Skip to Content
Product Information
Author's profile photo Stefan Walz

Intercompany Cost Allocations in S/4HANA Cloud

Welcome to our blog about intercompany cost allocations and how they are handled in S/4HANA Financial Accounting.

In this blog Sebastian Doll and I would like to show you the general process overview for intercompany cost allocations and the resulting periodic intercompany billing. In the first section we will explain the guiding principles to meet the related requirements of cost management, legal and group reporting. Then in the second section we will give an overview about the types of cost allocations, that are enabled for cross company postings, and we will analyze the generated journal entries. We will look at the configuration for clearing account determination. Finally in the third section, we will see how the cost postings are billed to the receiver company at period end. This blog is based on CE2005.


I. Overview and guiding principles of intercompany cost allocations in S/4HANA Cloud

Companies are intensifying their cooperative relationships in today’s global economy, for example by setting up shared services. As a consequence, intercompany cost allocations and billing processes are on the rise. As organizations become more global, it is becoming increasingly common for employees to charge time to a different legal entity. Especially professional service organizations are familiar with this situation, since they have consultants located across the world – as well as customer projects that are set up around the globe.

Let us present a process overview in figure 1.
A complete end-to-end intercompany CO allocation scenario consists of two parts: the intercompany cost posting and the periodic intercompany billing.

Figure 1: General overview for intercompany cost postings using the example of activity allocation

First, let’s have a look on the intercompany cost allocations. Compared to a scenario in which the costs are first collected in the supplying company and then periodically invoiced to the ordering company, direct cross-company posting has several advantages from a cost analysis perspective:

  • The costs are immediately visible on the receiver. This is particularly essential in case on the receiver object runs a subsequent time and material billing, which can start immediately after for example time or travel confirmation.
  • The direct intercompany posting provides much more detailed information on the receiver side. If the recipient is a customer project using resource-related billing, information such as the activity type, the service rendered date, the employee and the employee’s note must be transferred, so that this data is available for the itemization of the billing document. The same applies to expenses recorded in Concur: here, the trip data is important for the project
  • You can directly trace the costs of the receiver object back to the sender object.
  • On the sender object you get the debit of the sending cost center with a link to the cost object in the other company code, which has the received the service

Thus, the intercompany cost posting covers the requirement for enhanced cost analysis – in both the sending and the receiving company.

However, no taxes are posted during the intercompany cost posting, nor revenues, receivables and payables. Hence, we need a second part: The intercompany billing. This is done as a periodic job based on the aggregated intercompany cost postings. The billing is done in reference to an intercompany sales order, with the receiving company as customer. Thus, based on the sales order the sending company (by sales organization) and the receiving company are determined.

The periodic intercompany billing process selects all CO journal entry items posted in the selected period.

Figure 2 shows an example based on T-accounts for this scenario

Figure 2: Postings of an intercompany activity allocation with margin


Guiding principles

In the upper section you see an example for intercompany cost allocations – here, time confirmation. For all intercompany cost allocations there is the same pattern provided:

  • The ICO clearing accounts are P&L accounts and must not be a cost element (G/L account type = nonoperating Expense or Income), since no cost objects are available for these line items.
  • In all 1a) and 1b) Journal entries a trading partner is filled: the cost postings balance to zero from a group reporting view. In these line items all detail information of the cost posting are available, like partner fields, personnel number and activity type.
  • The intercompany cost allocations – posted with journal entry type “CC” – are relevant for controlling on sender and receiver cost object. In case of a customer project as the receiver, the reposted costs are recognized for time and material billing to customer and they will lead to a matching revenue recognition posting on the project based on the event-based revenue recognition.
  • It is recommended to assign a separate intercompany clearing G/L account for each origin G/L account. This allows the assignment of the 1a) journal entry line items to the same financial statement node (the same of course for 1b)) so that those postings do not impact the financial statement.
    This especially valid for the intercompany travel expense scenario: here, the travel expenses must be reported in the supplying company. The intercompany allocation must not reduce the amount of travel expenses in the supplying company and increase in the receiving company.
  • For the intercompany cost allocation in the supplying company, the sender object is a cost center (in the app “Reassign costs and revenues” there could be a different one). Receiver objects in the ordering company could be cost center, project (customer project, internal project and Mario project/EPPM project) or service order item.
    Remark: with CE2011 the intercompany cost allocation to service order item are now taken in account in periodic billing too.

The periodic intercompany billing and subsequent AP posting in the lower section is necessary to cover all legal requirements

  • The intercompany billing is done by a periodic job, which takes all intercompany cost postings of a selected period in account. (F1829 – “Generate Intercompany Billing request”)
  • Here taxes are calculated and posted– if the company codes are not in the same tax group – based on the calculated affiliated revenues in supplying company and affiliated expenses in ordering company.
  • The affiliated revenue and the affiliated expense G/L accounts are P&L accounts and impact the Financial statement!
    There are no detail account assignments available as the billing line items are created on base of aggregated CO journal entries.
  • As Universal Journal profitability is active in Cloud, the affiliated revenues are posted against a profitability segment including the Debit Memo Request as attribute. Thus, the affiliated revenue G/L accounts need to be cost elements.
    If you use cost elements for the affiliated expenses, you need to assign an automatic cost assignment (OKB9/ SSCUI ID 102639) as there are no detail account assignments provided.

Remark: there may be differences in the value between the affiliated revenues and the intercompany cost allocations, visible on the intercompany clearing accounts, in a given period – even the billing is based on the allocated amounts and there is no additional price calculation in place.
In addition to possible shifts in periods, these are mainly currency differences. The intercompany billing selects the costs based on transaction currency. The amounts are converted to the billing currency and company currency if necessary. This is done with one currency date – by default the last day of the month. The single cost allocations are converted into company code currency with every single posting date. For more see note 537556


Let’s take a look at a few aspects of how intercompany bookings are represented in cost accounting and legal reporting.

