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

U.S. Tax Reporter Year End 2021

Hello community,

As the Q1 due date in April 30th, this blog is not updated anymore. The blog for 2022 has been created, if you have any question, please post there.

Another Year with our U.S. Tax Reporter Year End blog. If you have questions about 2021 Year-End reporting, you can post it here. This blog will be updated with tips, best practices and, SAP Notes related to this subject.

To be able to access the Year-end 2021 in the Globalization finder page you need to be logged on (similar to SAP Service Marketplace) because it is a gated area and would need authorization.

To review the planned Legal changes for US, start the Announcement of Legal Change application. You can find detailed information about the Announcement of legal changes on this blog.

Year End notes

3082167 – U.S. Tax Reporter Year End 2021 Announcement 
3085142 – Year End 2021 Phase I for U.S. Tax Reporter -> You can just apply this note via Support Package
3082151 – W-2 / 1099-R Forms, Envelopes and PR Approval letter for year 2021
3100510 – Year End 2021 Phase II for U.S. Tax Reporter -> You must apply the prerequisite note and run the report NOTE_3100510, which is delivered in the prerequisite note:
3120702 – (Prerequisite objects for SAP Note 3100510)
3132965 – Year End 2021 phase III for U.S. Tax Reporter -> You must apply the prerequisite note and run the report NOTE_3134256, which is delivered in the prerequisite note:
3134256 – (Prerequisite objects for SAP Note 3132965).
3123716 – TR: Short dump when generating a Form W-2 that reports a 3-Digit Tax Type
3135634 – TR: Eugene Tax Type 106 not processed into Third party for W2 (FED) TemSe file
3136264 – TR: multiple blank output W-2 form pages for New Jersey employees
3138406 – TR: Year End 2021 additional U.S. Tax Reporter changes.
3138997 – TR: Q4/2021 changes for OH ICESA file format
3138872 – Tax Year is missing on W2 form for USERRA
3143778 – TR: Year end 2021 additional U.S. tax reporter changes for the city of Detroit
3140277 – TR: W-2 PR 21 not printing the employer phone field
3144794 – TR: Year end 2021 additional U.S. tax reporter changes for the city of Grand Rapids.

 

Additional notes

2464161 – TR: W-2 User Guides for HCM US Tax Reporter
2464078 – TR: 1099-R User Guides for HCM US Tax Reporter

Correction notes

3118379 – TAX: RPCALCU0 ignoring tip income after SAP Note 3054328
3118875 – RPCALCU0: technical changes regarding performance for TaxFactory SaaS
3099278 – SAP GUI F4 Amodal control : Search help Internal error table format.

KBAs (Knowledge Base Articles)

2480185 – TR: Tax Reporter – Online W-2 Enhancement Video
3081097 – KBAs (Knowledge Base Articles) for Payroll USA
3124528 – W-4 Legacy Data – Changes in IT0210

ASUG Webcast: HCM U.S. Payroll and Tax Reporting 2021 Year End Update

  • ASUG webcast was concluded on October 7, 2021.
  • Recording and slide deck for the ASUG webcast can be found here.
  • Slide deck is also attached to the SAP Note 3082167 – U.S. Tax Reporter Year End 2021 Announcement.

Limits for 2022

3079731 – BEN: Limits for HSA in Tax Year 2022
3117309 – BEN: Annual limits year 2022
3136963 – GARN: IRS Publication 1494 for tax year 2022.

Kind regards,
Graziela

Assigned Tags

      385 Comments
      You must be Logged on to comment or reply to a post.
      Author's profile photo Darci Meyer
      Darci Meyer

      Hi Graziela,

       

      We were adding the MMU 2020 W2 BOX 12 configuration with Tax Form Group W068.  The correct amounts and the letter D are showing as expected.  The year 20 is not populating as expected.  Has there been a change related to this configuration?

      We would appreciate any information you might have for our issue.

      Thank you,

      Darci

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Darci,

      Would you please confirm if the year 20 is not populating at all on Box 12? Or is it being populated with an incorrect value?

      Kind Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Darci Meyer
      Darci Meyer

      Good Morning,

      Since our original message we have found  Box 12 MMU  for the tax year 20 (Tax form field showing as  D20- USERRA 401K) is still not working as it has in the past.  When we produce the W2, the field is now only showing the first two characters whereas in the past it has been showing the first three characters in the W2 Box 12

      Past = D18, D19

      Current = D2.

      We found we could edit the text as 20D- USERRA 401K and then only the 20 showed in Box 12.

      Please let us know if you need any additional information.

      Darci

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Darci,

      Thank you for the information.

      This scenario is being reviewed by the development team.
      As soon as I have an update, I will let you know.

      Thank you,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Darci,

      This issue has been addressed by SAP Note 3138872 - Tax Year is missing on W2 form for USERRA.
      Please apply it on your system and then retest the scenario.

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Gayathri Nannapaneni
      Gayathri Nannapaneni

      Phase III note is asking for Package while implementing SFP. what to use for this? Information not provided in manual instructions. we tried using local object and Z*, none worked.

      Thanks

      Gayathri

      Author's profile photo Yusef Seidy
      Yusef Seidy

      Pretty sure the package for tax forms is PC_TAX.

      Author's profile photo Gayathri Nannapaneni
      Gayathri Nannapaneni

      Hi,

      Does anyone experiencing issues with PR-W2 rerun? when we delete our spools and rerun, we could see the job count is very less when compared to original run and only few people have spools created.

      Thanks

      Gayathri

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

      Hi Gayathri,

      I don´t see any other customer reporting this and I notice you already opened a case for SAP.
      My colleague is checking this for you.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

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

      Good morning,

      Do you know when the 2022 Tax Tables in BSI Bulletins and Publication 1494 will be out?

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

      Hi Sandra,

      Some changes for 2022 were released by BSI in TUB 071.
      About the Publication 1494, do you have the IRS link with the changes for 2022? I just found the link for 2021.

      Thank you,
      Graziela

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

      Thank you Graziela for the update,

      I only see Publication 1494 for 2021 on IRS website.  Do you know when Bulletin 72 will be released?

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

      Hi Sandra,

      We didn´t receive the API notice yet about Bulletin 72, so we don´t have the date.
      Could you please reach out BSI to get this information?

      Thank you,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Sukhbir Singh
      Sukhbir Singh

      Hello Graziela,

      Can you confirm if BSI tub 71 has all FED related changes for 2022? We are planning to import new tub today and don't want to do it twice. 

      It does appear from the documentation below -

      Authority BSI System Code Tax Type QF Update Effective Date Change Description
      FEDERAL 00000000

      WITHHOLDING TAX

      TAX TYPE 001

      YES 01/01/2022

      Changes the wage bracket tables.

      Increases the Nonresident Alien ( NRA) additional withholding amount for 2019 or earlier Forms W-4 FROM $8,250 TO $8,650.

      Increases the Nonresident Alien ( NRA) additional withholding amount for 2020 or later Forms W-4 FROM $12,550 TO $12,950.

      Increases the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion (FEI) annual limit from $108,700 to $112,000.

      Thanks

      Sukhbir

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

      Good afternoon,

      We reached out to BSI and some 2022 Federal Tax updates came out on Bulletin # 65

       

      Author's profile photo Jennifer Stnons
      Jennifer Stnons

      Publication 1494 (2022) (irs.gov)

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

      Hi Jennifer,

      Thank you for sharing the link.
      I have reached out Developer to see when the note will be published.
      Anyway, all the changes can be performed manually, using the publication as reference.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Chandramouly Veeramony
      Chandramouly Veeramony

      FYI - note 3136963 - GARN: IRS Publication 1494 for tax year 2022, is now available for the 2022 tax levy updates.

      Author's profile photo Hemanth Krishnakumar
      Hemanth Krishnakumar

      WASHINGTON CARES ACT TAXES TYPE 113 AND 114.

