentioned above) but can't Save; the Save button is grayed out.  Can you advise if I'm missing something that's not in the instructions?

      Tks,

      Rosette

      Author's profile photo Rosette Vaughn
      Rosette Vaughn

      Hi Carlos,

      Never mind my blog post on note 3103555.  I was having a user error moment. LOL!

      Rosette

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Rosette,

      Great to hear that the issue has been resolved!

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Rosette Vaughn
      Rosette Vaughn

      Hi Carlos,

      We've loaded service packs 83 - 98 and in retro we're see TIP being refunded. Before loading service packs there were two tax calls; one for regular payments and one for TIP payment.  After loading service packs the tax call for TIP went away.  We think note 3054328 (in service pack 97) may have something to do with the issue but we're not sure.

      Example:  In our current environment (without Service Packs 83 -98), employee has two tax calls: one for regular payment and one for TIP payment.

      USTAX 3 3 1 Call tax calculation routine-WTA W Hours

      Input
      Processing

      Import payroll result for same for-period
      Employee Data
      Tax Data
      BSI Interface
      BSI Messages and Status
      Tax result for payment type Regular payment
      Employee Data
      Tax Data
      BSI Interface
      BSI Messages and Status
      Tax result for payment type Regular payment
      Cumulated tax result for all tax types

       

      After loading service packs 83-98; tax call for TIP went away -

      USTAX 3 3 1 Call tax calculation routine-WTA W Hours

      Input
      Processing

      Import payroll result for same for-period
      Employee Data
      Tax Data
      BSI Interface
      BSI Messages and Status
      Tax result for payment type Regular payment
      Cumulated tax result for all tax types

       

      Please advise if there's a fix for this issue.  Let me know if you need additional information or if I should open a OSS Note.

      Tks,

      Rosette

      Author's profile photo Roger Oliveira
      Roger Oliveira

      Hi Rosette,

      We are checking a similar scenario.

      Can you confirm if the tip wage type has the processing class 84 as '1'?

      Regards,

      Roger

      Author's profile photo Rosette Vaughn
      Rosette Vaughn

      Hi Roger,

      Thank you for the quick response!  Yes, processing class 84 has '1'.

      Rosette

       

      Author's profile photo Roger Oliveira
      Roger Oliveira

      Hi Rosette,

      Can you perform a test? Please change it to '3' and check if the outcome is the same.

      Regards,

      Roger

      Author's profile photo Kim Grantham
      Kim Grantham

      We discovered the tips issue about four weeks ago and have an open ticket actively being worked on.  We created code to bypass the change, but are still waiting to hear back on our ticket.

      Kim

      Author's profile photo Rosette Vaughn
      Rosette Vaughn

      Hi Roger,

      I tested your suggestion, changing processing class 84 from '1' to '3' and got this error message below.

      Processing

      Cumulation of wage types

      Cumulation of user wage types in table TCRT

      Cumulation of taxation wage types in table TCRT

      Cumulation of tips wage types in table UTIPS

      Entry 0000 does not exist

       

      Author's profile photo Roger Oliveira
      Roger Oliveira

      Hi Rosette,

      I see. Thank you for the test.

      Please revert it back and log a case under PY-US-TX.

      I will need analyze it further.

      Regards,
      Roger

      Author's profile photo Kim Grantham
      Kim Grantham

      Hi Everyone,

      In response to the tip calculation issue...  SAP responded to our incident.

      Note 3118379 - TAX: RPCALCU0 ignorining tip income after SAP Note 3054328 has been released.

      We are applying today.  Will keep you posted.

      Regards,

      Kim

      Author's profile photo Raspreet Kaur
      Raspreet Kaur

      Hi Everyone,

      New Tax Authority Metro Commuter Trans District NY1P does not display as Tax codes in BSI, I tried to go to Mapping tools, but teher is no place for me to create a new Tax Code. Any insight on this please?

      Thanks.

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Raspreet,

      Tax Authority NY1P has been introduced on Regulatory 63. Please make sure that you have at least this level on your system.

      Also, this Tax Authority NY1P is the BSI Code 00360013. If you search for the BSI Code, are you able to find the Authority? In addition, on view V_T5UTZ, do you see NY1P there?

      Sincerely thanks,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Beth Matthews
      Beth Matthews

      Hi Raspreet,

      The BSI code for NY1P (00360013) is in TUB 60 (TF 11.0.E). Have you applied that TUB to your BSI environment? The TUB should load the BSI code information (Authority, Title, County (blank for this instance), BSI Code, and Preferred indicator) but not the Tax Code (NY1P).

      And have you run transaction HRPAYUS_SYNC_TAX_DT (Synchronization Tax Data report (US)) in SAP? You may have to run in Production Mode and choose Process Tax Authority Mappings Only under the Client-Specific Data section in your SAP Production environment. This step will update the Tax Code (NY1P) in BSI.

      Beth Matthews

       

      Author's profile photo Raspreet Kaur
      Raspreet Kaur

      Thanks Carlos and Beth,

      I was able to locate 00360013 and then I was able to map NY1P as preferred.

      Thanks for your help.

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Beth -

      How are you setting up this new NY1P for employees?  Are you using the new field on IT0208?  I'm trying to figure out how to set this up and haven't found anything to explain it.  I accidentally found the new field on IT0208 and the help for the field explains it's used for this.

      Thanks for any input!

      Author's profile photo Beth Matthews
      Beth Matthews

      Alicia,

      We don't have any employees in NY, so I just applied the TUB in BSI environment, and then ran the SAP transaction HRPAYUS_SYNC_TAX_DT in our Development environment. Then I created the Cross-Client and Client-Specific transports and moved them up to our SAPTST and SAPPRD environments.