In the travel scenario, the expenses on the cost center balance to zero due to the credit of the intercompany reposting.
In the income statement the travel expenses remain visible because the intercompany clearing account is included in the same financial statement node. The expenses are offset by the affiliated travel revenues.

With the intercompany activity allocation, the cost center is credited with the activity quantity and amount – same as for an intracompany activity allocation. In addition, the cost center is credited by the margin amount. Since it is posted with its own G/L account, it can be applied flexibly in the cost center reporting via assigning it to used FSV or cost element group.
In the income statement, an activity allocation is balanced to zero in the case of an intracompany allocation. So that this also happens with intercompany postings within one company code, the intercompany clearing account needs to be included in the same financial statement node as the activity allocation G/L accounts. The affiliated revenues for time are posted with the periodic intercompany billing are offset by the original personal expenses posted per period on the cost center.

If the recipient of the intercompany activity allocation is a customer project that generates revenues, it may be a requirement that the revenues generated by this intercompany service can be allocated to the supplying company. You can use the functionality of the origin PC described in this blog:


Relevant Scope items

3 scope items describe the processes mentioned here – distinguished by the business scenario

4AN – Intercompany Billing for Cross-Company Cost Accounting Postings

16T – Intercompany Processes – Project-Based Services

4AU – Intercompany Processes for Enterprise Projects

The content for the intercompany clearing accounts and the intercompany billing is activated with the project scenarios 16T and 4AU. If you use another Intercompany scenario – e.g. the concur scenario 1M1, with CE2005 you need to ensure one of them is activated.

Remark: the scope item 3ZB Billing of Costs Between Affiliated Companies is not part of the processes mentioned here. In this process there is no cross-company CO posting. The intercompany transaction is an intercompany billing – of collected costs in the sending company code.


Now let’s move on to the individual CO intercompany use cases.

II. Intercompany co business transactions

There are several business activities using intercompany CO postings: time confirmation or other type of activity allocation, amount-based cost allocation and travel cross company posting – e.g. with Concur.

Especially in professional service businesses intercompany staffing on customer project is very common. The consultants confirm their time and expenses accordingly. For the activity allocation a mark-up can be applied.

Let’s start with the activity allocation process.


Intercompany activity allocation/ time confirmation with mark-up

Within the scenario of intercompany activity allocation there is an option to apply additional markups.

The general overview is shown in figure 1 and the T-accounts in figure 2

The resulting journal entry line items are shown below in the app ”Display Line Items in General Ledger”.

This example reflects the time confirmation of Employee “John Consultant”, working in company 1710 (US), of one hour “T003 Platinum Consulting” to WBS element SWINT.1.1 in company 1010 (DE)

Figure 3: Journal entries of an intercompany activity allocation

For more details about the option for creating separate intercompany rates, the posting logic and reporting, see this blog:

Explanation of the posting example:

  • All line items are posted on P&L accounts. As mentioned, the clearing accounts are non-operating expense accounts
  • There are always two documents in each company: one for the activity allocation and one for the margin.
  • The cost center 17101902 in company 1710 is credited and the WBS element SWINT01.1.1 in company 1010 is debited. In case the receiver is a customer project, revenue recognition will be executed on this project based on both postings – activity and margin posting.
  • The reference document “12” in column 4 shows that all four documents are based on one source document: the time sheet entry (column 5)
  • The quantity is only provided in the activity allocation posting – to prevent double quantities on the sending cost center and the receiving customer project for T&M billing
  • The margin posting is posted with the same business transaction type RKL as the related activity allocation
    • Before CE2002 the margin was posted with business transaction type KAMV. We changed this with CE2002 for two reasons: Firstly, to keep these two postings together. Secondly, when we posted with KAMV, it was not possible to distinguish margin postings from other amount-based cost allocations.
  • To allow the bundling of the margin and related activity allocation in the Time & Material billing there is the unit of measure copied in the margin document with quantity zero – 0.000H – and the partner activity type “T003”.
  • In addition, the personnel number and the WBS element are provided in the journal entries in the sending company. The WBS element is only attributed (not a real account assignment), but available for reporting. Therefore, it is possible in the sending company, to drill down on WBS elements to intercompany time and expense postings in the same way as for intracompany postings.
  • The trading partner in the far right column shows that this document has a relation to another company and is relevant for group consolidation.
  • Special requirement for stable intercompany prices is applied (currency rate independent). As seen in our example the intercompany cost rate in the supplying company (US) can be maintained in receiver company currency (here, it is EUR). We use this currency as the transaction currency. Hence, the receiving company is charged with a fixed intercompany cost rate – independent of currency fluctuations.


Now we come to intercompany CO postings in the context of concur expense reports.


Concur intercompany posting

In the Concur application, an employee can assign his expense report to a cost object (cost center or project) in a different company code.

The company code in which we post the expenses, tax and accounts payable (the employee liability), is derived from the employee master record.

To assign the expenses in the employee’s company, we derive the cost center from the employee master. (if there is no employee available for the expense report in Concur, a cost center needs to be derived and sent from concur)

If no cost center can be derived for an intercompany scenario, the posting will fail.

An overview of this scenario you can see below in figure 4

Figure 4: Overview of Concur intercompany expense report

 Now let’s have a look at the journal entries which were created in this example. Travel expenses are posted to the cost center of the employee. Within the same „Logical Unit of work“ there is a CO reposting document created – crediting employee cost center in company 1010 and debiting WBS element in company 1710. The trading partner is set for the CO posting line items only -> in group reporting view this reposting is balanced to zero.