      Hi Team,

       

      We have employee in Washington who are eligible for WA CARES FUND LTC TAX: TAX TYPE 113 & WA CARES FUND LTC TAX ER: TAX TYPE 114.

      BSI has rescinded in TUB 70. Any idea when BSI will re-activate them or do we need to keep these taxes changes as optional rate override in BSI system. 

      Need your input.

       

      Author's profile photo Chandramouly Veeramony
      Chandramouly Veeramony

      There was a notification from BSI yesterday saying they will reactivate those two tax types. But there was no indication of when they will come through. Our guess is it will be included in TUB 72.

      Author's profile photo Chandramouly Veeramony
      Chandramouly Veeramony

      Graziela Dondoni and team - SAP has released a note 3136513 (BSI: WA cares fund tax updated for tax types 113 and 114) for the WA cares fund.  I believe this note is to reactivate these tax types in SAP. However, what is not clear is do we also need a corresponding TUB from BSI to fully reactivate these tax types.  As of now, these tax types are not active inside the BSI, so even if we reactivate the tax types in SAP and pass it over to BSI, BSI will still not calculate these taxes, right? could you clarify this for us?

      Thanks

      Chandra

      Author's profile photo Suneetha Venati
      Suneetha Venati

      When we are trying to apply SAP note :3136513 , it's getting message "Cannot be implemented". Any one is facing similar issue ?

      we have already implemented below SAP notes also.

      3103555 BSI: Tax Types 113: WA Cares Fund LTC Tax - EE and 114: WA Cares Fund LTC Tax - ER
      3134644 BSI: WA cares fund tax postponed

      Thank you

      Suneetha

      Author's profile photo Roger Oliveira
      Roger Oliveira

      Suneetha Venati the SAP note 3136513 do not have any correction instructions.

      This way, this note cannot be applied in SNOTE transaction as there is no object change to be done.

      Basically this is an informative note.

      Author's profile photo Suneetha Venati
      Suneetha Venati

       

      Thank you for the update Roger.

      WA Long Term Care is not deducted after updating the TUB 70 . We are running  the payroll on January 10th . Business wants to deduct the WA Long Term Care tax in Pay period 01 , is there any workaround to deduct the WA LTC tax ?

      Thank you

      Suneetha

      Author's profile photo Aman Kumar
      Aman Kumar

      Tub 73 is now available. WASHINGTON WA CARES FUND LTC  taxes have been reinstated.

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Appears that we will all be refunding the WA LTC tax now and waiting for another TUB from BSI to deactivate the tax again.

      https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/gov-inslee-signs-bills-to-delay-expand-exehttps://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/gov-inslee-signs-bills-to-delay-expand-exemptions-in-wa-cares-long-term-care-program/mptions-in-wa-cares-long-term-care-program/

       

      Excerpt from article released on 1/27: That tax is now delayed until July 2023. Any premiums collected so far by private and public employers are to be refunded within 120 days.

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

      niceeeee

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Graziela -

      Do you know if SAP will be removing the tax types they added for the WA LTC?  I know we are expecting BSI to release TUB 74 to rescind these taxes, but we are wondering how this is going to work with all the exemptions we have already set up on IT0235.  We know we can take the tax types out of the tax model to stop withholding the taxes, but we aren't sure we won't to undo the hundreds of exemptions we've already set up since WA has stated in the BSI release "Continue to maintain copies of exemption approval letters for workers who’ve provided them".

      Thanks for any input!

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Alicia,

      Please check SAP Note 3136513 - BSI: WA cares fund tax updated for tax types 113 and 114.
      It has been updated with the latest news of WA Cares Fund.

      Sincerely thanks,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Carlos -

      Thank you for this information, but this does not answer my question.

      I know BSI is rescinding the two tax types -113, 114 - but does this also mean that SAP will remove these tax types from their tables?  We have a large employee presence in the state of Washington and unfortunately we are one of the companies that went ahead to withhold the tax from these employees.  We also have hundreds of employees who got the exemption letter from the state and we had to exempt them on IT0235 so they would not have the tax withheld.  Per the BSI release we should continue to hold these exemption letters so we would like to also hold these exemption set ups on IT0235 as well, but if SAP removes the tax types from the tables how will that work?

       

      Author's profile photo Matt Fraser
      Matt Fraser

      Oh, that's a good question. I hadn't thought of this angle. We also tracked the exemptions on IT0235.

      Author's profile photo Matt Fraser
      Matt Fraser

      TUB 74 was released a few minutes ago (or at least I got the email notification a few minutes ago). I just looked through the cover sheet, and despite BSI's notice to customers and SAP's update of Note 3136513, there is no mention of anything for Washington at all in this TUB.

      Is this an oversight on the cover sheet? Are the tax types rescinded or not? It occurs to me that perhaps BSI has elected to spend more time on this due to Alicia's question about what to do with tracking exemptions on IT0235?

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Hi Matt -

      I just checked the TUB 74 itself and there is NOTHING in it for Washington.

      It's looking more and more like it's going to be a very interesting year for taxes.....again!

       

      Author's profile photo Matt Fraser
      Matt Fraser

      Look at it this way: if it wasn't so convoluted, they wouldn't need us to figure it out! 😉

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Alicia/Matt,

      I'm reviewing this topic internally with the developers. I believe that a new version of note 3136513 will be released.
      I will keep you posted.

      Thank you,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Alicia/Matt,

      A new version of SAP Note 3136513 has been released.
      As per keeping the employees exemptions, the developer update is that you can keep the already created IT0235 records with no issue.

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Matt Fraser
      Matt Fraser

      Thanks Carlos. I had just noticed the update shortly before getting the notification about your post here.

      As an aside, are you aware that, for some reason, most of your posts trigger a double notification? At least they do to me, but this only happens with your comments, not anyone else's. It's very curious.

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi Matt,

      Yep, for Carlos' posts, I get 2 notifications as well.

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Thanks for the quick turnaround on this question Carlos!  It's much appreciated.

      I also get 2 notifications each time and only for you.

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

      Hi Carlos,

      This is the same for me. 🙂
      I have received 2 emails today.

      Cheers,
      Grazi

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi all,

      Thank you for the update.
      I'm not aware of anything I'm doing differently from my colleagues, but I will be checking on that 🙂

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Matt Fraser
      Matt Fraser

      We're in the midst of applying TUB 73 now, which reinstates the taxes, but per direction from our Legal Counsel, we are continuing to leave the taxes out of our Tax Model, so they still won't be collected from employees.

      What a lot of churn! Between last-minute changes from IRS and the same (with reversals) from Washington State, they've been keeping us all hopping!

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

      Good approach, Matt.
      Thanks for sharing.

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      We were unfortunately told by our leadership to collect the taxes which we've done for two pay periods now as well as the last minute load of 100's of exemptions to not withhold.  Our plan is to just remove the tax types from the tax model as well.

      This has been a year end for the books for sure!!

      Author's profile photo Matt Fraser
      Matt Fraser

      Corrected link to the article:

      https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/gov-inslee-signs-bills-to-delay-expand-exemptions-in-wa-cares-long-term-care-program/

       

      Author's profile photo Theresa Westlund
      Theresa Westlund

      We are located in KY and just applied BSI 73 in test.  When running test payrolls; there is no KY wage or tax being reported or calculated.  Has anyone had the same issue?  thank you.

      Author's profile photo Stanette Balser
      Stanette Balser

      Hello,

      We are processing our weekly period 1/2022 payroll and the URME Test run differs from the LIVE run with the Test run matching the wage type reporter total amount.  We have multiple company codes but actually pay from only one.

      We only process garnishments (HR Payee Type 4) in our 3PR and are in a freestanding HCM system.  It appears we have some missing HR Payee numbers when I review the T51RH table and several HR Payees have no HR PAYEE TEXT data.