      There should be documentation for NY1P at the end of the TUB 060 (special comments) that may help.

      In IT208 in SAP, I would imagine that you would put NY1P into the new field (Source Tax Authority), providing NY1P uses Tax Type 19 (Payroll Expense Tax). Have you added Tax Type 19 to your Tax Models in SAP and wage type configuration in SAP?

      Hope this helps.

      Beth Matthews

       

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Beth -

      We have the code set up and tax type 19 is already in the tax models.  I appreciate the reply even though you don't have any employees in NY (lucky you!!).

       

      Is there anyone else that has set up the NY1P?  It appears they are rescinding all the county codes where this tax was calculated prior (NY03 - NY09, NY0A - NY0E) and replacing all of those with the NY1P.  I'm just not 100% sure how this new field on IT208 is to be used.

      Thanks!

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi,

      We are entering this NY1P into the "Sourcing Authority" in IT 208.  But the tax /419 still not getting calculated.  Tax shows as zero in the USTAX payroll log.

      I read BSI TUB 60 and BSI is saying that SAP has to pass parameter EQ with Employer's prior quarter estimated total wages for the entire tax company.

      So, I did a batch test by manually entering the EQ parameter and corresponding value into the .tst batch file and then BSI calculated the tax correctly.

      Is SAP not sending the EQ parameter to BSI?  Or have I missed some config step for this NY1P set up?

      I have correctly set up NY1P in T5UTI and T5UTE (Tax model).

      Please let me know.

      Thanks

      Paddy

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Paddy,

      The EQ parameter is send for Authorities maintained on view VV_T5UX9_ADDINFO.
      Please customize this view for NY1P in order to send the EQ on the BSI Interface.

      You can access VV_T5UX9_ADDINFO by the SPRO path: Payroll > Payroll: USA > Tax > SAP/BSI Interface > Maintain estimated quarterly gross wages.

      Sincerely thanks,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Thank you Carlos.  I appreciate your quick response very much.

      You saved me the trouble of creating an OSS Incident and related follow up etc.

      My search in SAP / KBA did not turn up any solutions.  Didn't use the right search term I guess! 😣

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Paddy,

      Thank you for the feedback : )

      Kind Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Anna Stevenson
      Anna Stevenson

      Hello,

      We recently upgraded our development environment for year end (SAPKB73128 / SAPKE604H1 / SAPK-606D3INEAHR).  We also updated BSI TF 11 cyclic from c to f and applied all TUBs up through 66.  After mapping all unmapped tax authorities, I have warning messages related to new Kentucky tax authorities - "Could not add County to Tax Area xxxx".  I have not seen this before and it is not an issue for us since we do not do business in KY.  I searched SAP Support Portal but did not find any notes regarding this message.  Has anyone else seen this?

      Thanks, Anna

      Sync%20Tool%20General%20Messages

      Sync Tool General Messages

      Author's profile photo Mitesh Kumar Jain
      Mitesh Kumar Jain

      Anna,

      We saw the same error when we implemented the TUB changes last month. On further checking, we found the county was added in table T5UTZ as maintained in BSI even though this warning was reported and no issue was reported in payroll execution so we did not create an incident for SAP to provide more details on this error.

      Thanks!

      Author's profile photo Anna Stevenson
      Anna Stevenson

      Thanks for your response.  I found that the table T5UTZ was updated.  The KYxx authorities were not the ones that did not have county designated.  Very odd.  Hopefully, they will fix this.

      Anna

      Author's profile photo Poonam Upreti
      Poonam Upreti

      Hi,

      Is anyone facing issues with OR07 and OR31 taxes with supplemental wages?

      The Multnomah County (OR07) and Metro District City Oregon Taxes (OR31) are not calculated correctly in case of supplemental wages.

      As per BSI, both the taxes withholding on supplemental wages will only apply if the employee is subject to withholding on regular wages (because their base annual taxable wages are $200,000.00 or more) and the employee has not elected to Opt-out of employer withholding.

      If projected base annual taxable wages are less than $200,000.00, withholding is not applicable to the supplemental wage payment. This above scenario is failing for an EE who has less than 200000 as regular wages but is paid a one time bonus of $10000. SAP is sending the bonus amount as regular wages causing the employee to be taxed which is incorrect.

      Thanks

      Poonam

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Poonam -

      I will go back and check a supplemental on our system, but we did notice another issue I wanted to mention.  It is our understanding that if the employee sends in the form with the designated amount that is what we should take per check instead of the authority designated percent.  In our testing, we found that the payroll is withholding BOTH (the designated authority percent and the employee requested amount).  I'm still testing to make sure I haven't missed something, but wanted to add this in case someone else has also noticed this.

      Thanks,

      Alicia

       

      Author's profile photo Poonam Upreti
      Poonam Upreti

      Hi,

      Is anyone facing issues with OR07 and OR31 taxes with supplemental wages?

      The Multnomah County (OR07) and Metro District City Oregon Taxes (OR31) are not calculated correctly in case of supplemental wages.

      As per BSI, both the taxes withholding on supplemental wages will only apply if the employee is subject to withholding on regular wages (because their base annual taxable wages are $200,000.00 or more) and the employee has not elected to Opt-out of employer withholding.

      If projected base annual taxable wages are less than $200,000.00, withholding is not applicable to the supplemental wage payment. This above scenario is failing for an EE who has less than 200000 as regular wages but is paid a one time bonus of $10000. SAP is sending the bonus amount as regular wages causing the employee to be taxed which is incorrect.