Remark: If the receiver object is a customer project, there will be an additional revenue recognition document created with reference to the Concur document

Figure 5: Journal entries of an intercompany Concur posting

Explanation of the posting example in figure 5:

Employee “Stefan Walz”, working in company 1010 (DE), creates an expense report of €100 to the customer project WBS element ICOTESTUS.1.1 in company 1710 (US)

The travel expense, tax and AP posting incur in the company of the employee -> company 1010. The travel expense is posted to the cost center of the employee (cost center assignment can be defined in employee master data).

The cost reposting is done with accounting documents with the journal entry type CC “Sec. Cost Cross Company”. The cost center of the employee is credited and the WBS element is debited. The trading partner is applied to these line items.

All journal entry line items are referenced to the same reference document (column 6) with the reference document type CTE(CONCUR) – see column 7.

For reporting purposes, we provide additional the personnel number and the WBS element on the P&L line items in the supplying company. The WBS element is only attributed (not real account assignment) but available for reporting. So, it is now possible in the sending company to drill down on intercompany expenses on WBS element in the same way as for postings within the same company.

Regarding tax:

  • Tax is only relevant in the company of the employee: 1010. In the intercompany „CO“ line items – JE type CC – there is no tax indicator applied.
  • Within the cost reposting there are two line items with expense accounts, which are tax relevant but don‘t carry tax indicator -> can be distinguished by Journal entry type „CC“
  • Tax will be calculated within the subsequent intercompany billing – if the companies are not within a tax group

The transaction keys explain the type of financial posting: BUV (Clearing between company codes), HRP (Customer/vendor trip costs postings) and HRT (Trip costs postings, expense accounts)


Supplier invoice with intercompany account assignment

This scenario can be used for the integration of external 3rd party travel applications to S/4HANA cloud. For mass data integration the API for Supplier invoice can be used.

A supplier invoice cannot post items in different company codes!
The supplier invoice will be posted in the company code of the employee. We applied an automatic intercompany CO reposting document to get the costs on the object that was assigned by the employee.

Figure 6:  overview of the intercompany supplier invoice scenario

How the scenario works:

  1. The user creates a supplier invoice with the app Create Supplier invoice or uses the API for supplier invoice for mass data handling with external travel application
    • Special document type – e.g. “ER” – must be used
    • Expense line item is assigned to WBS element. WBS element is assigned to a different company code
    • Personnel number is mandatory
  2. With the transfer to Financial Accounting – not visible for the user on the UI – the expense line item is redirected to the cost center of the employee, which we get from the employee master
    • We create a “CO reposting document” – crediting the cost center of the employee and debiting the WBS element of the supplier invoice account assignment
    • This is done in one Logical Unit of Work with the invoice
    • The same expense account of the supplier invoice is used
    • Work item, personnel number and line item text are copied
    • Special travel Intercompany clearing accounts should be used (see self config UI)

Let’s create an example in the system. We use the app Create Supplier Invoice, which is part of the role SAP_BR_AP_ACCOUNTANT

Figure 7:  Example supplier invoice – header


The process is controlled with the document type ER.

Figure 8: Example for supplier invoice – G/L item view

In supplier invoice item, the WBS element SW008.1.1 is entered, which is assigned to company code 1010. This entry is only allowed, when additional the personnel number is applied. From this entry we get the cost center, which is assigned to the same company code 1710 as the supplier invoice.

The item text “Hotel for workshop” will be copied in the CO reposting document and visible on the WBS journal entry line item.

Figure 9: Journal entries of an intercompany supplier invoice

In the upper section you see the AP postings of the supplying company 1710. Here the cost center of the employee is debited with the supplier invoice – line item 2.

In the section below the project is debited with by the CO reposting in company 1010

All postings refer to the supplier invoice – see column 4 reference document

The CO reposting is posted with a separate journal entry type CC and business transaction type RKU1. All four items are assigned to a trading partner.

Tax – here, sales tax – is only relevant in the company of the supplier invoice for its AP and expense line item. The intercompany CO posting is not relevant for tax.

The text is copied to the line item of the project in company code 1010 and thus available for time and material billing to customer.

The WBS element is attributed in the reposting CO documents in the supplying company to allow tracing. The real account assignment is defined by the field Object Type.


Intercompany cost allocation

You can allocate costs between company codes with the Reassign Costs and Revenues app. Possible use cases are intercompany allocation of travel or shared service costs.

Remark: You can also post intercompany expenses with the Post General Journal Entries app. But the companies need not to be in the same tax group, and the intercompany postings are not selected in the periodic billing.

This restriction does not apply to the Reassign Costs and Revenues app.

The app is part of the Overhead Accountant role.

Figure 10: Intercompany expense allocation with Reassign Costs and Revenues app

You need to specify the allocation expense account. The sender cost center is assigned to company 1710 and the receiver WBS element is assigned to company 1010. You enter an amount in transaction currency.

When we save we get the journal entries below.

Figure 11: Journal entries of an intercompany cost reassignment

In the upper section you see the postings for the sending company code. The cost center is credited.

In the section below the project is debited with the expense account.

You see both journal entries are referenced to the CO document 200000103.

In all four documents, the trading partner is assigned.

With this scenario we finish the CO intercompany postings. We learned that the flexible definition of the intercompany clearing accounts is important for the financial reporting. So let’s have a look at this.


Definition of Intercompany Clearing accounts

There is a self-configuration UI available under the task Automatic Account Determination, which you can access with the BPC_Expert role.