      We select the Issue Separate Check to Vendor checkbox on each PA0194 record due to a limitation in our FI system.

      I create the FI vendors for our garnishments in our HCM system using FK01.

      I am stumped on what would cause URME itself to work differently for TEST and LIVE runs with TEST matching the Wage Type Reporter total of all our Garnishment WT amounts for the period.

      Any insight is appreciated!

       

       

       

      Author's profile photo David Adams
      David Adams

      This is not the proper thread for this question, but I will attempt to answer it anyways.

      When 3rd party was released many years ago, there were issues with linked creditors, adjusting due dates, etc.  Because of this SAP does not recommend running RPURME00 for only one creditor type.  It does not cause issues in simulation, but can cause problems in production runs.

      There is nothing wrong with running 3rd party remittance for only garnishments, but you need to configure the system so it knows that is all it is running for.  You need to deactivate all other wage types from processing through 3rd party, and then you should be good to go.

      If you run 3rd party again in simulation without specifying the creditor type, and turn the log on - you should be able to see what wage types you have set up incorrectly.  While it is good to clean up the HR Payee tables, your first priority should be setting the wage types correctly.

      As far as the HR Payee tables, whomever deleted payees might have done it incorrectly.  If they did, you might still have supporting entries set up for wage type details assigned to a creditor that does not exist.  This is easy to find by adding the creditor back in development with a dummy name, deleting the lower level entries and then deleting the credit.  WARNING - do not ever delete Ceditors that have actually been used in production.  You can stop using them, and reassign the wage types but you need to leave the creditor there as production has entries referring to it.

      Author's profile photo Stanette Balser
      Stanette Balser

      Thank you David!  I was unaware SAP's recommendation and your information allowed me to correct the issue.

      Much appreciated!

      Stanette

       

      Author's profile photo Mandar Muley
      Mandar Muley

      Hello

      Has anyone noticed any issues with HR_F_MMREF_1_AL (TEMSE file for AL)? We are seeing additional data after the header record and before RS record.

      Screenshot is attached.

      Wanted to check before reporting an incident to SAP.

      HR_F_MMREF_1_AL%20Issue

      HR_F_MMREF_1_AL Issue

      Thanks

      Mandar

      Author's profile photo Cindy Rheinlander
      Cindy Rheinlander

      Our file for HR_F_MMREF_1_AL looks correct with a RA, RE, and RW record between header and RS record.  Do you have a carriage return configured in header record, location 010?  Possibly that is missing?

      Author's profile photo Mandar Muley
      Mandar Muley

      Hi Cindy

      We tried with CRLF at location 10 as well...but it did not resolve the issue.

      Anyways have raised it with SAP.

      Thanks

      Mandar

      Author's profile photo Stanette Balser
      Stanette Balser

      Hello,

      We are executing PU19 test runs and receiving a short dump for one tax company on the HR_F_MMREF_1_OH output.    We are on HRSP H0 And EA C1.

      This is the first year for the failing tax company to execute PU19 outputs.

       In the source code, the termination point is in line 679 of (Include)
       program "RPCTRPUT".
       The termination is due to exception "CX_SY_CONVERSION_NO_NUMBER" occurring in
        procedure "PREPARE_ITEM_FOR_TAPE" "(FORM)".
       This exception was not handled locally or declared in the RAISING
       clause in the procedure's signature however.
       The procedure is in program "RPCTRPU0". The source code begins in line 638 of
       (include) program "RPCTRPUT".
      It appears to be looking for a rate conversion but I don't see any rates are contained in the output format.
      Has any else had this issue?
      Thanks,
      Stanette
      Author's profile photo David Adams
      David Adams

      Did you apply this note?

       

      Component:PY-US-TR
      Priority:Correction with high priority
      Category:Program error
      Release Status:Released for Customer
      Corrections:3
      Manual Activities:0Entry successfully validated
      Prerequisites:0

      Symptom

      In the standard system as currently delivered, when you run the Tax Reporter (PU19) transaction for Form W-2 and you have amounts for a 3-Digit Tax type for example, Tax Type 106, the following dump is generated:

      • Runtime Errors: CONVT_NO_NUMBER
      • Exception: CX_SY_CONVERSION_NO_NUMBER
      • ABAP Program: RPCTRPU0
      Author's profile photo Stanette Balser
      Stanette Balser

      Thank you for the suggestion. Unfortunately, it did not correct the issue.

      Regards,

      Stanette

       

       

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

      Hi Stanette,

      Are you using any SAPScript from in the generation?

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo David Adams
      David Adams

      IF pv_text = true.
      * required when i51t3-amprp 1 - 4
      lv_t_reslt_value = pv_tvalue+i51t3-offst.
      lv_nreslt_value = pv_tvalue+i51t3-offst.
      * For rates we need to do this in order to come up with
      * the right value.
      CLEAR i5ut3-taxfg.
      LOOP AT i5ut3 WHERE txitm = i51t3-txitm
      AND taxfg CA '6789'.
      EXIT.
      ENDLOOP.
      IF i5ut3-taxfg CA '6789'.
      lv_rate_reslt = lv_t_reslt_value * 100.
      lv_nreslt_value = lv_rate_reslt.
      ENDIF.
      ELSEIF i51t3-amprp CA '1BE3DA'.
      lv_nreslt_value = pv_value * 100.
      ELSE.
      lv_nreslt_value = pv_value.
      ENDIF.

      I would set a break point on the top line that I pasted, which is from the form you provided.  This is where it is blowing up.  Then, you can single step through to see the exact line that is causing you the short dump.

      Once you figure out the line that is causing the short dump, you should be able to look in the variables in prior lines to determine what is trying to be converted.  By doing this, you should be able to isolate what part of the form you are using that is causing the error, and figure out what is going wrong.

      Sorry that this is vague, but this should get you into the magnetic tape structure and subsequently get you to a field in T51T3 that access a tax form group or something like that.

      I am glad to try and help more, but you need to get further along in debug so we have a clue as to what is blowing up.

       

       

       

       

      Author's profile photo Stanette Balser
      Stanette Balser

      Graziela,

      I am loading TUB 72 and received an error in the Sync tool when executing the live run.

             Error Text:  It was not possible to insert entry WA 4320201231 in table T5UTX

      I have checked the table entries for WA and the starting entry reflects as below.

      WA Washington 043 Employee Medical Aid Fund Tax 01/01/2011 12/31/9999 9,999,999.99 0.010000000

      The Sync Tool table shows it is attempting to update the T5UTX table as indicated in the screenshot.

      WA%20043%20date%20issue%20T5UTX

      WA 043 date issue T5UTX

       

      Thanks,

      Stanette

       

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Stanette,

      The issue you are facing is caused when there is a delinquent record for the tax rates on table T5UTX.
      In order to correct it, you will have to update table T5UTX manually and then rerun the Sync Tool.

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

      Kind Regards,
      Carlos

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

      Carlos Accorsi we replied the thread at same time... kkkkkk

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Graziela Dondoni This is a great team work 🙂

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

      Hi Stanette,

      This is due the overlap for tax type 043.
      You need to change it manually in T5UTX to fix this overlap.
      After this you will be able to run the Sync tool.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi Graziela,

      We have encountered an issue with /Qxx because of the application of OSS Note 3101020, which was released on Dec. 27th 2021.

      We have raised OSS Incident 16164 / 2022 with regards to this issue.  Please look into this at your earliest convenience.

      For example,

      Say, EE has /Q03 in RT and TCRT in last Biweekly period 26.2021, when the OSS note 310120 had NOT been applied yet.

      Also employee's /303 & /603 for FED is already over yearly taxable ceiling $142,800, say $152,800.

      After payroll run for period 26.2021, the note 3101020 was applied.

      Now, in period 01.2022, there is retro back to 26.2021 and the schema (ADDCU function in Final processing) is creating negative amount for YTD /Q03 in TCRT.

