TaxFactory 11.0

[graziela]

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

[ejaz1]

I am closing this question as it was answered by SAP that the Formula needs to be maintained on IT0210 for IL employees

 

Ejaz

[rosette_vaughn2]

Hi Carlos / Graziela,

In BSI TUB 112, new tax codes are introduced for NY Metro Commuter Trans Dist tax. When testing we noticed that the Estimated Quarterly Gross Wages (EQ) parameter is missing in the BSI Interface, which is causing the tax not to calculate.  Is there an SAP note we can pull in to fix this issue?  Please advise.

Tks,

Rosette

[ChandraV]

The Gross quarterly wages are maintained in VV_T5UX9_ADDINFO; you would have to add a new entry for the new NY metro commuter tax authorities.

Thanks
Chandra

[CarlosAccorsi]

Hi Rosette,

Chandra's recommendation here is correct.
I would also like to mentioned the below Support Content, which has detailed many BSI Interface parameters and where they come from, which may be very useful.

Support Content: https://help.sap.com/docs/SUPPORT_CONTENT/erphcm/3354684302.html?locale=en-US

Thank you,
Carlos

[Kim_Grantham]

Looks like a note has been delivered!  3362032 - FAQ: Secure 2.0 Act - Section 603

Announcements of Legal Changes - SAP for Me

Thanks!

Kim

[psrinivas12]

Yes, but eagerly awaiting more details to be released by SAP on Sept. 7th. 

[Matt_Fraser]

Padmanabh and Kim,

The Note due to be released on 9/7 was in fact released yesterday: https://me.sap.com/notes/3365473

Cheers,
Matt

[Attreyee_B]

Hi All,

While the Note has been released, please be advised that it is currently meant only for piloting/ early adoption. Based on piloting feedback, and if there are no further changes, the Note will be made generally available on September 07, 2023.

Thank you,
Attreyee

[ChandraV]

Also, If my understanding is right,  this note/solution is applicable for customers that use the standard catch-up functionality/set up (single plan for both 401K regular and CU contribution).  Is that right?

Thanks
Chandra

[Matt_Fraser]

Hi Attreyee,

That's not what's recorded in the actual Note. It has status "Released for Customer" and High Priority.

Cheers,
Matt

[Attreyee_B]

Hi Matt,

You are correct. To clarify, while the Note is released, the solution in the Note is subject to change until September 07, hence we recommend that you wait until the Note is available in the Legal Change Notification app.

Regards,
Attreyee

[Kim_Grantham]

The IRS just extended the deadline!

 

IRS announces administrative transition period for new Roth catch up requirement; catch-up contribut...

 

Kim

[graziela]

Hi Chandra,

Yes, that´s correct.

Kind regards,
Graziela

[Kim_Grantham]

Follow-up:

I was able to successfully configure this using memo wage types to store overtime.  We pay straight time plus the blended rate at .5.  I capture the full hours of overtime and amount and the blended rate dollars and store them in a memo wage type as a negative amount using new rules in the schema with an effective reading a constant in T511K.  I then created a new processing class 71 that indicates exempt from state withholding and added it to the Alabama tax model in T5UTM.  I assigned this new wage type to this processing class and it reduces taxable wages.  I use a secondary processing class to track if the OT is eligible or not since absence overtime is not.  The memo wage type is treated like a pre-tax deduction.  I am storing both the amount and hours so we can meet the Alabama reporting requirements.  Every client is different, but this solution has tested out to be working for us.

Thanks,

Kim

[phanik_123]

Hi Khalid,

I have maintained formula 02 in IT 210 for IL employees who are hired after 06/07/2023 and ran payroll.

How to test this scenario. Could you please help me out with steps if possible.

Iam no sure what fields need to be maintained to check if system is taking exemption amt of 2425. How did you test this scenario?

Thank you and appreciate your help.