Here you can assign different clearing accounts per origin posted P&L G/L account (view cluster FINSVC_CO_CCC – see note 2457163 ).

Figure 12: Self-service UI for intercompany clearing accounts

The assigned intercompany clearing accounts must be defined by the G/L account type “Nonoperating Expense or Income”.

Remarks to the account determination in the different processes:

  • In the Concur scenario, the travel Expense account needs to be assigned to an intercompany clearing account in the customizing activity of figure 12. If there is no clearing account derived, you get an error with the transfer of the expense report to S/4HANA Accounting.
  • For the other cost allocation scenarios (activity allocation, time confirmation, cost re-assignment) we read additional the configuration activity Accounting Intercompany Clearing Accounts ( figure 13), if nothing could be derived in the activity figure 12.
    Here you can define only one G/L account for every company-company relationship. And the clearing accounts must be balance sheet accounts.
    Note: If you use these balance sheet accounts, the intercompany posting has an impact on your financial statement and P&L. So you need to ensure that the posted expense G/L accounts are excluded for the intercompany billing – otherwise you would activate it twice. As with this posting there are no taxes applied, this would be only be an optional scenario if the companies are within one tax group.

Figure 13 Configuration activity Accounting Intercompany Clearing Accounts


Control of CO intercompany postings

With CE2102 it’s possible to control intercompany co postings for company code relationships via the SSCUI “Block Intercompany Postings” (ID 104056).

Figure%2014%20Configuration%20of%20blocking%20intercompany%20co%20postingsFigure B1 Configuration of blocking intercompany co postings

In the next step, you can allow or block all intercompany postings, or define an allowlist for certain combinations of sender and receiver company codes.

Figure B2 General settings for blocking ICO CO postings

If you work with an allowlist you can define for which company code relations ICO posting are  allowed

Figure B3 maintaining allowed company code relations


Remark:This configuration is only relevant for co postings, not for G/L postings.

The following transactions/apps you can control:

  • Time recording, timesheet postings/ Manage My Timesheet
  • Activity allocation/ Manage Direct Activity Allocation
  • The co posting within the Manual supplier invoice of type ER see above
  • Expense posting through Concur integration
  • Settlement
  • CO assessments/allocations
  • Overhead calculation, periodic and event-based
  • Manual cost allocation
  • Reassign Costs and Revenues

This Configuration will be available in OP with the 2021 Release. In OP the check is not active for the supplier invoice scenario and the Concur Intercompany posting.

With CE2102 the Note  2855105 , in which we in general restricted several ICO co postings, is obsolete.


This completes part one of the intercompany CO scenario. Now let’s move on to the third section, the periodic intercompany billing


III. Periodic Intercompany Billing

With the intercompany CO postings, some legal requirements are not yet covered. We are still missing taxes, accounts receivables and payables as well as affiliated revenues and expenses for group reporting. This is provided by the periodic intercompany billing, which we will explain in the following chapter step by step.


Creation of intercompany sales order

For every company-to-company relationship a sales order is required – as basis for the intercompany billing document.

It can be created with the app Create Sales Order Intercompany, which is part of the role SAP_BR_INTERNAL_SALES_REP_PRSV.

Figure 14: Creation of an intercompany sales order

The assigned customer “10401010” represents the receiving company. There is a separate sales order document type SO03 and a separate item category PS04 for intercompany. There is only one item required, to which an intercompany Time and Material Billing profile is assigned.


CO documents are base for intercompany billing

The basis for the intercompany billing are the CO journal entry postings. Below we see the CO intercompany postings, which are relevant for an intercompany billing from company 1710 to 1010 for April 2020: they are posted in company code 1010 with trading partner 1710..

Figure 15: Intercompany postings for a certain period


Creation of intercompany billing document

The periodic intercompany billing is done by the app Generate Intercompany Billing Request, which is part of the role SAP_BR_INTERNAL_SALES_REP_PRSV – see figure 16.

Figure 16: Request for periodic intercompany billing

The billing is created with reference to intercompany sales order 16152 shown above.

By selecting Save sales document, a subsequent Debit Memo request is created.

Figure 17: Intercompany debit memo request

In the DMR there are line items created by the different sources – here two items for different expense types and one for the times. Basis for this billing proposal are the postings in figure 15.

  • There is a billing product “E002” derived for the six travel postings on G/L account 61007000 with a value of 60 USD
  • There is a billing product “E001” derived for the one travel posting on G/L account 61003000 with a value of 100 USD
  • There is a billing product “T003” derived for the time confirmations with a value of 448,88 USD.

The matching CO postings show a value for the time confirmation of 400 EUR in transaction currency, which is converted to 495,20 USD in company code currency.

Here we get an example for different values based on different currency rates.

Figure 18 explains the pricing for the time confirmation

Figure 18: Pricing for the intercompany time confirmations

The aggregated time confirmation costs based on transaction currency of the intercompany postings are 400 EUR. The 400 EUR are converted with one currency date – 30.4.2020 – to 448,48 USD.

With reference to the DMR the invoice is created

Figure 19 the intercompany Invoice

There is a separate intercompany invoice type CI02 used for intercompany billing

Below you see the accounting document of the invoice.

Figure 20: Journal entry for the intercompany invoice

There is a detailed invoice document available, which lists the individual intercompany CO postings.

Figure 21: Output document for the intercompany Invoice


Example for and intercompany AR posting with the matching AP document created by IDOC

Let us show you an example for the journal entry for the AR invoice and the matching AP document.

This example is different to the example above.