      As per them, he is exceeding the limit of 200000 because 10,000*26 = 260000 (this is not the actual projected wages but one time supplemental payment)

      Thanks

      Poonam

      Author's profile photo Raspreet Kaur
      Raspreet Kaur

      Hi,

      WA01 Seattle Payroll expense tax is calculating 1.7% on supplemental wages., this rate does not match any rate on the BSI document.  I observed instead of /701 its taking /S01. 

      Any insight on this? Can anyone share their observations on supplemental wages tax calculations for TT19?

       

      Thanks

      Author's profile photo Navneet Barwa
      Navneet Barwa

      Hi Colleagues,

      I am also facing the problem : the WA01 Seattle. Can anybody share the insight on this?

       

      Warm Regards,

      Navneet

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Hello -

      Has anyone gotten the change for LA and the day count in TUB 58 to work?  What's the secret?

       

      Effective 1/1/2022, under the provisions of Louisiana Public Act (SB 157), Louisiana has enacted a time-based nonresident de minimis withholding threshold.  Per the legislation, non-resident employees are not subject to Louisiana withholding until they work in excess of 25 days within a given calendar year.  However, if, during the calendar year, the number of days the employee spends performing employment duties for the employer exceeds the 25-day threshold, an employer shall withhold and remit tax for every day worked in Louisiana within the calendar year.  The bill defines a working day as one in which the preponderance of an employee’s employment duties is performed in Louisiana.

       

      Author's profile photo Mitesh Kumar Jain
      Mitesh Kumar Jain

      Alicia,

      This is working for us as expected. A non-resident LA employee in bi-weekly payroll area has a withholding tax for LA in the third pay period of 2022 and no tax in the first two pay periods (10 working days in each pay period).

      Did you modify feature 10EET (BSI Employee Type Indicator) in SAP? If you check the details in bulletin 58, one of the parameter that BSI needs for this change is employee type indicator and that is configured in feature 10EET. You will need to update this feature and send employee type indicator 1 (EETYID 1) if the work state is LA.

      We implemented this feature for Illinois De Minimis and updated with the same logic for the work state LA .

      Hope this helps.

      Thanks!

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Mitesh -

      Thank you so much for the information!  I honestly didn't realize we needed to change anything since the bulletin doesn't mention that feature specifically and no other instructions from SAP (at least that I've seen). I will try that and see if it works for me.

      Did Illinois have something similar for day count released?  I don't recall seeing that one, but I'm not the only person on my team that updates TUBS.

      Thanks again for your help!

      Author's profile photo Mitesh Kumar Jain
      Mitesh Kumar Jain

      Yes, Illinois De Minimis was released with bulletin 172 (TF 10.0).

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Mitesh -

      I will have to go back and check that one because it doesn't appear we did anything for IL.  We have a complicated custom process that we built many years ago to handle employees working outside of their normal locations so hopefully that took care of that one.

      Do you mind sharing a screen shot of your settings for 10EET for IL/LA?

      Thanks again for your help!

      Author's profile photo Mitesh Kumar Jain
      Mitesh Kumar Jain

      Alicia,

      Sorry, I won't be able to share any screenshot due to security reasons, but the logic for this is to check the work tax area which is a field in the feature, and for IL/LA, the return value should be 'EETYID 1', else 'EETYID 0'.

      This feature was delivered as part of upgrade to TaxFactory 10.0 (SAP note 1909015) and I'm assuming you have this implemented already to send 'EETYID 4' if an employee is deceased.

      Check the documentation of this feature and note 1909015 for more details and let me know if you still have any questions.

      Thanks!

      Author's profile photo Sandra A. Pelkey
      Sandra A. Pelkey

      Good morning,

      We updated BSI from 11.0c Regulatory 046 to 11.0F Regulatory 071, I had recently updated the Unemployment tax override effective December 12th in SAP and BSI.  the rate went from 0.0010 to 0.0007, pay period 26/2021 rate is correct at new rate, ran Simulated payroll after BSI update for pay period 1/2022 and not reflecting the change even though is SAP and BSI

      Screen%20shot%20of%20RT

      Screen shot of RT

       

       

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Sandra,

      Please check KBA 2998362 - BTXRATE entry is not being considered on the payroll calculation.

      Kind Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Sandra A. Pelkey
      Sandra A. Pelkey

      We looked at the note, Downloaded all the notes mentioned on the PDF and they are not applicable.  we also tried SAP note 3132381 BSI: Documentation Fixes for Wage Types /X10 and cannot be implemented.

      Thank you

      Sandra Pellkey

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Sandra,

      Could you please confirm that you have checked the steps #1 to #4 detailed on the KBA?
      If so, you can follow the instruction provided on the KBA on the following point: "If you had followed all the four instructions detailed on this KBA and you still see an incorrect tax calculation [...]".

      Sincerely thanks,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Sandra A. Pelkey
      Sandra A. Pelkey

      Good morning Carlos,

      Yes, I validated the steps 1 - 4 in SAP and BSI.

      Author's profile photo Sandra A. Pelkey
      Sandra A. Pelkey

      Carlos,

      I submitted an incident with SAP 24794/2022

      Thanks,

      Sandra

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Sandra,

      Thank you for opening an incident. I took it over.

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Deborah Duron
      Deborah Duron

      Greetings,

      Can anyone provide the TUB which will contain the 2022 Federal Tax Tables.  We applied up to regulatory 70 and the tax withholdings for post 2020 W4 records are calculating higher than expected.

       

      Thanks,

       

      Debbie

      Author's profile photo Euna Lee
      Euna Lee

      71 has it.