[phanik_123]

provided a new formula number 2 for tax type 19 for NY MCTMT (tax authority NY2P&NY0F) Zone1&Zone 02 tax authorities.

I want to perform testing for these changes which sap has introduced in Cyclicj.1

I could see that in IT235 we should be able to maintain formula 01 or 02 . How these changes verified through testing Any help?

 

Did any one performed test scenarios, could you please help with steps .

 

Thanks to in advance.

[ejaz1]

Hi Phani,

 

Thats all you need to do on IT0210 , once you do that and run payroll , check the BSI Log in the Payroll schema and see if the formula that is being used to calculate taxes is 02  for IL

As for the exemption amount , look at it in the schema or calculate the taxes using IL withholding worksheet from BSI Tax formulas to validate your results

 

Ejaz

 

[phanik_123]

Thanks Khalid.

I am able to see formula no.02 in payroll BSI Log.

 

[Euna]

Hi,

 

We've applied the notes and completed configuration V_T5F99K2 with 'Error', but I'm not getting any error message in payroll processing. Any suggestion where to check?

 

Thank you,

Euna

[rosette_vaughn2]

We’re testing HR service packs and have questions regarding note 3277295 - BSI: Tax Types not using standard worked hours when worked hours are equal zero.  In the BSI Interface for OR Workers Compensation, the note is changing calculation of tax, using default hours instead of worked hours.  This is incorrect.  Example:  we tested an employee who was paid hours for vacation and holiday pay.  Per the state of OR, workers compensation tax should not be calculated for sick, vacation and holiday hours.

Please investigated and advise a solution?

Thank you,

Rosette

[CarlosAccorsi]

Hello Rosette,

This is a know topic.
Please open a Support Case and we'll further check the issue on your system.

Best,
Carlos

[Matt_Fraser]

Hi all,

As part of our regular annual Year End update processing, I'm updating to the latest Cyclic and Regulatory Bulletins. As such, in our DEV environment, I just updated our TaxFactory system from Cyclic J to Cyclic J2 (haven't yet updated the Regulatory Bulletins, so it remains on 112), and for the first time ever in years of managing a TaxFactory system I experienced unsuccessful records/transactions while applying the Cyclic Data File. In total, 83 transactions were rejected according to the Update Output report.

Has anyone else experienced this? Did I need to update to a later Regulatory Bulletin first? I didn't see any mention in the installation notes of a minimum Regulatory Bulletin for this Cyclic.

Yes, I did update the Client Package first.

Cheers,
Matt

[Kim_Grantham]

Matt,

Cyclic J2 has note 3381608 that accompanies it along with two prerequisites 3377590 and 3378026.  It is related to change for the Indiana W2.  This may be your issue.

Kim

[Matt_Fraser]

Thanks Kim!

However, I suspect this isn't the cause of the error, as unless I'm missing something, not having those Notes in the backend would only cause the Indiana-specific functionality to not work in the backend, no? We do not have any Indiana employees, so this is not a priority for us.

I haven't gotten so far as synchronizing the TaxFactory changes into the backend system. This error is happening during the Cyclic Update to the TaxFactory system itself.

Or do I need to apply those Notes, then run a sync, then apply the Cyclic? I didn't find anything in the Notes to indicate this would be necessary. I'm reluctant to do this without knowing it's necessary, as the Notes introduce complexity that our team will be loath to have to test at this time on top of all they already have to look at for year end.

Cheers,
Matt

[Euna]

Did you directly update to J2? I know there was J1. If you have skipped J1, would it be a reason?

 

Regards,

Euna

[Matt_Fraser]

Yes, I jumped direct from J to J2. In the past Cyclics were cumulative, unlike Regulatory Updates, so this should have been ok. But I am wondering if that's no longer the case.

I'm in the process of restoring my database now to a point before I started the update, and I'll try doing both Cyclics in sequence instead to see what happens.