Figure 22: Example for an intercompany AR posting

With IDOC the corresponding AP Document in the receiving company code is created:

Figure 23: Example for a matching intercompany AP posting

Remark: To get an account assignment for the expense posting in the receiver company code, created by IDOC, you need to maintain a receiver cost object in the app Default Account Assignment for the expense G/L account. Otherwise you get an error in the IDOC AP posting.

Reflection of intercompany co postings in periodic billing

Please note: with S/4HC 2011 postings on a service document as receiver are now recognized in intercompany billing too.

To include in OP additional co transactions – like co settlement – in the periodic intercompany billing please check Note 1447123



We hope you enjoyed this overview of Intercompany CO allocations and its subsequent intercompany billing. The CO allocations allows for the receiver detail information on line item level and a perfect tracing for the intercompany activities, while the legal billing is done aggregated at period-end. We plan to enhance the scenarios on roadmap as these scenarios are more and more used by customers – especially shared service allocations. We will keep you updated.

Assigned Tags

      You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.
      Author's profile photo Sammar Razdhan
      Sammar Razdhan

      Brilliant Article explaining the process of Inter Company processes in Cloud.. We are building on similar lines for professional services in S/4 HANA On premise..

      Author's profile photo Prateek Mohapatra
      Prateek Mohapatra

      Hey Sammar..Can you please share with us with what did you find for this on S/4 On-premise?

      Author's profile photo Resul Simsek
      Resul Simsek

      Hi Stefan,

      Very detail and excellent blogpost. Thank you very much.

      I have some questions;

      1-  On the periodic billing for the supplier company, the object type is Profitability Segment (41970000 Gl Account). Can we see WBS element as an attribute in profitability segment? I wonder how can we understand this revenue is related with   “X” project.

      I can only see project name for the Activity and ICO accounts, not revenue account.  (figure-2 in blog)


      2-  In the “Intercompany clearing accounts assignment” 100297 SSCUI , I see only   610* expense accounts .



      What is the difference between, “65008400 – Pur Ser Accomodation”  and “61003000 – Travel Expenses – Hotel and Accommodation” ?

      650*  accounts are not included in “Intercompany clearing accounts assignment”  config in figure-x. Do we need to add  650* accounts to there?

      On the GBB-VBR  , E* materials assigned to the  650* accounts. Which account does “Concur” consider and where we assign accounts to concur expenses?



      GBB-VBR expense materials


      Simply this part is confusing me ?

      Thank you,

      Kind Regards,


      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Resul,

      thanks for your feedback.

      (1) the periodic billing has no account assignment. there is no information about the account assigned object in the receiver company. the billing items are highly aggregated. there is no link of the intercompany revenue line items to a cost object.

      thus, the CO reporting must be based on the CO postings

      (2) we provide in the default content for the intercompany clearing account the G/L accounts which are common for cost allocation - mainly the travel expenses.

      If you use a different account for intercompany posting, you need to add it in this table.

      but please notify: this process does not work for inventory postings or other logistic postings. e.g. you cannot post a cross company material consumption or supplier invoice.

      regards Stefan

      Author's profile photo Resul Simsek
      Resul Simsek

      Thank you Stefan, I got the picture.

      Thank you for high value added sharings.


      Kind Regards,


      Author's profile photo Clare Campbell-Smith
      Clare Campbell-Smith

      Useful post.

      Can I ask a question?

      You say by figure 14 "There is only one item required, to which an intercompany Time and Material Billing profile is assigned".

      What if an organisation whants to bill different types of recharge separately (so actually needs to create multiple items (e.g. using the E0* materials)?

      You used to be able to do this using scope item 16T - can you still do this - and if do, how?

      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Clare,


      as discussed in the S/4HANA cloud community the billed material derivation is independent of the used material in the intercompany sales order. The sales order is just for triggering the invoice and define the receiving company. Same as for T&M customer billing, the billed material is derived by the G/L accounts in case of expenses. This functionality is independent of the scope item.

      regards Stefan

      Author's profile photo Resul Simsek
      Resul Simsek

      Hi Stefan,

      Thank you again.  I have some questions.

      1- How ICO clearing accounts will be cleared(no balance) for each company code? As I understood, It can be cleared with Group level, but what about company code level? Do these accounts remain same? These accounts are not secondary cost element.


      2- For the periodic Billing, necessary SSCUIs are 102462 and 102463. Is this correct? I mean accounts perspective.


      By the way, I guess,  on the figure- 2  we should see “99999900” ICO account instead of have “68888800” GL account for Ordering company 1010.

      Thank you,

      Kind Regards,  Resul

      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Resul,

      1. the ICO clearing accounts will not be cleared. As you mention, they are non operating P&L accounts. They need to be taken in account in legal report to define correct expenses by company code.
      2. The 2 SSCUIs you mention are just for the accounts payable account on the receiving side.
        Billed revenues are defined by the billed materials, derived by the ICO DIP configuration.
        the recevables account by the customer assigned in in the ICO sales order.

      Thanks for your hint. I corrected it.

      kind regards Stefan


      Author's profile photo Resul Simsek
      Resul Simsek

      Hi Stefan,

      In my humble opinion, Intercompany allocations solution(T&M scenarios) in S4Cloud is good.

      But what about if the customer projects(supplier and receiver) contract types are “fixed price“?

      We have only ICO supplier invoice and time confirmation info on the supplier side, time confirmations does not flow to receiver side. We can infer from that, we lost some detail information like employee based etc   on the receiver company code. Because there is only supplier invoice.

      There are 2 project and tracing of time confirmation details on the receiver side seems not possible.

      What do you think for Fixed Price ICO scenarios?