      This negative amount is equal to 142,800 minus the YTD /303 in TCRT.  In this case, it would be Negative 10,000 (142,800 minus 152,800).  

      Regards

      Paddy

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

      Hi Paddy,

      I colleague is assigned to the case and will  verify the issue.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Kelli Dixon
      Kelli Dixon

      Hi Graziela,

      We see that SAP Note 3136613 has been released stating that BSI has decided to reinstate tax type 113 and 114.  Do we know what BSI regulatory bulletin/TUB this will be delivered in?

      We are currently at BSI bulletin/TUB level 64 and are holding off on applying current BSI bulletins/TUBs until the reinstatement of the tax types 113 and 114 are delivered.

      Thank you in advance for your prompt response.

      Regards,

      Kelli Dixon

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Kelli,

      BSI confirmed that the Tax Types 113 and 114 will be reinstated on Regulatory Bulletin 73, released on January, 19th.

      Thank you,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Matt Fraser
      Matt Fraser

      Ah, you're faster than me! 🙂

      Author's profile photo Kelli Dixon
      Kelli Dixon

      Dup

      Author's profile photo Kelli Dixon
      Kelli Dixon

      Hi Carlos,

      Thank you for the prompt response.

      I am surprised and concerned that BSI is releasing the update so late in the month.

      As I state in my comment above, we are currently on BSI Bulletin/TUB 64, therefore have not applied the BSI Bulletin that delivers the OASI max or the BSI Bulletin that delivers the 2022 Federal Tax Tables.  So we are not in compliance with the Feds right now.

      BUT if we were to apply up through BSI Bulletin/TUB 72, we would not be in compliance with taking the WA Cares Fund tax.

      Regards,

      Kelli

       

      Author's profile photo Matt Fraser
      Matt Fraser

      I think the state of the law is currently unclear, pending a decision by the state legislature next week. It has to do with whether or not the governor had the authority to tell employers to stop collecting the premiums or not. For this reason, at the moment some employers are electing to collect the premiums, and some are not. Mine is not, so we have the taxes disabled in our tax model. And, we are waiting for 73 to become available next week before we move the latest TUBs in. We did need some of those TUBs, not only for the Federal withholding changes, but also for the latest PFML rate changes, but as the PFML change already came far too late, we handled that with an override in BTXRATE.

      The main thing that getting TUB 73 in will do is enable you to have a choice about whether you withhold premiums or not (via the tax model), whereas if you put 70 in the choice will not be there -- you won't be withholding.

      We plan to move 70, 71, 72, and 73 in after 73 is released, at which point we'll remove our PFML override from BTXRATE, but continue to control WA Cares premiums via the tax model until we get a determination from the legislature and our legal office. As for the Federal withholding rate change, the actual rates didn't change, but the wage brackets expanded higher, so the net result is that some employees may see a reduction in their withholding once 71 is put into place. That should retro back to the beginning of the year, meaning employees will get a one-time bump in take-home pay, rather than a one-time smaller take-home check. They're less likely to complain about that!

      Author's profile photo Kelli Dixon
      Kelli Dixon

      Hi Matt,

      Yes there is some confusion, though in the Governors statement on 12/23/2021, the state of Washington is following the law and will have to begin collecting money from state employee paychecks as of January 1st.

      Author's profile photo Matt Fraser
      Matt Fraser

      Kelli,

      I think it was Carlos who responded to this same question earlier, though I can't now find the actual response. He said that the reinstatement of tax types 113/114 would be in TUB 073 and that is scheduled to be released on January 19th.

      Cheers,
      Matt

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

      Hi community,

      Blog updated with notes:
      3135634 - TR: Eugene Tax Type 106 not processed into Third party for W2 (FED) TemSe file
      3136264 - TR: multiple blank output W-2 form pages for New Jersey employees

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

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

      Hi community,

      Blog updated with note:

      3138406 – TR: Year End 2021 additional U.S. Tax Reporter changes.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

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

      Hello community,

      Blog has been updated with SAP note:

      3138997 - TR: Q4/2021 changes for OH ICESA file format

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Eray Kocaman
      Eray Kocaman

      Hi Graziela,

      We generated the file and tried to upload to the agency website. At first it said missing the  name , phone and email address – so we added these. Then it said it was an invalid file layout. Do you want me to raise an incident?

       

      Thanks

       

      Author's profile photo Eray Kocaman
      Eray Kocaman

      I got the file to load the leading top line is the issue – spaces instead of blanks when it comes to adding submitter, phone number and email address – so good there but not sure it is something SAP needs to fix.

      Author's profile photo Steve Murray
      Steve Murray

      We are having the same issue with the Ohio SUI file regarding missing name and email.  Can you explain more what you did for it to load?

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi Steve,

      How are you doing?  We are having similar issue. Tried reaching out to you.  But your phone has blocked my number.

      Paddy

      Author's profile photo Euna Lee
      Euna Lee

      Hi,

       

      Can anyone suggest what needs to be checked for "SOAP Framework error: SOAP Runtime Exception: CSoa pExceptionTransport : HTTP se.." after every ADS connection check is successful?

       

      Regards,
      Euna

      Author's profile photo David Adams
      David Adams

      Take a look at ABAP section in Note 944221 - Troubleshooting if problems occur in forms processing

      Author's profile photo Euna Lee
      Euna Lee

      Did that. Passed all the check with flying colors. Makes it even more frustrating... , but Thank you for the response, David.

      Regards,

      Euna

      Author's profile photo David Adams
      David Adams

      I would be glad to try and help you resolve this, but it is tough given the very limited information you have provided.  I think if you would take time to post answers to these questions, it might even help you solve this yourself.

      1. What steps are being processed to create this repetitive error, and where are you seeing it in a spool?
      2. What system are you performing these tests in?  DEV?  QAS?  PRD?
      3. Are you running the utilities in the same system that you are getting the error in?
      4. Did you actually print the test adobe form from the note I gave you or did you just run the step.

      If the issue is in Tax Reporter then have you made sure your configuration is pointing to an appropriate printer set up for Post Script?

       

      Author's profile photo David Adams
      David Adams

      Additional information I found from past issues.

       

      The Device Type names that you have provided are not listed in the SAP Central Note for Printers/device Types

       

      https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/8928

       

      However, you can again re-check this note with your printer model and check what suitable device types should be used. As you will find inthis note:

       

      "Device type definitions are stored completely in tables and can be individually adapted, modified or enhanced. If SAP performs such an adjustment for a customer, it constitutes a consulting service, and is generally charged seperately"

       

      SAP has now released the SAP Printer Vendor Program - https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/1130927, printer manufacturers can develop and release device types for their printers.

       

      https://service.sap.com/sap/support/notes/1100779 contains a list of all participants

       

      Information about the support for new printer models is contained in the "Printer Vendor Wizard Note" of the relevant manufacturer. A complete list of all "Printer Vendor Wizard Notes" is available in Note 1097990. If your printer model is not listed in one of these "Printer Vendor Wizard Notes", proceed as described in Note 1103826.

      Author's profile photo Euna Lee
      Euna Lee

      Hi David,

       

      Sorry for the delayed response. It's been just hectic with everything.

      We ended up with restarting ADS system and it fixed the issue.

      Thank you so much for all the info.

       

      Regards,

      Euna

      Author's profile photo Hemanth Krishnakumar
      Hemanth Krishnakumar

      Hi Team,

       

      We applied TUB 70 till 73 in BSI. Upon running the sync tool in SAP, iam getting this error message which is attached below. Can i add this entry in T5UTX for Washington tax type 33? Please take a look and kindly do the needful.