       

      Euna

      Author's profile photo Rosette Vaughn
      Rosette Vaughn

      Hello,

      This morning I downloaded BSI TUBS 69 - 72.  I ran SAP Data Sync (HRPAYUS_SYNC_TAX_DT) in Productive Run and saved both Cross-client and Client-specific tables.  I see table updates in both transports.  But when I look at the Regulatory Bulletin Information section, Cross-client and Client-specific tables did not update to TUB 72.

      Regulatory Bulletin Information

      Level in BSI Client: TaxFactory 11.0.f | Cyclic F | Regulatory 072 | TaxLocator 05
      Cross-client Tables: TaxFactory 11.0.f | Cyclic F | Regulatory 068 | TaxLocator 05
      Client-specific Tables: TaxFactory 11.0.f | Cyclic F | Regulatory 068 | TaxLocator 05

      When I ran Productive Run, I noticed this error in General Messages; "It was not possible to insert entry WA  3320201231 in table T5UTX"

      Could this error cause the Regulatory Bulletin Information not to update?  Please advise what we need to do to fix.

      Tks,

      Rosette

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Rosette,

      Yes, I do believe that the Regulatory Bulletin did not update due the T5UTX error.

      This error is caused when there is a delinquent record for the tax rates on table T5UTX.
      For your specific scenario, the issue is for Tax Authority WA and Tax Type 33, as detailed on the message error.

      In order to correct it, you will have to update table T5UTX manually so that it does not have the overlapping entry anymore.
      Afterwards, you may rerun the Sync Tool.

      You may refer to 2550829 - Synchronize Payroll Tax Data Update Error.

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Rosette Vaughn
      Rosette Vaughn

      Hi Carlos!

      Thank you for the quick response.

      The issue is fixed! Also, thanks for the note referral.

      Rosette

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Rosette,

      I'm glad to hear that the issue has been resolved!
      Have a nice day.

      Kind Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Rizwan Khan
      Rizwan Khan

      BSI 11 not saving new experience rate for State of IN, for other States worked fine.

      Tried to delete the old record (End Date 12/31/9999) - system does not produce any error but does not delete or save the new entry.

      Author's profile photo Katherine James
      Katherine James

      We have this issue also. A ticket was opened and I can't remember the exact wording but basically we were told our client was corrupt and would need to do a restore. Our workaround is the download a backup file, make the change on the csv file, and then upload the file. I am glad to hear that someone else is having this issue also. I thought it was funny that if our client was corrupted that we are not having this issue with other authorities. 

      Author's profile photo Rizwan Khan
      Rizwan Khan

      Thank you Katherine, I followed the same steps and it resolved the issue.

      Thank you again.

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Did anyone notice the same problem with MN and TUB 70?  The rates that loaded to the table are not the same as what is mentioned in the TUB and neither is the previous rate that is mentioned (tax types 15 and 89).  I'm not sure this is a client corrupt issue. We've never had this happen before and why would one tax type work, but two others didn't?

       

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi,

      We are seeing some differences in tax amount for tax type "Payroll Expense Tax" for NY METRO COMMUTER TRANSIT DISTRICT Tax authority NY1P, depending on whether we populate NY1P in  the Work Tax Area field or 'Source Tax authority" field of IT 208.

      Also, retro payroll back to 2021 is creating a short dump if we use NY1P in the source tax authority field, because we have assigned the tax model to NY1P in T5UTE only with a start date of 01/01/2022.

      Please let me know how you are handling this change to tax type 19 starting 01/01/2022.

      Thank you in advance.

      Paddy.

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Hello -

      Has anyone noticed a problem with the tax type 11 credit reductions that were recently reinstated?  Issues like not stopping at the max wage base or different amounts populating for /711 vs /611 where there should be no differences (employee with no pretax items)?

      Thanks!

      Author's profile photo Rizwan Khan
      Rizwan Khan

      We had the same issue, when we analyzed it, amount of /711 was higher by the cafeteria plans deductions (pre-tax)

      We solved this problem by adding entry of cafeteria plans (PRCL 71) in table (T5UTM)

      Tax Model = that represents the tax authority

      Res/Wrk/UI = U

      Tax Modif = U1

      Tax Class = that represent Cafeteria plan (i.e. C )

      End Date = 12/31/9999

      Start Date = 01/01/2021

      TAx Combo = that should have tax type 11 (i.e. 87 )

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Rizwan -

      Thanks for the response, but pre-tax is not my issue.  The max wage base is listed as $7,000 but the system is not stopping at that value - it's going over that amount.  We have also noticed that some employees have no /711 YTD value, but they have a /411 value (as well as /311 and /611).  We did not have these taxes in the system for the first payroll for 2022 so we know it should try to catch up, but something just isn't right.

      Anyone else have any of these issues or suggestions?

      Thanks!

      Author's profile photo Katherine James
      Katherine James

      We are seeing the issue of /711 not generating. It was for all teammates who had already met the $7000 limit. We are seeing /311,/411,/611 generating.

       

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Katherine - Did you retro your payroll?  I'm just curious if that is part of the issue because we did not.  It's also causing issues if an employee has a tax authority change due to moving and we retro that change.

      Author's profile photo Katherine James
      Katherine James

      We did not retro. I would expect the tax wage types to true up in the current run (the same as unemployment would).

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Graziela Dondoni Carlos Accorsi

      How is this showing in your system?  Did you retro your payroll back to January 1 once this was available?

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi,

      In TF11.0f TUB 75, BSI has provided a new formula number 2 for tax type 19 for NY MCTMT (tax authority NY1P).