[ChandraV]

We had a different error while applying cyclic J (dont think it is same as yours). In our Dev boxes it error'd out with message -

5116 - CURRENT CYCLIC BULLETIN IS I. ENGINE REVISION IS I. CYCLIC DATA J2 IS OUT OF SEQUENCE. CANNOT PROCESS THIS BULLETIN.

The message didnt  make any sense as the sequence was correct.  Our basis team had to use a command line tool to update. BSI support couldnt explain why this happens but happens sometimes. We migrated both cyclic j2 and TUBs 120 to prod last week.

Thanks

Chandra

 

[Matt_Fraser]

Weird! I wonder where the tool got the idea you were on Cyclic I, since that doesn't yet exist for TF11.

[Matt_Fraser]

Ok, I solved it by including J1 before J2, but also by interleaving the application of the Regulatory Updates based upon what their minimum required Cyclic was. So, the full order of import was:

1. Regulatory Updates 112 - 119


2. Cyclic Update J1


3. Regulatory Update 120


4. Cyclic Update J2


5. Regulatory Update 121

This worked. I checked the audit reports carefully at each step of the way.

I also successfully synchronized to the backend after finishing the above without any error, despite not having the Indiana Notes related to 3381608 installed, and PA20/PA30 and ESS WDA appear to be working fine.

Thanks Kim, Euna, and Chandra, for jumping in to help!

[Euna]

Hi,

 

Anyone getting a message "Could not add County to Tax Area KYBR" with TUB122?
Is it something I can fix manually or should I wait for the fix?

 

Regards,

Euna

[rosette_vaughn2]

Hello,

We're testing note 3392866 - Tax: Alabama Overtime Pay Exemption beginning January 1, 2004, and noticed in the cumulated tax results for AL withholding that the /601 earnings and /701 earning do not match.  The difference is the AL overtime pay exemption amount, but these two wage type totals should match. Can this be explained?

Tax authority AL Alabama 257
Tax Category                       Tax.inc    Tax-free Inc.Declare Tax.earning Tax
001 Withholding Tax (REG) 4358.22   459.22   3899.00        2446.52       85.50

Tks,

Rosette Vaughn

[CarlosAccorsi]

Hello Rosette,

Would you please ensure that you have BSI Cyclic K installed on your system as detailed on note 3392866?
If yes and the issue persists, my suggestion would be to first check the calculation with BSI team, since /701 comes from them.

Best,
Carlos

[rosette_vaughn2]

Hi Carlos,

We have Cyclic K installed.  Per your suggestion we will contact BSI.

Tks!

Rosette

[Kim_Grantham]

We are testing the New York Disability Reverse Tax Updates.  BSI refers to a reserved amount variable DRSVD1 being enabled to send the Pay Period-TO-Dage Gross (PTG).  Is there a setting in SAP to utilize this variable?

Thanks!

Kim

[former_member300128]

looking for the Bulletin that will have IRS 2024 Tax brackets, does anyone know?

 

[Euna]

Check here? https://taxfoundation.org/data/all/federal/2024-tax-brackets/

 

Regards,

Euna

[Matt_Fraser]

Sorry, deleted my previous comment because I wasn't sure of its accuracy. But yes, BSI typically does put out an annual regulatory bulletin with Federal wage bracket updates. Last year it was in bulletin 98 (at least for some of the brackets), and it wasn't released until December 27th or thereabouts. I think in some years these bulletins have even come out in January. I don't know why they should be so late in the year if IRS has already published the brackets, but this seems to commonly be the case.

[rosette_vaughn2]

Hi Carlos,

We've come across another issue while testing AL OT Exemption.

AL Overtime Exemption /PPE testing issue.  Note 3392866 and Cyclic K applied.

Employee was paid regular pay plus a bonus supplemental payment in the same pay period.  We noticed that /PPE is coming out of bonus supplemental payment which is incorrect – AL OT Exemption is on overtime hours only.