       

      ERROR%20MESSAGE

      ERROR MESSAGE

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

      Hi Hemanth,

      I already replied your question:
      ISSUE WITH TUB 73 | SAP Community

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Matt Fraser
      Matt Fraser

      Hi Graziela,

      I just got this error too, and I noticed that quite a few customers mentioned earlier in this thread having this problem (it is occurring for both tax types 33 and 43). Unfortunately, Note 2550829 seems to be out-of-date. For one thing, the Sync Tool no longer includes "Effective Dates," so everyone is doing "Option 3" all the time with every sync anyway, yet the problem persists. For another, T5UTX cannot be edited directly in SM30, the maintenance view V_T5UTX has to be used instead, so the Note should probably reflect that. And, finally, there should probably be some guidance as to how to properly edit T5UTX, because it's not always clear whether a line should be deleted entirely, have its start date edited (which causes weird artifacts and new rows to be inserted), etc.

      Since so many customers are experiencing this same error, many for the first time after years of problem-free syncs from prior TUBs, it would be helpful if we could see exactly what V_T5UTX for WA 033 and 043 is supposed to look like, since that is the one that seems to be hanging almost everyone up. Or, perhaps this needs to be escalated to BSI, so that they issue a "fix" in the next TUB?

      This is what the error looks like for me:

      Initial%20error%20message

      Initial error message

      And what the sync tool tried to insert:

      Sync%20Tool%20inserts

      Sync Tool inserts

      And what the table looks like before the sync attempt (and after, since it fails):

      V_T5UTX%20WA%20033-043%20overlaps

      V_T5UTX WA 033-043 overlaps

      It's easy to see the incorrect overlaps in 033 and 043 between 1/1/2011-12/31/2018, 1/1/2019-12/31/2019, and 1/1/2011-12/31/9999. I'm assuming that final row end-dated 12/31/9999 should have had a start date of 1/1/2020? But just directly editing that row to change the start date seems to do some weird things. And, since we all have pretty much the same error, this was clearly delivered as a bug by BSI.

      Therefore, I think it would be worthwhile for a Note specific to this WA 033/043 overlap error to be issued with clear, precise instructions on what to do here, since it affects every Washington customer. And, in the short term, what should these tax types look like before we sync the latest TUBs? (For reference, my starting point here is on TUB 066, and I'm trying to apply/sync TUBs 067-073).

      Cheers,
      Matt

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

      Hi Matt,

      I would delete the last entry with the dates:
      01.01.2011 and 12.31.9999 for both entries WA tax type 33 and tax type 43.

      After this the Sync tool will be able to update the table accordingly.

      Could you try it and let me know?

      Cheers,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Euna Lee
      Euna Lee

      it did work for me.

       

      Regards,

      Euna

       

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

      Thank you, Euna! I will create a KBA for this specific scenario.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Matt Fraser
      Matt Fraser

      Thank you Graziela, that worked! I believe it looks correct now:

      Correct%20T5UTX%20WA%20033/043

      Correct T5UTX WA 033/043

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

      I have updated KBA 2550829.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Theresa Westlund
      Theresa Westlund

      Has anyone else run into an ADS error in the tax reporter log manager?  Any ideas for correction are appreciated.  I checked with Basis team and all tests are working correctly.   thank you.

      Type

      @5C\QError@
      Message Text ADS: com.adobe.ProcessingException: com.adobe.Proc essingException: org.omg.CORB
      id: SUN minor code: 2 completed: No(200,101).

      Author's profile photo Matt Fraser
      Matt Fraser

      Theresa,

      We did not encounter this, but one or two other customers reported the same or a similar ADS error earlier in this thread. Based upon their comments, the solution was simple: restart the ADS.

      Cheers,
      Matt

      Author's profile photo Theresa Westlund
      Theresa Westlund

      Hi Matt; that worked!  thank you.

      Theresa

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Community,

      This week BSI has released Regulatory Bulletin 73, which reinstated Tax Types 113 and 114 for the Washington Cares Fund.
      Upon the installation of this Regulatory Bulletin on your system and the inclusion of these Tax Types on the Tax Model, the taxes should be calculated with no issue.

      SAP Note 3136513 (BSI: WA cares fund tax updated for tax types 113 and 114) has also been updated with this information.

      Sincerely thanks,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Community,

      Please check SAP Note 3136513 - BSI: WA cares fund tax updated for tax types 113 and 114.
      It has been updated with the latest news of WA Cares Fund.

      Best Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Matt Fraser
      Matt Fraser

      Carlos,

      Just a heads-up, in case you didn't see it in the other part of this convoluted thread, but BSI just released TUB 74, and despite their notification that it would rescind 113/114, in fact they are not in the TUB (at least not on the cover sheet, and I have reason to believe the cover sheet is accurate). There's nothing for Washington in this TUB at all.

      --Matt

      Author's profile photo Sridhar Reddy
      Sridhar Reddy

      Hi Graziela/Carlos/Matt,

      Firstly thank you for all your help/contributions. we are facing this below issue.

      As part of uploading 1099 MISC and NEC data to IRS, to create DME files as per latest 2021 updates of IRS from report RFIDYYWT, we were asked to apply notes 3095180 and 3125141.

      Note 3095180 was implemented successfully, but while doing DMEE file uploads as per note 3125141, we are getting below errors:

      "Error in node LOB Code: source field IDWTPARTNER-US_1042_LOB does not exist" for IDWTFILE_US_1042

      "Error in node 3E amount: source field IDWTPARTNER-US_1099INT_BOND_PRM does not exist" for IDWTFILE_US_1099INT

      Any information on this would be of great help.

      Regards,

      Ram

       

       

       

       

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

      Hi Ram,

      I´m glad to help. 🙂

      Form 1099 MiSC is for FI and not related to HCM Tax Reporter.
      So I don´t have knowledge on this form.

      Maybe you can use the FI tag and post in some related FI community.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Sridhar Reddy
      Sridhar Reddy

      Thank you Graziela for your quick response. I did post it in FI community 🙂

       

      Regards,

      Ram

      Author's profile photo Matt Fraser
      Matt Fraser

      Just a quick note, Sridhar, that I applied Note 3125141 to our DEV system yesterday and did not encounter any issues.

      Author's profile photo Deborah Duron
      Deborah Duron

      Hello,

      Has anyone experienced issue with PDF viewer in ESS Portal when trying to display W2 via Chrome browser? Some users, not all, are experiencing the error below and not sure how to resolve. Tried reloading Chrome to the latest version and still having issues. Any suggestions?

      PDF%20viewer%20error

      PDF viewer error

      Author's profile photo Brooke Greenfeder
      Brooke Greenfeder

      I was able to replicate this issue - changed Chrome setting(Site Setting>PDF Documents) for PDF's to open in Chrome and issue resolved.

      Author's profile photo Deborah Duron
      Deborah Duron

      Thank you so much Brook!  It worked perfectly to resolve the issue!  Thank you for sharing!

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi Graziela,

      Created High Priority OSS Incident 71690 / 2022 for the following issue.

      Just curious why SAP has not delivered this as standard config.

      Hi,
      /Q01 is correctly included in Box 1 of W2.  (Tax Form Group 0001)
      But /Q03 is not included in Box 3 and /Q05 is not in Box 5.
      i.e. Tax Form Groups 0003 and 0005 do not account for corresponding /Qxx WTs.
      This is leading to incorrect reporting in W2, W2C, W3 etc.

      Every Employee who has a YTD /Q03 or /Q05 in TCRT is impacted.

      We are thinking that SAP should deliver this as standard config.
      Please review as we need this for 2021 W2 run.

      Regards
      Paddy

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

      Hello Paddy,

      My colleague took it over and is reviewing the scenario.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Thank you Graziela.

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi Graziela,

      For additional visibility, I am pasting below my response to Zach's comments in OSS Incident 71690 / 2022.