      This formula will provide quarterly self adjustment calculation for this tax type 19 for NY1P tax authority.

      For this formula number to work, we need to send value 1 in SA parameter in the BSI interface.

      But, even after doing the following config, SA parameter still has value 0 in the BSI Interface.

      1. We have adjusted feature 10STT to say that tax type 19 is self adjusting.

      2. We have changed the formula number in T5UTD for NY1P to the value 2 from 1.

      3. As mentioned in documentation for feature 10STT, we have created an entry for NY1P tax type 19 in BTXRATE.

      Please let us know how we can get SAP to send value 1 in the SA parameter of BSI interface for tax authority NY1P.

      Thanks in advance.

      Paddy

      Author's profile photo Kevin Hirsch
      Kevin Hirsch

      Hi Paddy,

      You can change the formula number on T5UTD, it should be delivered with a "1". However, any time TUBS are applied the value (if you use "2") will be overwritten back to "1", which adds to the maintenance of that field to get the taxes right.

      I have a similar situation that I'm still researching on how to send "1" for parameter SA:

      Did updating 10STT not work?

      Also, for NY1P (unless it's changed) I thought the estimated gross quarterly wages needed to be on V_T5UX9_ADDINFO, as that is needed since the NY transit tax is a tiered tax. BTXRATE won't help, as you need to pass the prior quarter wages to get the right tax rate.

      If I resolve how to get "1" for SA, I'll update this thread.

      Regards,

      Kevin

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi Kevin,

      Thank you for your detailed response.

      Yes, please update this thread when you find resolution for the SA parameter for tax type 19 for NY1P.

      Feature 10STT adjustment did NOT make any  difference in the value being passed to BSI for parameter SA.

      Furthermore, TF11 TUB 75 has introduced Formula number 2 to work for Self adjusting feature.  We are currently in TUB 73.

      Anyway, we ended up retro'ing all employees back to 01/01/2022, because we could not get BSI interface to send value 2 in the SA paramter.

      Yes, we have Estimate Quarterly wages in V_T5UX9_ADDINFO and this is showing up correctly in EQ parameter of the BSI interface.

      But, now we have another problem with NY1P in Source Tax authority.  Yikes.  I have created an OSS Incident for this.  I shall keep you posted in this thread.

      The issue is as follows:  Whenever there is more than one WPBP split in a pay period, the amount in /319, /619 etc. is 4 to 5 times the amount in /705.  This is totally incorrect.  Luckily this is not an Employee tax.

      Regards

      Paddy.

      Author's profile photo Ejaz Khalid
      Ejaz Khalid

      We are running Supplemental wages and the taxes are not getting calculated at the supplemental rate.  The message that I am getting from BSI is  -

      " THE BASE WAGES PARAMETER FOR THE FEDERAL WITHHOLDING IS ZERO BUT IS REQUIRED FOR THE SEPARATE AGGREGATE SUPPLEMENTAL METHOD. THIS TAX WAS CALCULATED USING THE REGULAR METHOD"

       

      Any one else facing this issue and have a solution on it ?

      Thanks

      Ejaz

       

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Ejaz,

      Please check SAP Note 3148821 - TAX: BW parameter not set when supplemental method is replaced with the separate aggregation method.

      Sincerely thanks,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Ejaz Khalid
      Ejaz Khalid

      Thank you , I opened an incident with SAP and they have just recommended the same, Will apply this ..

      Author's profile photo Graziela Dondoni
      Graziela Dondoni
      Blog Post Author

      Hello community,

      Important change with US HCM Tax Calculation and BSI TaxFactory 11 Cyclic H. Apply at the earliest 
      HotNews SAP Note 3088446 (BSI: Updates to TaxFactory 11.0 reverse engine processing) to your payroll systems.
      It is required for BSI TaxFactory 11 Cyclic H.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Stacey DeGarmo
      Stacey DeGarmo

      Graziela, we applied Note 3088446 in our Sandbox and now unable to run RPCALCU0_CE.  I have not seen anyone else post with issues applying this Note.  We are EhP8 and SP Level 0098.

      ST22 presents:

      In include "RPC_PAYUS_IS_INPER_REVERSED             ", in line 1 of program                   
           "RPCALCU0_CE                             ", the following syntax errors                      
          have occurred:                                                                                
          A FORM already exists with the name "IS_INPER_REVERSED".           

      Thank you,

      Stacey DeGarmo

      Author's profile photo Graziela Dondoni
      Graziela Dondoni
      Blog Post Author

      Hello Stacey,

      I found a case with the same error related to SAP note 3119876.
      Do you have this note in your system? How are the versions for th object RPC_PAYUS_IS_INPER_REVERSED.

      Is it consistent in your system?

      Thank you for the update.

      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Stacey DeGarmo
      Stacey DeGarmo

      Hello Graziela,

      We do NOT have Note 3119876 (SAPK-608A0INSAPHRCUS) as we are on SAPK-60898.  When we check SE38 for RPC_PAYUS_IS_INPER_REVERSED the Check Syntax is displaying a Syntax Error in

      Include RPCMASUT_USTAX_CALC
      INCLUDE report "RPC_PAYUS_BSI_CALLER_COMPNENTS" not found

      Since Note 3088446 is only in Sandbox, RPC_PAYUS_IS_INPER_REVERSED does not exist in any other system.  Will applying Note 3119876 resolve this issue?  I am not sure what additional Pre-Requisite Notes will be needed since we are on 60898.