      Can we handle fixed price ICO scenarios with using one customer project on receiver side like T&M   ICO logic?

      Thank you,

      Kind Regards,


      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Resul,

      In the scenario described here we post cross company cost allocations. this allows detail information on receiver side. this is independent if the receiver customer project is fixed price or T&M. you can post fixed values by a cost allocation.

      The scenario you describe is scope item 3ZB Billing of Costs Between Affiliated Companies. Here you have on sending side a sales order, which you bill , and on the receiving side a Supplier invoice with reference to a PO. Here you have no detail information, correct.

      best regards


      Author's profile photo Resul Simsek
      Resul Simsek

      Thank you very much Stefan.

      Actually, 3ZB is not active, but process is similar. We have Fixed Price contract between group company. It is difficult to trace Projects belong 2 Group company. There is no link.

      Do we have different approach? We will check cost allocation between group companies. I wonder legal Fixed Price billing and invoice in reference to cost allocation later on(Between group companies).

      Thank you

      Kind Regards,

      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Resul,


      not sure, if I get you correct.

      If you collect cost on a customer project with customer is an affiliated company, we write information about the affiliated company for group reporting purposes. The account receivables and the affiliated revenues as same as the revenue recognition postings on the project write the trading partner information; on the receiving side the expenses and the accounts payables.

      regards stefan


      Author's profile photo Margit Rosenbauer
      Margit Rosenbauer

      Many thanks for this article!

      I've a question regarding invoice output:

      For example for time related items quantity is always '1 h'  although more hours are invoiced. Rate is item net amount per 1 h instead of the correct hourly rate.This leads to a wrong invoice output. The related times in the service journal entries tables are correct.

      The DMR output in figure 21 is similar, the units are just hidden.
      How can we get the correct amount and rate?


      Intercompany invoice item with 1 h instead of 8 h and wrong rate

      Best regards

      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Margit,

      you are right. It seems misleading.

      Just to explain, where it comes from: Behind the intercompany billing there is a DIP profile, which only takes costs in account, no quantity and quantity based pricing. this explains the quantity of one. the rate makes no sense here.

      But I think this can be handled by the flexible output management for SD Billing. especially there is the option to show all the the line items, which are taken in account by the T&M billing.
      Do you think, customer can arrange this?

      regards Stefan

      Author's profile photo Resul Simsek
      Resul Simsek

      Hi Stefan,

      Again me 🙂

      In below screen as we see Profit center is YB101.

      According to my search on the system, Profit center on the receiver side populated from Cost center not from ICO Project.

      So on Receiver company side(1010) , Profit center directly flow from Project Billing Item. Thats fine.

      But what about Profit Center on the supplying side?(1710)  It flows from Cost center.

      Also on ICO billing side, you mean sales order created with aggregated level.  No Project information.

      How can we reach Profit Center P&L report on 1710 Company code?  It is not same Profit center in ICO T&M Customer Project.

      Thank you

      Kind Regards,


      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Resul,

      yes, the profit center is always derived from the real account assignment ( Object type).

      On the supplying side, company 1710, it is the cost center of the employee, 17101902.

      On the receiving side, company 1010, it is the project, SWINT01.1.1.

      Additional there is the partner profit center provided on all line items.

      This allows you a profit center reporting based on the cost posting.

      as you mention, not with the intercompany invoice and the related accounts payable posting - as this is on aggregated level.

      sorry, next time I will provide an example with different profit centers on sending and receiving side.

      regards Stefan


      Author's profile photo Resul Simsek
      Resul Simsek

      Hi Stefan,

      Yes we have partner profit center in order to reach Project Profit center.  But this field also populated for other non ICO scenarios as well , if I remember correctly.

      Anyway, it requires some reporting tricks to be able to reach clear view, like using with partner project field etc. 🙂

      Thank you very much,


      Author's profile photo Thomas Von Holzen
      Thomas Von Holzen

      Hi Stefan

      That's an excellent piece of work and I really appreciate the level of detail. I do have some concerns though

      1. Is there an option to setup an approval workflow for the "reassign cost and revenues" part? I.e. we would want that receiving cost center's company code accountant will have to confirm the reassignment posting.
      2. It seems that it is possible to directly post to ANY company code, even if you don't have access to. How could this be restricted?
      3. It seems that such CC journal entry posting is also reflected on the trial balance (whereas I understand this should hit CO only...?)


      Thanks and regards,



      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Thomas,

      thanks for the feedback.

      1. no, there is no approval workflow planned.
      2. there is now a new configuration in place. you can control for which company code relations the co postings are allowed. I added today this section.
      3. you know with universal journal all co postings are reflected in General ledger. You need these co postings and its clearing line items if you want to get more detailed information like profit center and functional area. So it makes sense to include them in Financial statement

      hope this helps

      best regards Stefan

      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      I added a new section. It is now possible to control by configuration, for which company code relations the co postings are allowed.

      Author's profile photo Klaus Löhnert
      Klaus Löhnert

      In many cases one requires an intercompany billing for goods and and services including cost, margin and taxes with cost allocation to the right cost object in the ordering company.

      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Klaus,

      are these scenarios , in which we allocate costs or rather delivery products or services? is in this cases a PO on the receiving side and am own sales order on the sending side available? In these case we assign the costs with the GR or Supplier invoice with the reference to the PO, in which the cost object is assigned. If we would post in the co scenario the ICO invoice to the cots object, they would be double.

      regards Stefan


      Author's profile photo Klaus Löhnert
      Klaus Löhnert

      Hi Stefan,

      these are scenarios, in which we allocate costs to delivered products or services, because in service business invoicing can be done on the level the delivered service (service product related to an equipment or functional location) or on the level the labour and products used to deliver the service.