      Hi Zach,
      I agree that the tax - /403 is self adjusting.  But taxable wages (which is the sum of /703 and /Q03) is NOT self adjusting.
      So, when reporting to IRS, should we not be including the total taxable wages.  (Taxable - /703 PLUS Taxable, but not taxed - /Q03).
      By the way, /Q03 is not included in /703.  It is separately cumulated.
      Also, the combined YTD total of /703 and /Q03 count towards the annual ceiling of 142,800 for year 2021.

      Can you please check again based on this information above?  I will appreciate it.
      This should need a legal document.

      Regards
      Paddy

      Author's profile photo Kevin Hirsch
      Kevin Hirsch

      My understand is that /Q03 and /Q05 were not tied to those boxes is because it is usually added into the /703 etc as these wage types self-adjust. (check the tax configuration) Whereas the withholding wage types do not self-adjust. They expect the employee to true up their withholding when they file their taxes.

      Regards,

      Kevin

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Thank you Kevin for your response.  Hope you are doing great.

      Looking through the payroll results for employees who have wages that are "Taxable, but not Taxed", I am seeing that /703 will self adjust only for Taxable wages.  "Taxable, but not taxed" wages are separately cumulated in /Q03.

      I am also seeing that /703 and /Q03 are cumulatively counted together towards the 2021 annual ceiling of 142,800.

      Is this your understanding as well?

      Regards

      Paddy.

       

      Author's profile photo Kevin Hirsch
      Kevin Hirsch

      Hello Paddy,

      To be honest, it's been awhile since I've seen or run across /Q03 and /Q05. If /703 and /Q03 counts towards the 2021 limit of $142,800, then Box 3 should show both wage types; otherwise, Box 3 (based on what you're saying) would only show /703 and be under-reporting.

      I hope that helps.

      Kevin

       

       

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi Kevin,

      Thanks for your response and for confirming what I was thinking too.

      Regards

      Paddy.

      Author's profile photo Randall Allred
      Randall Allred

      Hi,

      Did you make you configuration change to include /Q03 in Box 3 and /Q05 in Box 5 for the W-2? Or is there a SAP note?

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi Randall,

      There wasn't any SAP note when I encountered this issue.  I created an OSS Incident.  SAP's response stated that they would provide the config change via SAP note only if we provide them a legal document, which requires that /Q03 go into box 3 of W2 etc.

      So, I resigned myself to configuring that quick change myself.  Fortunately we stopped using that WT which was generating /Q03 and /Q05.  That WT was the only one which was generating /Q03.  So, I didn't have to do anything.

      Regards

      Paddy

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

      Hi community,

      SAP note 3138872 – Tax Year is missing on W2 form for USERRA has been released to all customers.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Mushtaq Mohammed
      Mushtaq Mohammed

      Hello Everyone,

      Hoping everybody is doing well. If you have experience with the issue below, please share it. It would be greatly appreciated.

      Issue – Form CA DE9C is incorrect for Q4 2021.

      Background – We have few employees who were moved from TAXCO-1 to TAXCO-2 effective 11/01/2021. Therefore, for the first month of the Q4, they were in TAXCO-1 and for the remaining 2 months of the quarter, they were in TAXCO-2. Payroll results in TCRT are generated accordingly and the numbers are all correct.

      Impact – When we run the California State Unemployment Insurance (SUI) wage reporting for Q4 2021 for TAXCO-1, we are getting the TAXCO-2 numbers also.

      Example:

      CA Subject Wages in TAXCO-1 company = 100

      CA Subject Wages in TAXCO-2 Company = 200

      Expectation – When we run SUI report for TAXCO-1, we are expecting 100 in TAXCO-1 DE9C form and when we run SUI report for TAXCO-2, we are expecting 200 in the subject wages box.

      Actual Results – We are seeing, the total, which is 300 in the TAXCO-1 DE9C form which is incorrect. TAXCO-2 is correct at 200 in the subject wages box.

      Attempted Fix – We tried to do manual entries for these employees using utility tool, however, the deductions are not going lower than what was withheld in the first company. In our example, manual correction is -200 in TaxCo-1, however, we cannot go more than -100, because this is the amount that was subject wages in TaxCo-1.

      Note - W2 was also impacted due to this issue, however, we are able to fix the W2 issues by using manual entries, however, we are not able to do so for SUI forms.

      Related issues – This is impacting the other fields on DE9C, DE9, and DE3D. We are hoping the solution for above should also fix all these related issues.

      Thanks,

      Mushtaq.

      Author's profile photo Mushtaq Mohammed
      Mushtaq Mohammed

      All,

      Closing the thread on the above issue. We figured out the root cause. It was due to incorrect configuration of features UTXRP and UTXTM.

      Thanks,

      Mushtaq.

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

      Hi community,

      SAP 3143778 - TR: Year end 2021 additional U.S. tax reporter changes for the city of Detroit

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Hemanth Krishnakumar
      Hemanth Krishnakumar

      Hi Team,

      System not calculating employer unemployment taxes for State of South Dakota.

      An employee reside in south Dakota state pays unemployment to south Dakota state. i have configured BTXRATE table and BSI

      BTXRATE:

       

      BSI:

       

      Now when i run payroll for this employee. System is not calculating unemployment for this employee for current year.

      Screenshot of USTAX is given below. SAP system is not sending SD, because of which BSI is not calculating Unemployment for the state of south Dakota. System send only federal and calculate all taxes for Federal except south Dakota unemployment.

      SD 010 $4912.73 (this line is missing).

       

       

      I checked TCR and i dont see any record for SD unemployment for 2022. Screenshot of TCRT is given below. Please take a look and kindly let me know why system is not calculating SD unemployment for 2022.

       

       

       

       

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi Hemanth,

      Check your tax model for SD.  If tax type 10 is present in a tax combo only for "U" (R/W/U) in table T5UTM, then you need to set EE's IT 209 to SD in order for tax type 10 to calculate.

      Regards

      Paddy

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Hemanth,

      I see that on the BSI Override the field "Override Max Wage" is set to 0.00.
      Please make sure that it is filled with the same amount of the field "Maximum Salary" on BTXRATE.

      You may also refer to 2998362 - BTXRATE entry is not being considered on the payroll calculation.

      Sincerely thanks,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Susan Wing
      Susan Wing

      Hi.  Is anyone having trouble with the 1099NEC file not producing when the Classic WH Tax Code is used?  We are using that field to report on Tax Code 14 (Attorney).  When we execute the report with the 14, Error 7Q702 happens.  When we do not fill in the Classic WH Tax Code, the report runs.  Any help would be appreicated.

       

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Susan,

      The mentioned form is a FI Form rather than a HCM Tax Reporter Form.
      As I don't work in FI, I cannot help much here.

      In any case, I was able to locate KBA 2371425. Hope it helps.
      In case it doesn't, my suggestion would be for you to report this scenario for the FI team directly.

      Also, for future issues with a FI delivery, I would recommend you to post the question on the community using a FI tag.

      Kind Regards,
      Carlos

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

      Hi community,

      Blog has been updated with SAP note:
      3140277 - TR: W-2 PR 21 not printing the employer phone field

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

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

      Hello all,

      Blog has been updated with SAP note:

      3144794 – TR: Year end 2021 additional U.S. tax reporter changes for the city of Grand Rapids.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Jahnavi Kavuru
      Jahnavi Kavuru

      HI,

      941 form for Q1 2022, is not checked for the quarter. Schedule B is good though. Does any one else have the same issue?

      941%20Employer%20Returns%20Q1%202022

      941 Employer Returns Q1 2022

      Thanks,

      Jahnavi

      Author's profile photo Randall Allred
      Randall Allred

      Yes, the quarter 1 box is greyed out.

      The form also states "Rev. June 2022".

      Form%20941%202022

       

      Form 941 2022

      Author's profile photo Katherine James
      Katherine James

      Was a resolution for this ever found? We are having this issue for Q2.

