Enterprise Resource Planning Blogs by SAP
Get insights and updates about cloud ERP and RISE with SAP, SAP S/4HANA and SAP S/4HANA Cloud, and more enterprise management capabilities with SAP blog posts.
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
Hello community,

Updated on 09.12.2022:
3273042 - BSI: introduction of Tax Types 117, 118, 119, 120, 121 and 122 has been released to cover the changes released by BSI on Regulatory Bulletin 96

Updated on 02.12.2022:
SAP Note 3260101 - TAX: De Minimis number of days worked criteria for nonresident state withholding

Updated on 03.05.2022:

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

Blog Reverse Tax Engine - Payroll USA

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BSI TaxFactory and TaxFactory SaaS released version 11.0 is available.

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

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

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

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

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

Important SAP notes:

2760305 - BSI: Tax Factory 11.0 - Main Note

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

2760918- BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 - DDIC Changes

2763228 - BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 - Function Modules Changes

2770832 - BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 - General Technical Changes

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

2868617 - BSI: Tax Profile Factory SaaS correction

2780716 - BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 - BSI Tools

2790902 - BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 - Payroll Driver Changes

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

2852878 - BSI: Technical Correction changes

2854888 - BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 - Configuration Option

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

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

2855926 – BSI: internat error US_UPDATE_TXIT_FROM_TAXES in BSI Tax Calculation

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

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

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

2878074 -  BSI: Update to BTXRATE reader class usage

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

2915653 - BSI: Unemployment Override not Being Considered on TaxFactory

2948446 - BSI: installation instructions for TaxLocator 11.0.

3008339 - TAX: Community Safety Payroll Taxes for Eugene

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

Important:

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

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

2920181 - TAX: TaxFactory Version Source in USVERS

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

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

Further irformation about the installation can be found on:

2844034 - TaxFactory 11.0 - On-Premise Installation

2843977 - BSI: TaxFactory 11.0 - SaaS Installation

2948446 - BSI: installation instructions for TaxLocator 11.0.

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

2988140 - IT0208: Performance issue when using Tax Locator

Frequently Asked Questions – FAQ

 

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


  • In transaction SU3, define the user parameter BSI_TF_VERSION with value 11.

  • In transaction PE03, configure the BSI Tax Factory Version (10BSI) feature with value 11.

  • In transaction SM30, open table view Customer values for configuration options (V_T5F99K2) and set the value of constant BSI TAX FACTORY: CUSTOMIZING SWITCH (BSITF) to 11.Once your company switches to TaxFactory 11.0, you may no longer use TaxFactory 10.0, nor may you switch back to it later.


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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

To solve this SAP note 2844646 must be applied.

Detailed steps:

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

 

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

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

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

 

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


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

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


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



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

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

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

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

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

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


Regards,

Graziela
650 Comments
CarlosAccorsi
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
Hello Barbara,

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

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

Kind Regards,
Carlos
bsgarret
Discoverer
hi Carlos,

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

Thanks,

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

Thank in advance for your help!

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

ST22 presents:















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

Thank you,

Stacey DeGarmo
graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos
Hello Stacey,

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

Is it consistent in your system?

Thank you for the update.

Graziela
stacey_degarmo
Explorer
0 Kudos
Hello Graziela,

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

Include RPCMASUT_USTAX_CALC
INCLUDE report "RPC_PAYUS_BSI_CALLER_COMPNENTS" not found

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

Thank you,

Stacey DeGarmo
stacey_degarmo
Explorer
0 Kudos
Graziela,

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

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

Thank you!

Stacey DeGarmo
graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos
Hi Stacey,

Thank you for the update.

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

Hope this information helps.

Kind regards,
Graziela
CarlosAccorsi
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos
Hello Deb,

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

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

Kind Regards,
Carlos
0 Kudos
Hi Carlos,

Does BSI support HANA 2.0 on Redhat 7.9
CarlosAccorsi
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos
Hi Sreeram,

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

Thank you,
Carlos
gseepala
Explorer
0 Kudos
Hi Carlos,

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

 

Thanks

Ganesh

 
ManishT
Explorer
0 Kudos
We have installed BSI 11 on OS level RHEL 8.2 and HANA 2.0 SPs 05

 
NAME="Red Hat Enterprise Linux"

VERSION="8.2 (Ootpa)"

ID="rhel"

ID_LIKE="fedora"

VERSION_ID="8.2"

PLATFORM_ID="platform:el8"

PRETTY_NAME="Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8.2 (Ootpa)"

ANSI_COLOR="0;31"

CPE_NAME="cpe:/o:redhat:enterprise_linux:8.2:GA"

HOME_URL="https://www.redhat.com/"

BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugzilla.redhat.com/"


REDHAT_BUGZILLA_PRODUCT="Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8"

REDHAT_BUGZILLA_PRODUCT_VERSION=8.2
s0002443872
Discoverer
0 Kudos
Hello - We are having an issue with our Cyclic Level in SAP not matching the BSI Client level.  We applied TUBS 82 - 87 and ran the Sync Tool and moved it to our test box.  We then upgraded from Cyclic 11.0g to 11.0h in our dev and test box but the Cyclic version does not match in our test environment?   We update our test and production environments through transports and running the Sync Tool in our Development box for the cyclic does not produce a transport?