      Thank you,

      Stacey DeGarmo

      Author's profile photo Stacey DeGarmo
      Stacey DeGarmo

      Graziela,

      We have resolved the Payroll Short Dumps by applying Notes 3088446, 3119876 and 3121156 and Pre-Reqs (3098698 and 30116376).

      We are looking at the Manual Steps associated with Note 3088446 - Updates to TF11 Reverse Engine Processing and have a question regarding the steps.  The two configuration options have been created in step #3 for BSIRS.  Step #4 is to maintain V_T5F99K and select the desired Option; #1 or #2.  There is no direction as to the Start Date for the option.  Can you provide any additional information regarding the validity of the Start Date please?  We have retroactivity that occurs in Payroll and not sure of how this date will affect the processing.  Typically the steps provide an example or some direction on what is expected.

      Thank you!

      Stacey DeGarmo

      Author's profile photo Graziela Dondoni
      Graziela Dondoni
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Stacey,

      Thank you for the update.

      Did you set BSIRS to OFF? By default after note 3088446 will consider it as ON and will perform the split. In table V_T5F99K2 usually the start date used is 01.01.1900.

      Hope this information helps.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi Graziela,

      Thank you for forwarding this note.  We were facing issues whenever taxable wages for one of the tax types was negative while taxable wages for the other types were positive.  BSI was returning incorrect results because all of the items were being sent by SAP to the reverse tax engine.

      I hope this note will fix this particular issue.

      Regards

      Paddy

       

      Author's profile photo Graziela Dondoni
      Graziela Dondoni
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Paddy,

      I hope so. 😉

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi Graziela,

      BSI has reinstated tax type 11 for state of NY in TUB 74.  (effective date 1/1/2022).  We have tax type 11 included in the tax model for NY.  But, BSI was returning /411 as zero even though /711 is positive.  So, in order to fix this, we had to configure the rate of 0.3% in BTXRATE for tax type 11 for NY.  Now, I see this 0.003 in ER parameter in the BSI interface.  There are many other states such as NJ, MA, CO, IL etc, which do NOT need this entry in BTXRATE and /411 is correctly calculating at 0.3%.   Has anyone else reported this issue?  Perhaps this is a question to BSI?

      Regards

      Paddy

       

      Author's profile photo Beth Matthews
      Beth Matthews

      Paddy,

      Tax Type 11 is for the Credit Reduction, and most states had stopped having to pay back, so their percentage rate is 0.00. That started changing this year in TUB 73 for CA and CT; TUB 74 for CO, IL, MA, MN, NJ, NY, and PA. You will need to add Tax Type 11 to your tax models for all of the states that you do business in.

      If you go to table V_T5UX9, Type of Information = 05 (940 Credit Reduction Rate), you can change the rate to 0.003, effective 1/1/2022. This is an additional step that needs to be done after applying the TUB. SAP will release an OSS note, usually 4th quarter, to update this table.

      When you go to Tax Reporter and choose Annual, you will find Form 940 - Employer's Annual Federal Unemployment (FUTA) Tax Return and Form 940 Schedule A. The Schedule A shows all of the states' Reduction Rate. Not all of them have updated their rate from 0.000 to 0.003.

      As long as you have Tax Type 11 in your tax models, and have updated table V_T5UX9, you should not have to enter anything into table BTXRATE.

      Hope this helps.

      Beth Matthews

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi Beth / All,

      Thank you for taking the time to respond in such detailed fashion.

      Yes, we have tax type 11 in the tax model for NY and for other states such as NJ, MN, CO, MA, PA, IL etc.  Tax type 11 has been in the tax model for a while.  Only for CO and MA we had to recently add tax type 11 into the model, because for these 2 states this tax is brand new, not a reinstatement.

      We also have the entry in T5UX9 for type of info = 05 for NY and other states.  the Field 1 rate = 0.003

      But, BSI is not returning any value for /411 only for NY.   For other states such as NJ, CO, MA etc., BSI is calculating /411 at 0.3%.

      So, I thought that perhaps if I configure 0.003 for NY for tax type 011 in BTXRATE, then the tax will be calculated.  I tried it and it worked.  By the way BTXRATE has this entry only for NY, not for any of the other states.

      So, my question is why do I have to configure this explicitly in BTXRATE only for NY?  Did I do the right thing after all?  Tax type 11 for NY is calculating now, but I don't want to create some other problems in the process.

      I think that T5UX9 information type 05 is primarily for 940 in Tax reporter; it is not for calculation of the tax during the payroll run.

      Please let me know.  I will appreciate your response.

      Regards

      Paddy

      Author's profile photo Graziela Dondoni
      Graziela Dondoni
      Blog Post Author

      Hello Paddy,

      If you do a batch test? Do you get the same result?

      If even doing the batch test you don´t get any tax calculated, you can reach BSI, providing the script and explaining that tax is not being calculated.

      The following KBA has instructions in how to perform the batch test.

      3068397  How to execute a Batch Test in BSI TaxFactory

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Barbara Garrett
      Barbara Garrett

      So we have a really wacky error showing on the sync tool transaction and rpubtcu0.    Only the BSI level is wrong.  The cyclic info is correct. after the server upgrade.  Our BSI client is perfect  and the payroll seems to run but we have the wrong information coming out of the system.  We upgraded to 11.0.g.  our DEV system install is perfect.  this only happened in our QA system.

      showing%20error%20of%20level

      showing error of level

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Barbara,

      This happens when the program has not been updated on BSI.
      Please refer to KBA 2443834 (TaxFactory cyclic upgrade doesn´t show the new version).

      Also, you can check the following blog for details on that: BSI TaxFactory 10 Cyclic Update
      This blog is for BSI TaxFactory 10.0 but still valid for BSI TaxFactory 11.0.