      Products and services are mainly purchased as non-stock items via work orders.

      In each case planned and actual cost are collected work order (internal order), which may be linked to a

      • project WBS
      • sales order item
      • service order item
      • subscription item.

      Regards Klaus

      Author's profile photo Víctor Álvarez
      Víctor Álvarez

      Stefan Walz just a simple question, Intercompany Sales Order should be created manually or it is being created automatically when a posting from other company (let's say 2310) reach company customer project company (2410)?

      Scope item 4AN it is a bit confusing about that.

      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Victor,

      the intercompany sales order must be created manually for every sender-receiver company code relation. But only once.

      best regards Stefan

      Author's profile photo Ginette Erpen
      Ginette Erpen

      Brilliant ! Thank you very much !

      Author's profile photo Jack Alan Reynolds
      Jack Alan Reynolds

      Hi Stefan Walz , is this functionality available in S/4HANA 2021 on-premise version? And if not, when is it planned to be made available for on-premise customers? Thanks! Jack

      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Jack,

      this functionality is mainly available in OP, as the base for the new posting logic is the Universal Journal.

      The supplier invoice scenario and the feature with the intercompany cost rate and the subsequent intercompany margin posting is in OP behind the business function FINS_CO_ICO_PROC_ENH_101, but with different cost rate UI.

      best regards Stefan

      Author's profile photo Raphael Winter
      Raphael Winter

      Fantastic article, very helpful, thanks both!

      We are also using the IC process for cost postings and activity allocation between the entities.

      When I was reading your blog, I stopped exactly at one screenshot, where I would appreciate your explanation. Why do you have this posting on clearing account without any cost object? Is it a statistical posting?

      We prepare our reporting based on Line items in GL and we experienced the issue that some postings (on ICO clearing accounts) simply don't have any cost object assigned- neither cost center, nor cost center origin, nor a project.

      Do you know why and can you explain please?



      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Raphael,

      the intercompany clearing account line item we need for general ledger and group reporting.

      This line item should not be relevant for Controlling reporting. If we would provide the wbs element in this line item, the costs on the project would balance to zero.
      From controlling perspective the offset controlling object, which is credited, is in company code 1710, the cost center 17101902, with the first line item in your screen shot.

      This is the reason we use a non operating expense account.

      best regards



      Author's profile photo Venkat Bommakanti
      Venkat Bommakanti

      Hi Stevan Waltz

      Thanks for posting a very good document that is very informative. However i have some questions. In the second diagram (Figure 2) - Posting of intercompany activity  allocation you mentioned that the The ICO clearing accounts are P&L accounts and must not be a cost element (G/L account type = nonoperating Expense or Income). So from which configuration step is this 99999900 ICO clearing for activity allocation picked up for a on premise version. Thanks and appreciate your response.

      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Venkat,

      it is the table in figure 12.

      view cluster FINSVC_CO_CCC

      or in IMG cost center accounting -> actual postings -> intercompany postings -> assign intercompany clearing accounts





      Author's profile photo Venkat Bommakanti
      Venkat Bommakanti

      Hi Stefan

      Thanks for the information. I was able to get this done.


      Author's profile photo GIANLUCA TACCONE

      Hi Stefan,

      thanks a lot for the huge effort to explain this process, much appreciated.

      I have a question regarding picture 2:

      From a pure internal CO object consideration Company code 1710 has:

      Cost Centers- Minor Costs of 60+20

      Profitability Analysis- Revenues of 80

      So the 1710 CO PNL positive impact of these intercompany postings would be:

      80 Minor Costs + 80 Revenues= 160

      I think it should be only 80  (minor cost + markup) but I have certainly misunderstood something.

      What do you think ?

      Thanks a lot



      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Gianluca,

      you are right: from CO perspective we have a credit of 80€ in company code 1710: the internal rate and the margin crediting the cost center.

      Same us the affiliated expenses in the receiving company code the affiliated revenues posted by the ICO Billing should not be taken in account in Controlling.
      It is a technical reason, that we post the affiliated revenues on a profitability segment. As mentioned in the blog there are only the market segment fields of the intercompany DMR available.

      regards Stefan

      Author's profile photo Javier Fernando Ruiz Salcines
      Javier Fernando Ruiz Salcines

      Hi Stefan,

      we are delighted with your post. It is absolutely brilliant. We are now testing the different scenarios with direct activity allocation, time posting (CATS) and travel expenses in our OP Sandbox. We hope we can get rid of a couple of old Z-Programms with this functionalities. 

      Due to organisational reasons we cannot use direct activity allocations or time posting in certain circunstance. In this cases we use assessment from CC of the sender Company Code to the WBS in the receiver. We are now testing to post the markup on the assessment through a defined condition instead of using a Z-Programm.

      As the scenario with assessment is not directly described in your post I was wondering if it could be possible somehow. At the very end of your post I read your comment referring to the Enhacemnt in the Note 1447123.

      "Reflection of intercompany co postings in periodic billing

      Please note: with S/4HC 2011 postings on a service document as receiver are now recognized in intercompany billing too.

      To include in OP additional co transactions – like co settlement – in the periodic intercompany billing please check Note 1447123"

      Do you know if this note would cover assessment in the IC billing?

      Do you know if there a special blog related this topic?

      Thank you very much.

      Best regards,


      Author's profile photo Sebastian Doll
      Sebastian Doll

      Hi Javier,

      thanks for your feedback on our blog.

      Assessments will be picked by Ressource Related Intercompan Billing after the implementation of SAP  Note 1447123. This is applicable for the "classic" assessments as well as for Universal Allocation.