Any assistance in this matter would be appreciated.

BethM-CPF
Explorer
Hi Bruce,

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

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

Hope this helps.

Beth Matthews
0 Kudos
Hi,

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

Example:

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

But YTD /419 is = $1,625.69

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

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

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

 

Regards,

Suresh
CarlosAccorsi
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos
Hi Suresh,

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

Best Regards,
Carlos
xavier_joseph
Explorer
0 Kudos
SAP has come back saying it is a BSI issue. BSI came back and asking

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

 

See the modified test that  is attached for your review.

 

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

EQ: 500000.00 GP: 2000000.00

 

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

 
stacey_degarmo
Explorer
0 Kudos
Graziela and Carlos,

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

  1. It appears based on the Reverse Tax Engine Blog that Note 3088446 delivers the Reverse Tax Engine defaulted to ON

  2. We have not moved to Cyclic H yet and have Table T5F99K2 currently set to OFF for BSIRS for testing

  3. However, based on the Reverse Tax Engine Blog it appears that we are required to leave T5F99K2 set to ON once Cyclic H is applied??

  4. Also the Reverse Tax Engine Blog in FAQ #1 regarding Activation of the Reverse Tax Engine, "you still need to make sure that method ALLOW_NEG_TAXABLES of BAdI PC10_PAY0002 is implemented on your system, allowing negative values be considered".

    1. Is there additional information regarding this BAdI?  How long has this been a requirement?  I am not seeing it has been implemented in our Sandbox.  Is this referenced in one of the Notes and we missed it?

    2. So not having BAdI PC10_PAY0002 implemented means that the Reverse Tax Engine functionality is ignored?




Thank you,

Stacey DeGarmo
graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos
Hello Stacey,

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

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

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

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

This is just for companies who has negative amounts scenario.

I hope I was able to clarify.

Kind regards,
Graziela
stacey_degarmo
Explorer
0 Kudos
Graziela,

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

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

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

Thank you,

Stacey
graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos
Stacey,

This an old BAdI for negative taxables.

548804 - MSC: Negative taxables switch in Common Paymaster case

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

Kind regards,
Graziela
mjaix
Explorer
Hello,

Has anyone implemented De Minimis rule for these states?

  • Louisiana

  • North Dakota

  • West Virginia

  • Utah

  • Minnesota

  • South Carolina


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

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

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

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

Thanks,

Mitesh
rosette_vaughn2
Explorer
0 Kudos
Hi Graziela,

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

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

Thank you,

Rosette Vaughn
CarlosAccorsi
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
Hi Rosette,

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

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

Best Regards,
Carlos
rosette_vaughn2
Explorer
Hi Carlos / Graziela,

We’re in the process of testing HRSPs.  We’ve applied service packs SAPKE60899 - SAPKE608B1 in our test system and we’re on BSI Cyclic H.  When we ran payroll; we’re seeing a lot of state refunds with large amounts.  Could Note 3158436 -TAX: Retroactive change in work tax area incorrectly removing amounts that were already refunded in previous retro run be causing the issue?

Before loading the note there were retro refunds but for smaller amounts.  For example, before applying the Note the refund amount for LA (Louisiana) was $45.02.  After the note the refund amount for LA changed to $210.34.  This type of scenario is happening in several payroll periods in different states.

Can you advise what could be causing this issue and what steps we need to take to correct?  Also let me know if any additional information is needed or if you prefer, I can create an incident.

Tks,

Rosette
CarlosAccorsi
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
Hi Rosette,

Between support packages 99 and B1 there was a big delivery on the system which was the new Reverse Tax Engine. At first, I would recommend you to check if you have all the correction notes on that. You can check them on this blog: Reverse Tax Engine – Payroll USA | SAP Blogs

In case the issue persists after that, I would suggest you in submitting an incident on this topic, as so far we are not aware of any side effect that note 3158436 may have caused.

Thank you,
Carlos
rosette_vaughn2
Explorer
0 Kudos
Hi Carlos,

Thank you for letting me know about the Reverse Tax Engine blog link, very helpful.

I had our Basis team check the 3 correction notes (3218134, 3239725 and 3225302) and the message(s) in Note Assistant: Note Browser in the implementation state section says - can not be implemented.  Could this be part of the issue we’re having with the state refunds?

Also, in the Reverse Tax Engine FAQs question #1:  it states, we still need to make sure that method ALLOW_NEG_TAXABLES of BAdI PC10_PAY0002 is implemented on your system, allowing negative values be considered.  I have not seen this in any of the notes and the BAdI is not in our system.

Please advise of next steps.

Tks,

Rosette
CarlosAccorsi
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos
Hi Rosette,

I see that you have submitted the same questions on the Reverse Tax Engine blog here.
I have replied to you on the other blog.

Thank you,
Carlos
greg_zifchock
Participant
0 Kudos
Hi Community,

Will we expect any upcoming SAP Notes to address having Paid Family Leave for Colorado and Oregon for 2023?