       

      Thanks,

      Katherine

      Author's profile photo Randall Allred
      Randall Allred

      I see a legal change regarding upcoming changes for form 941 Q2/2022 . Maybe it will be fixed with this update.

       

       

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

      Hello all,

      This is the announcement for the 941 Q2 form:
      Announcement of Legal Changes - SAP ONE Support Launchpad

      This is planned to be released on 18.07.2022.

      Kind regards,

      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Venkata Kandula
      Venkata Kandula

      Hello everyone,

      We are having peculiar issue. W-2 manual adjustments are showing on the W-2s in the test runs, but not in the production run.

      Tax reporter is ignoring all employees with manual entries. Any one has the same issue. Can you please let me know how to resolve this issue?

      Thanks,

      Venkat

      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 Nitin Jain
      Nitin Jain

      Hello Graziela,

      We have a question regarding general instructions for online W2  forms. According to IRS section 2.4- Electronic delivery of form W-2 and W-3 recipient statement, it clearly states that electronic format complies with the guidelines in the document and contains all required information described in the 2021 general instructions for forms W-2 and W-3. For online w2 forms produced by SAP we do not have general instructions printed on back of form.

      So, do we have any plans to provide the general instructions for online W2 forms.

      Thanks

      Regards

      Nitin

      Author's profile photo Jahnavi Kavuru
      Jahnavi Kavuru

      Hello Graziela,

      Is there any update on 941 Q1 2022 form? The box is greyed out.

      Thanks & Regards

      Jahnavi

       

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Jahnavi,

      The development team is working on an update on 941 for Q1/2022.
      This is expected to be released by the end of this month. Once released, this blog will be updated.

      Kind Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Kim Grantham
      Kim Grantham

      Hi Graziela,

      We are attempting to execute our first quarter Indiana SUI report and receiving an ABAP abend.  We did the manual steps for note 3132959 after receiving a termination with the message 'Form HR_F_WLIST_IN'.  When we try to execute it now, we get the following error:

      ABAP%20Programming%20Error

      Here's what we did in the update:

      This field was manually added via a note while applying the changes for MA and OH W2 in mid- January:

      Here's the structure and it is missing the field HIRE causing the error:

      We were hoping you could steer us in the right direction.

      Kind Regards,

      Kim

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Kim,

      The root cause here should be indeed the missing field on the structure.
      In order to updated it, please proceed as detailed below. Then, please retest the scenario and check the results.

      1. In transaction SM34, maintain the V_T51T8 view cluster selecting Country Grouping 10.
      2. Select the Tax form HR_F_UNEMP_IN and double click on the Tax forms fields option on the left pane.
      3. Select the entry HIRE, and unflag the field "Form Processing Indicator" and Save.
      4. Select the entry HIRE, and flag the field "Form Processing Indicator" and Save.

      Sincerely thanks,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Kim Grantham
      Kim Grantham

      Hi Carlos,

      That did the job!  Greatly appreciate your quick response and assistance.

      Thanks,

      Kim

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hi Kim,

      I'm glad to hear that it worked 🙂

      Kind Regards,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Hemanth Krishnakumar
      Hemanth Krishnakumar

      Hi Team,

      OHIO LOCALS tax authority are missing in SAP table T5UTZ.

      1) Ohio Local "Northwest LSD" with school district code of 3113 which belongs to Hamilton county.
      2) Ohio Local "Edgewood CSD" with a school district code of 0901 which belongs to BUTLER County.
      3) Ohio Local Lakota LSD with a school district code of (0904) belongs to butler county.

       

      All the above is missing in SAP in table T5UTZ.

      Please let me know when the above tax authority will be released in SAP, so i can start my configuration changes.

      Author's profile photo Carolina Macks
      Carolina Macks

      Hi Hemanth,

      I took over your case and I am going to proceed with the investigation.
      As we have confirmed, the taxes for these authorities are 0.00 now.

      Kind Regards,
      Carolina

      Author's profile photo Hemanth Krishnakumar
      Hemanth Krishnakumar

      Hi Team,

      Issue with /711 wage type.

      From TUB 74 and 75, BSI has activated tax type 11 for "CO, IL, MA, MN, NJ, NY & PA states". We have implemented this TUB and upon running payroll i see only /411 (for $21.00) and /711 is missing in the employee RT. When an employee has supplemental wage types of a positive amount.

      When the same employee has a positive amount of 2600.00 and negative amount of -100.00 in supplemental wage types. System process both and it brings a /711 of -100.00 and error out when we process payroll. Rule where it stops is given below.

      PTCRT UNEG GEN Y

      This is happening in PROD. Please take a look and kindly do the needful.

       

       

       

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Hemanth,

      I see that you have opened a support incident addressing this issue.
      A colleague will follow up with you.

      Thank you,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      We have this same issue and now also having the negative issues.  There is another post about this issue on this blog TaxFactory 11.0 | SAP Blogs

      I would really like to know what comes out of your incident.

      Author's profile photo Hemanth Krishnakumar
      Hemanth Krishnakumar

      Hi

       

      All i did is retro back all employees from 01/01/2022, taxes naturally adjusted and resolved this. issue. Please try this and kindly let me know if you still have any issues

      Author's profile photo Alicia Robinson
      Alicia Robinson

      Did you check your TCRT for the YTD /711?

      We didn't want to retro this change because it's more than half of our employee population.  We expected it to act like all other unemployments and auto adjust for the /411 and /711.  It is adjusting for the /411, but it's not creating the YTD /711 that will be needed at the end of the year.

      We have had to retro some employees with the negative issues back to 1/1/2022, but it still doesn't create the /711 YTD entry in TCRT.

      Author's profile photo Hemanth Krishnakumar
      Hemanth Krishnakumar

      Hi Alicia,

       

      Under regular payroll scenario, system calculates /411 and save this wage type under RT and TCRT. but it does not accumulate /711 in both RT and TCRT.

      As per instruction from SAP, i did retro one employee from 1st pay period of 2022, system did calculate correct /411 (Cumulated in both RT and TCRT). System did calculate correct /711 and cumulated in TCRT.

      We have more than 80000 employees in USA and the only option we have right now is to retro all of them from 1st pay period of 2022.

      This is the same what SAP recommends in the BSI 11.0 Blog that you have sent.

       

      Hope this helps

       

       

       

       

      Author's profile photo Anna Stevenson
      Anna Stevenson

      Hello,

      We did not have that many employees impacted and most had already reached the FED FUTA 7K wage limit.  We do not have issues as it seems to use FED WT /710 for the calculation.  We did not retro any employees.  There should not be any concerns and this will only apply if the states do not repay the FUTA loan by 12/31/2022.

      Thanks, Anna

      Author's profile photo Aimee Rice
      Aimee Rice

      I am trying to generate Form 941x for Q2 2021 (Form name - HR_F_941X_21).  Line 18c is not populating the amount of the wage type configured on Define Tax Forms.  It is displaying 0.00.  The wage type is in the RT (amount GT 0.00).  COB2 is capturing the # of individuals correctly (Line 18d).  PU19 Configuration checker returns no errors.  I have reviewed the manual configuration steps listed in Notes 3083881 & 3070882. 

      Tax Form details:

      Tax Form field: COB1

      Evaluation type: 3 - deposited tax

      Print option: 3 - don't print if zero

      Form processing indicator: checked

      Taken from tax tables: Tax Form group: COB1

       

      Tax Form group - COB1

      Wage type - mapped

      Date 1/1/21-high date

      Field to be taken from payroll result: Amount

      Store content in interface table field: Tax and deposit

      Add wage type

      Employee info checked

      Regular wage and tax reporting: Sum all amounts of quarter

      Reporting for retro: Sum all amounts of quarter

       

       

      Author's profile photo Hemanth Krishnakumar
      Hemanth Krishnakumar

      Hi Team,

      i have set up oregon state with 10,30,40,96 as tax types and Massachusetts state with 01,10, 11,18,87 and 99.