      Kind Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Barbara Garrett
      Barbara Garrett

      hi Carlos,

      The BSI server update was done and the BSi client was done as well.  This was the result after this happened.  That's why it doesn't make sense.  We are in the midst of having SAP re-do the BSI server upgrade since obviously there was a problem there.  I'll let you know if that fixes the issue.

      Thanks,

      Barbara

      Author's profile photo Deborah Sanland
      Deborah Sanland

      Hello - we have TF11 since last year.  We are installing a new S4HANA environment and are trying to find the technical details on steps to create the TF11 schema on HANA.  Have searched the BSI site however it only shows technical details for the client itself & not the database details or instructions.  Can you please point to this information?

      Thank in advance for your help!

      Deb

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Deb,

      The last information we have on that are the following notes:

      3210624 - BSI TaxFactory SaaS and SAP S/4HANA Cloud, private edition FAQ.
      3093220 - Localization of HCM U.S. for RISE with SAP S/4HANA Cloud, private edition and SAP ERP Cloud, private edition as of EHP8.

      Kind Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Sreeram Kaki
      Sreeram Kaki

      Hi Carlos,

      Does BSI support HANA 2.0 on Redhat 7.9

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Sreeram,

      As detailed on note 2845114 (TF11 Installation - FAQ), BSI Tax Factory 11.0 is certified for HANA database.
      To check which specific versions BSI supports for the HANA database, I would recommend you to check it with BSI team directly.

      Thank you,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Ganesh Seepala
      Ganesh Seepala

      Hi Carlos,

      Thank you for your response. I am also on the same boat.  The sap note  2845114  doesnt tell on OS versions. is there a way from SAP to find BSI supports Hana 2.0 Database installed on Redhat linux 7.9?

       

      Thanks

      Ganesh

       

      Author's profile photo Manish Thakore
      Manish Thakore

      We have installed BSI 11 on OS level RHEL 8.2 and HANA 2.0 SPs 05

       

      NAME="Red Hat Enterprise Linux"
      VERSION="8.2 (Ootpa)"
      ID="rhel"
      ID_LIKE="fedora"
      VERSION_ID="8.2"
      PLATFORM_ID="platform:el8"
      PRETTY_NAME="Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.2 (Ootpa)"
      ANSI_COLOR="0;31"
      CPE_NAME="cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:8.2:GA"
      HOME_URL="https://www.redhat.com/"
      BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/"
      REDHAT_BUGZILLA_PRODUCT="Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8"
      REDHAT_BUGZILLA_PRODUCT_VERSION=8.2
      Author's profile photo Bruce Kuck
      Bruce Kuck

      Hello - We are having an issue with our Cyclic Level in SAP not matching the BSI Client level.  We applied TUBS 82 - 87 and ran the Sync Tool and moved it to our test box.  We then upgraded from Cyclic 11.0g to 11.0h in our dev and test box but the Cyclic version does not match in our test environment?   We update our test and production environments through transports and running the Sync Tool in our Development box for the cyclic does not produce a transport?

      Any assistance in this matter would be appreciated.

      Author's profile photo Beth Matthews
      Beth Matthews

      Hi Bruce,

      In your SAP Development box, execute both Cross-Client and Client-Specific in Productive Run mode. This should change your Cyclic from G to H for both tables. Then select Cross-client and create a transport. Then select Client-specific and create a transport. These are separate transports.

      Transports are not automatically created in the SAP Sync Payroll Tax Data Tool. You need to create the transports, regardless of applying TUBs, Cyclics, or both. Then you move them to your SAP TST/QA and PRD environments.

      Hope this helps.

      Beth Matthews

      Author's profile photo Suresh Gumpili
      Suresh Gumpili

      Hi,

      Due to recent changes to NY1P- TT19, we see the /419 of NY1P is not adjusting on YTD /719 wages.

      Example:

      YTD /719 = $426,486.64  * 0.0034 = $1450.05 (it should be)

      But YTD /419 is = $1,625.69

      even running retro from 01/01/2022, it is not getting adjusted.  is any advise on this?

      2022 01 Y NY1P /719 RE Payroll Expense Tax 426,486.64 USD 01/01/2022 12/31/2022

      2022 01 Y NY1P /419 TX Payroll Expense Tax 1,625.69 USD 01/01/2022 12/31/2022

       

      Regards,

      Suresh

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Suresh,

      I see that you've opened an incident addressing this same scenario.
      A colleague has been assigned to this case and will keep checking it with you.

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Xavier Joseph
      Xavier Joseph

      SAP has come back saying it is a BSI issue. BSI came back and asking

      Per Regulatory Bulletin 75, please pass  Value '1' in the Self-Adjust Tax (SA:) parameter.  In the SAP interface that was provided, the value "1" was not indicated on the  LUD ES line,  under Tax Type 19.

       

      See the modified test that  is attached for your review.

       

      ADC TC: NY1P NR: 1 RP: 1 RC: 1 SE: 0 NX: 0 HUD TT: 019 FN: 2 PW: 11143.35 HW: 80.00 MS: 1 NE: 0 ADD TE: 0 YW: 426486.64 YT: 1625.69 RN: 0 PW: 1.00 RF: 0 YG: 426486.64 VDC AT: 0 SDC SM: 9 BW: 11727.12 EDC DE: 0 NA: 0 LUD ES: 0 SA: 1 QW: 92256.34 QT: 313.67 PND: 0 MND: 0 QND: 0 YND: 0

      EQ: 500000.00 GP: 2000000.00

       

      My question is why SAP is not sending SA =1 in the BSI script?