 

Thanks,

Greg
graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
Hello Greg,

I just talked to Product Owner and BSI is still analyzing the changes with the authorities.
Once they have all the changes in place SAP will evaluate if any note will be needed or just the update in the Regulatory Bulletin with this just the Sync tool and the Tax Model need to be updated, so there is not need for notes.

I recommend that you keep tracking of this through the legal change notification app, further information about the legal change app can be found on:
2917160  New legal change is under evaluation

Kind regards,
Graziela
ChandraV
Participant
Hello SAP team - could you check the ACA Legal change KBA? the status says its "Available", but when I click the note (3270993) it says "SAP Note/KBA 3270993 is being created".  If it is still work-in-progress, you may want to update the status to In-progress or other appropriate status.


Thanks
Chandra
graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
Hello Chandra,

This is a SAP note. I will reach the developer to check when this will be available.

Kind regards,
Graziela
graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
Hi Chandra,

I have talked to the developer and they don´t have an exactly date, but this should be released before December 15th.

Kind regards,
Graziela
otistonka
Explorer
When will SAP/BSI release an update for the Colorado Family and Medical Leave Act? Employers are supposed to start deducting in 2023.
CarlosAccorsi
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos
Hello Steve,

SAP is currently working with BSI team on that to determine whether a note will be released from SAP or if just the update of the Regulatory Bulletin will be enough.
For any news on that, I suggest you to keep an eye on the legal change app, as detailed on 2917160 (New legal change is under evaluation).

Thank you,
Carlos
sukhbir_singh3
Explorer
0 Kudos
Hello

when do we expect BSI to release changes regarding tax tables for 2023?

Thanks

Sukhbir
graziela
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
0 Kudos
Hello Sukhbir,

BSI will release it on a Regulatory Bulletin.
You can reach BSI for detailed information.

Kind regards,
Graziela
jwiblepasshe22
Participant
Graziela, as the annual Federal tax table release date and TUB number is important to ALL customers can this be researched by SAP (i.e. contact BSI on behalf of the customer base) and then published on the Year end page (as this was not the correct Blog for this question anyway).

Thanks, Jeff
ejaz1
Participant
0 Kudos
Hi .

Any update on the Colorado Family and Medical Leave Act, is there a time frame on when this should be expected ? We are getting pretty close to running the first check for Year 2023

 

Thanks

Ejaz
stacey_degarmo
Explorer
0 Kudos
Carlos, I see that BSI has just released Bulletin 196 that includes the Oregon Paid Family & Medical Leave (PFML) and Colorado Paid Family & Medical Leave.  Can you confirm if there will be any SAP Notes associated with these two plans or will the Bulletin be the entire deliver?

Thank you,

Stacey
CarlosAccorsi
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
Hello Stacey and Ejaz,

There will be a SAP note released for Oregon and another one for Colorado.

This is not official, but I believe that they will be published by tomorrow.
Once this is released, I will update you here on the blog.

Kind Regards,
Carlos
CarlosAccorsi
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
Hello Stacey and Ejaz,

The following note has just been released: 3273042 (BSI: introduction of Tax Types 117, 118, 119, 120, 121 and 122).
The developers ended up using a single note for both Colorado and Oregon, so everything you need should be on this one note.

Best Regards,
Carlos
jwiblepasshe22
Participant
0 Kudos
Does anyone have an update on the BSI release of the Federal tax tables? Just wondering if someone heard anything from BSI, thanks, Jeff
kristenburd
Explorer
0 Kudos
What should the FED exemem date be on T5UTZ? I thought this date was always 2/15. Now it's 2/17.
ChandraV
Participant
0 Kudos
It is February 15 per IRS.  And, in our system T5UTZ has 2/15 as the date.
0 Kudos
Hello Carlos, after creating the Tax Types and 117 to 122 and running the BSI Sync program. Do we still need to maintain tables T5UTY and T5UTM (Taxability Model related tables)? Or do BSI will release another Bulletin to synchronize these tables?

Thanks, best regards.

Juan
CarlosAccorsi
Product and Topic Expert
Product and Topic Expert
Hello Juan,

Tables T5UTY and T5UTM are custom tables which are not updated by the Sync Tool.
These tables are used to setup the Tax Model and should be maintained by the customer based on their business needs.

Therefore, yes, you will have to maintain these tables per your side if you'd like Tax Types 117 and 122 included on your Tax Model.

Thank you,
Carlos
jennifer_stnons
Explorer
0 Kudos
Just got TUB 101 from BSI with changes to the state of Maryland.   In reviewing information directly from the state, I see that local tax rates for the following counties (Allegany, Anne Arundel, Cecil, Frederick, St. Mary’s and Washington) have also changed.   These don't appear to be part of TUB 101.  Any news from BSI on when these updates will take place?
Euna
Participant
0 Kudos

Hello,

 

Someone got IRS limits changed, but the tax amount is not changed. Is there any way I can confirm that tax calculation is correctly done?

 

And I've found T5UTKZ is empty. Should there be any records in it?

 

Thank you,

Euna