      Upon running payroll iam getting an error message "Wage type /496 is missing in table "V_T5US0" for state of oregon and " Wage type /499 is missing in table "V_T5US0" for state of Massachusetts. Screenshot is given below for references.

      OREGON

      OREGON

       

      MASSACHUSETTS

      MASSACHUSETTS

       

      Upon doing some research i found SAP Knowledge base article 2671295, Screenshot is attached below.

      SAP%20KNOWLEDGE%20BASE%20ARTICLE

      SAP KNOWLEDGE BASE ARTICLE

       

      According to the configuration i have added both /496, /D96 for Oregon and /499 & /D99 in Table T5US0. now the error is resolved.

      But SAP note talks only about /496 and not /499 (For Massachusetts).

      Please confirm doing the same will resolve the issue for /499 (Massachusetts state).

       

      Author's profile photo Carlos Accorsi
      Carlos Accorsi

      Hello Hemanth,

      KBA 2671295 (Payroll error missing entry in V_T5US0) is a generic KBA and the same instructions can be followed if you face the same error for different Tax Authorities and/or Wage Types.

      Sincerely thanks,
      Carlos

      Author's profile photo Kishore Kumar Pachava
      Kishore Kumar Pachava

      ​Hello All

      We are facing a tricky situation with Deferred Comp Deductions on W-2 and wanted to know anyone faced such issue in the past and if yes, what was the resolution. 

      Employee is working in NY and residing in CT. His base salry is deferred by X percentage and he also have Deferred comp bonus with some Y percentage. Percentages are calculated without any issues. However, the taxable earnings /701 is differing between NY and CT and the same is showing on the W2. We are expecting the taxable earnings for both the states should be same and without deferred comp earnings for both the states and also box 1 should be without differ comp deductions. 

      1. Is our assumption right?

      2. If yes, why the /701 is differing from resident state to work state? FYI, resident state taxable earnings are showing high in our case

      3. if /701 should be different for both states and which state earnings should show on box 1 in w2 is it resident or work state? 

      Early response is much appreciated!

      Thanks!

      Author's profile photo Kevin Hirsch
      Kevin Hirsch

      Anyone run into the issue for Q1.2022, when running 941 using for current form HR_F_941_21_Q2 that the "Rev June (Q002)" has 2022 for the date (in the future) and in the tax reporter log the field Q002 is 2022?

      Outside of overlaying that variable Q002 with 2021, has anyone run into this?

       

      Regards,

       

      Kevin

      P.S. I wasn't sure if this was the right forum for this question.

      Author's profile photo Beth Matthews
      Beth Matthews

      Hi Kevin,

      There is a new OSS note and a new PDF form for 2022. OSS note is 3156413 (TR: Form 941 (Fed) and Form 941 Schedule B (FED) updated for Q1/2022). It has a prerequisite note 3168377 (Prerequisite objects for SAP Note 3156413.

      The new PDF is HR_F_941_22 and is provided in note 3156413.

      Hope this helps.

      Beth Matthews

       

       

      Author's profile photo Kevin Hirsch
      Kevin Hirsch

      Thank you

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

      Hello community,

      As the Q1 due date in April 30th, this blog is not updated anymore. In a couple of months a new blog for 2022 will be created. Meantime if you have any doubt you can create questions using the tag HCM_Payroll_USA.

      Thank you all for the contribution on this blog!

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Padmanabh Srinivas
      Padmanabh Srinivas

      Hi Everyone,

      Do you happen to know how we can configure what appears in Box d (Control number) of the W2  form. We use .pdf for W-2 output.

      Currently the Box d has PERNR.  We want to see if we can change this.

      I will appreciate all of your pointers.

      Thank you.

      Paddy

      Author's profile photo Hemanth Krishnakumar
      Hemanth Krishnakumar

      Hi Team,

       

      I have issue with Gross up wage types.

      on pay period 01 2022 employee reside and work in state of Colorado. Employee has gross up wage type with an amount for $1500.00. Now taxes including Federal + State (Colorado) + EE social security + employee Medicare is $800.00. Now System adds 1500.00 + 800.00 (taxes) comes out with total gross of $2300.00. System subtract taxes so employee gets a full pay of $1500.00

       

      on 12th pay period (06/01/2022 - 06/15/2022) they changed employee record effective 01/01/2022 where employee reside in Rhode island and work in Colorado. Payroll team request to retro this employee from first pay period and calculate taxes for both Rhode Island and Colorado.

      I set up a reciprocity in BSI which stared calculating taxes for Both Rhode island and Colorado.

       

      ISSUE:

      When we retro back this employee to Pay period 01 2022, We have gross up wage type for $1500.00. Now the total calculated taxes are

      Now taxes including Federal + State (Colorado & Rhode island) + EE social security + employee Medicare is $1000.00. Now System adds 1500.00 + 1000.00 (taxes) comes out with total gross of $2500.00, This happens with USTAX functionality. Now later in schema UTPRI set this back to $800.00 (As in first pay period) and set Rhode Island taxes to $0.00. now total gross becomes $2500.00 - $800.00 = $1700.00 as payment and system retro $200.00 back which is incorrect.

      When UTPRI reset the taxes back, why not it reset Gross up wage type amount as well so we dont have to face this issue. Please let me know if anyone else is having this kind of similar issues or is there a note to resolve this issue.

       

      Author's profile photo Hemanth Krishnakumar
      Hemanth Krishnakumar

      Hi Team,

       

      Can someone please share your thoughts/updates on this issue

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

      Hello Hemanth,

      I recommend to you to review:

      3094116  Gross-up calculation returns an unexpected amount due to retro changes

      As mentioned in the begging of the blog, this is not updated anymore as this is related to the YE.

      Please, post questions using the tag HCM Payroll USA

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Elizabeth Munoz
      Elizabeth Munoz

      Hello,

      Does anyone know if there is an SAP note for the new 941 Q2/2022 form that came out in June? Thanks!

      Author's profile photo Matt Fraser
      Matt Fraser

      Hi Elizabeth,

      The Note is still being put together I believe. SAP has just released a Legal Change Notification about it:

      https://launchpad.support.sap.com/#/legalchangenotification/NoteInforSet/jira=GSREQAMER-3045/MidColumnFullScreen/0

      Cheers,
      Matt

      Author's profile photo Elizabeth Munoz
      Elizabeth Munoz

      Thank you for your quick reply! This is helpful.

       

      Elizabeth

      Author's profile photo Robert Laliberte
      Robert Laliberte

      Hello,

      I am not sure if this is the proper blog to ask the question, if not, please direct to the proper one.

      BSI was planning to release Cyclic H on July 16th as per their site. It was confirmed by them that it was ready but were waiting for it to be certified by SAP before releasing it to their customers. When can we expect SAP to be done with the certification process?

      Thx

      RL

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

      Hello RL,

      For questions about BSI TaxFactory you can use the blog:

      TaxFactory 11.0 | SAP Blogs

      Regarding your question about cyclic H, I have talked to the Developer and he will clarify this with BSI. Once I get any news I will let you know.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

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

      Hello RL,

      I received an update from Developer.

      SAP didn´t received the cyclic to certify, this is planned to be done still on July. After this, the cyclic will be certified. We reached out BSI as well and they informed the information on their website is subject of changes. You can reach BSI via email if you have further questions.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Elizabeth Munoz
      Elizabeth Munoz

      Hello- Could you please let me know if the blog for U.S. Tax Reporter Year End 2022 is coming up soon or is already out there? Thank you!

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

      Hello Elizabeth,

      The blog already in draft I will release it in a couple of days. Once it´s ready I will publish here.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

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

      Hello Elizabeth,

      The blog for 2022 is now released.

      Kind regards,
      Graziela

      Author's profile photo Elizabeth Munoz
      Elizabeth Munoz

      Thank you Graziela!