       

      Author's profile photo Stacey DeGarmo
      Stacey DeGarmo

      Graziela and Carlos,

      I was not sure whether to post in the Reverse Tax Engine Blog specifically or here.  We have applied Note 3088446, 3239725 in our Sandbox but after reviewing the Blog looking for clarification on a couple of items.

      1. It appears based on the Reverse Tax Engine Blog that Note 3088446 delivers the Reverse Tax Engine defaulted to ON
      2. We have not moved to Cyclic H yet and have Table T5F99K2 currently set to OFF for BSIRS for testing
      3. However, based on the Reverse Tax Engine Blog it appears that we are required to leave T5F99K2 set to ON once Cyclic H is applied??
      4. Also the Reverse Tax Engine Blog in FAQ #1 regarding Activation of the Reverse Tax Engine, "you still need to make sure that method ALLOW_NEG_TAXABLES of BAdI PC10_PAY0002 is implemented on your system, allowing negative values be considered".
        1. Is there additional information regarding this BAdI?  How long has this been a requirement?  I am not seeing it has been implemented in our Sandbox.  Is this referenced in one of the Notes and we missed it?
        2. So not having BAdI PC10_PAY0002 implemented means that the Reverse Tax Engine functionality is ignored?

      Thank you,

      Stacey DeGarmo

      Author's profile photo Graziela Dondoni
      Graziela Dondoni
      Blog Post Author

      Hello Stacey,

      The only think that note 3088446 changes is the way negatives taxes are sent to BSI interface.

      If you don´t have the BAdI implemented and this is not affecting your system, another point is, the change in the reverse tax engine was already delivered in TF11, and in case you have negative taxes you should have  T5F99K2 activated, but as per your description you don´t have scenarios with negative amounts being send to BSI.

      If you use negative amounts, you will need to have BSIRS set to ON.

      Let me try to explain the background, after BSI TF 11, BSI requires to sent parameter ET: 3 in order to handle negative amounts in BSI script. After cyclic H they need different BSI script so this new parameter has been created.

      This is just for companies who has negative amounts scenario.

      I hope I was able to clarify.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Stacey DeGarmo
      Stacey DeGarmo

      Graziela,

      Thank you for the information. To clarify we have had ADTMD turned on since upgrading to TF11.0 and we do have scenarios with negative amounts.

      My reference to our Sandbox settings currently with BSIRS: OFF was when we wanted to test with the setting OFF and then test with the setting ON.  This was before seeing the Reverse Tax Engine Blog FAQs clarifying the behavior is Note 3088446 with the Default to BSIRS:ON and the BAdI also required.  Because we already created the BSIRS and assigned the OFF setting we are changing BSIRS to ON.

      Our outstanding question is with the introduction of the BAdI PC10_PAY0002 into the mix.  We do not have this BAdI implemented and would like to know where this has been referenced other than the Blog so we know where we missed this?  Was this part of the upgrade from TF10 to TF11 and we have missed this step?

      Thank you,

      Stacey

      Author's profile photo Graziela Dondoni
      Graziela Dondoni
      Blog Post Author

      Stacey,

      This an old BAdI for negative taxables.

      548804 - MSC: Negative taxables switch in Common Paymaster case

      I worked with customers that the call to BSI was not performed and the BAdI was needed, because none of BSI interface was created, if this is not the case in your scenarios, you don´t need to implement it.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Rosette Vaughn
      Rosette Vaughn

      Hi Graziela,

      Thank you for your response to Stacey on note 3088446.  It was very helpful as we are having the same issue (several employees taxes not calculating), after updating to Cyclic 11.0h.  Although your Blog reply provided a solution, we think this could have been handled differently.

      My question/comment is this - in Cyclic 11.0h, the Reverse Tax Engine process changed.  With such a big change, do you (SAP) know why BSI delivered the change with a status ‘Active’ as opposed to delivering it with ‘Off’ status to not cause such a dramatic change in tax calculations?  Resulting in us scrambling to find out why we were seeing such differences in our Cyclic 11.0h test results.  Just Curious?

      Thank you,

      Rosette Vaughn

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Rosette,

      As from Cyclic H, BSI requires negative input wages to be calculated exclusively by the Reverse Tax Engine while positive input wages to be calculated exclusively by the Regular Tax Engine. If the wages are sent to the incorrect Tax Engine, BSI will return hard errors with no tax calculation.

      Therefore, this is the reason why option BSIRS was delivered as ON, as it ensures that the new Reverse Tax Engine logic will be used as soon as note 3088446 is applied on the system, avoiding such BSI errors to be raised.

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Mitesh Kumar Jain
      Mitesh Kumar Jain

      Hello,

      Has anyone implemented De Minimis rule for these states?

      • Louisiana
      • North Dakota
      • West Virginia
      • Utah
      • Minnesota
      • South Carolina

      We have implemented feature 10EET and added logic to send EP: 1 for non-residents. During testing, we noticed that the values in PW (Period Wages) parameter is not used when determining the tax withholding and instead it is the Year-to-date Wages (YW). Due to this behavior, the subsequent tax withholding for the next pay cycles for said non-resident increases over time which is not correct.

      We reached out to BSI and they responded that the EP:1 parameter should be changed back to EP:0 when the threshold to determine De Minimis has been met. There is no functionality in the TaxFactory client to revert back to EP:0.

      Based on the response from BSI I'm assuming there is something in SAP to change parameters but I can't find that in feature 10EET.

      Please let me know if you have implemented De Minimis rule and already have a solution for this issue.

      Thanks,

      Mitesh