      Here you can find a short demo of the E2E flow RRICB with Cost Center Allocations.mp4 (Please note that I did not use the SD conditions to apply a mark-up in this demo.)

      Best regards


      Author's profile photo Anand Khedkar
      Anand Khedkar

      Hi Sebastian,

      thanks for sharing the demo, but the link got expired. Is it possible to re-share it? thanks

      Author's profile photo Amarender Challa
      Amarender Challa

      Hi Stefan,

      Well explained. Is this process also available in OP-2021 ??\

      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Amarender,

      as mentioned above this functionality is mainly available in OP, as the base for the new posting logic is the Universal Journal.
      The supplier invoice scenario and the feature with the intercompany cost rate and the subsequent intercompany margin posting is in OP behind the business function FINS_CO_ICO_PROC_ENH_101, but with different cost rate UI.

      best regards Stefan

      Author's profile photo Santoshi Varduagi
      Santoshi Varduagi

      Hi Stefan,

      We are working on SAP ICS project and have a few queries on the intercompany expense postings. You mentioned that the clearing accounts should be a non-operating P&L account. Why can't we have it as a Balance sheet G/L? The other general intercompany account that we have configured in the system is all balance sheet so just trying to understand if we create this G/L as a balance sheet G/L, will it be okay as we map our intercompany G/Ls in balancesheet for reporting purposes.

      Also, you mentioned it is good practice to have a separate clearing G/L for each origin Expense account. How will it impact if we use one clearing G/L for all expense GLs?




      Author's profile photo Hassan Murad
      Hassan Murad


      If you maintain BS account on Cluster View, it will error for you on CO processes. I had to use it for Distribution and it created an error and does not allow. If you want to use Balance Sheet accounts then do not maintain Cluster view and maintain OBYA and that works for CO process.

      However there is a conflict in Concur integration as that do not use OBYA but only this cluster. We maintained balance sheet account in the cluster and it worked however it conflict with CO processes. SAP have also released a note to not allow to maintain Balance Sheet accounts on Cluster.

      Author's profile photo Hassan Murad
      Hassan Murad

      Hi Stefan


      This is great. I have a specific situation.


      We maintained Balance Sheet account on OBYA as in figure 13 of the blog. We used concur integration and it failed to post to SAP with an error that the clearing account is not maintained. We raised this with SAP and we were told to use Cluster as in figure 12 and maintain that, so we did maintain Balance Sheet accounts on that and it worked perfectly fine.

      We now want to use distribution on the same GL accounts maintained on the cluster and we get an error. We raised with SAP and we are told to go through this blog and that we should not maintain the Balance Sheet account on the cluster (figure 12). If I remove this from figure 12 I am back to my first problem where concur integration do not use the OBYA standard and use the cluster.

      How do we deal with such a situation?

      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Hassan,

      thanks for your feedback.

      In the current standard solution we read for CONCUR Integration only the config table in figure 12, no OBYA. Figure 12 only allows non operating P&L accounts. Thus balance sheet accounts cannot be used for CONCUR Integration.

      Can you please tell us the business background for still using balance sheet accounts? Do you not use the periodic RRICB Billing? How do you follow-up on these balance sheet accounts?

      regards stefan



      Author's profile photo Hassan Murad
      Hassan Murad

      Hi Stefan


      1) is there a reason why Concur do not use figure 12 as like any other SAP posting such as VIM or AP?


      2) we do not run RIFB billing. Just like AP or VIM have a vendor, Concur have a vendor. Only difference is external vendor or employee vendor but both are to he paid exact same way. So when invoice is coded we do debit expense in one company and credit in another for payments and that uses OBYA or figure 12 and creates intercompany on balance sheet. Exact same way Concur has an employee who work for one company but did an expense on behalf on another company so will charge expense to different company. This should do debit the expense in the other company and credit the company where the employee is employed creating intercompany. This will be settled when cash is transferred or the other company settling the intercompany balances. At the cash transfer as well system will use OBYA figure 12 and use exact same GL accounts so net off.  So it does not make sense to me to use different p&l GL accounts for Concur and OBYA for everything else where balance sheet are used, then run another process or manual entries to clear these GL accounts on intercompany.

      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Hassan,

      thanks for our exchange on this subject.

      I understand why you want to use for the CONCUR business process balance sheet accounts as clearing accounts. Our standard scenario use the non operating P&L accounts as clearing accounts.

      With OP 2022 there is a workaround available: if the new config table FINS_CO_CCC  is empty, we read OBYA. Hope this helps for your use case

      best regards Stefan

      Author's profile photo Adrian Di Nanno
      Adrian Di Nanno

      Hi Stephan,

      Really nice and detailed posting on this Business Function !.

      I have a question as there is not a lot of literature on this one ... Your posts always talks about the usage of this Function on an intercompany scenario. But what about using the new CMACA02 (that replaces KP26) on a context where you need to bill an external and normal Customer ?

      Can we still use this to drive different Activity Rates by Employee, by WBS, etc ... ? I would assume we could and we would not configure the intercompany clearing accounts and other IC related config. Are there any restrictions ?

      I am in a project where we have a Professional Services customer in an On-Prem 2023 solution and we came across this functionality as seems to be doing what we really need. And we our customers are not intercompany, they are normal customers

      Thanks in advance for your help !


      Author's profile photo Stefan Walz
      Stefan Walz
      Blog Post Author

      Hi Adrian,

      yes, this blog focus on Intercompany. CMACA02 is here a prerequisite for the margin.

      When you activate CMACA02 in OP, you can use it for intracomapny activty allocations too.

      regards Stefan