/PPE of $30.00 on regular payment - which is correct.

852.87 (AL /601) minus 822.87 (AL /701) = 30.00 (AL OT Exemption earnings).

Tax result for payment type Regular payment - correct.

Tax authority AL Alabama 257

Tax Category                                          Tax.inc    Tax-free   Inc.Declare    Tax.earning     Tax

001 Withholding Tax             (REG)     1010.00      157.13      852.87      822.87       28.46

 

/PPE of 30.00 on one-time bonus supplemental payment – incorrect.

Tax result for payment type Once-only payment.

Tax authority AL Alabama 257

Tax Category                                          Tax.inc    Tax-free Inc.Declare   Tax.earning        Tax

001 Withholding Tax              (REG)     3000.00        0.00     3000.00     2970.00      117.96

 

Tks,

Rosette

[rosette_vaughn2]

Hi Carlos,

Here's some additional clarifying information..

The problem is there are 2 tax calls (one for reg and one for Supplemental) and /PPE is called in both and therefore, doubling the exemption amount. 

Tks again,

Rosette

[graziela]

Hello Rosette,

Could you please open a case? I will check it.

Thank you,
Graziela

[Steve_S]

Hello, We have applied Cyclic K, but TaxFactory is still showing Cyclic J.

Can anyone help with this?

 

Thanks

[graziela]

Hello Steve,

Please, check:
2443834 - TaxFactory cyclic upgrade doesn´t show the new version

Kind regards,

Graziela

[Euna]

Silly me. What was I thinking. I'd rather delete my response, but leave it as that might remove Matt's post along with mine. Sorry, Sandra. 😉

 

Euna

[Matt_Fraser]

No worries! Easy to misinterpret the question. 🙂

Also, by now, I'm sure everyone has seen BSI's announcement about this, or at least Jeff Wible's post about the announcement (on the Year End blog comment thread, not this one). BSI says they haven't released the update yet, because IRS's announcement is technically still only in draft form. But they have used the draft to be ready to release it once IRS makes it official. Or, at least that's how I interpreted the announcement.

[Steve_S]

Hello, thanks for the reply.. It was reporting the wrong cyclic in TaxFactory after applying cyclic K.

I had a snapshot running on the host, i rolled it back and then applied Cyclic J2, and then Cyclic K and its now reporting K as being installed. The first time I went from Cyclic J to Cyclic K, I skipped J2.

Are Cyclic versions supposed to be in order, can you Not go from F to K with out doing G, H, I, ect?

Thanks again for replying..

Steve

[rosette_vaughn2]

Hi Carlos.

As suggested, we contacted BSI regarding the difference in the USTAX call between Inc.Declare wages  and Tax.earning not matching because of /PPE amount (AL Overtime).  BSI replied that we should contact SAP regarding changing the Tax Free column in the USTAX call to include /PPE amount, which would reflect same amount Inc.Declare wages  and Tax.earning.  Example below.

We’d like to know if this is something that could or would be changed by SAP?  And it would only be for AL Overtime exemption amount.

Example:

Tax authority AL Alabama 257
Tax Category                       Tax.inc    Tax-free  Inc.Declare  Tax.earning Tax
001 Withholding Tax (REG) 4358.22   459.22   3899.00        2446.52       85.50

Tks,

Rosette

[CarlosAccorsi]

Hi Rosette,

Thanks for checking that with BSI.

The tax-free column represents the pre-tax deductions.
This is customized by the customer via Tax Model.

So, my suggestion for you would be to review the Tax Model for Alabama to ensure it follows your needs.
Please refer to this documentation for details on the Tax Model: https://help.sap.com/docs/SUPPORT_CONTENT/erphcm/3354684289.html?locale=en-US

Best Regards,
Carlos

[rosette_vaughn2]

Hi Graziela, 

We're using Tax Locator Audit Report RPUTXLU0.  My question is regarding the Display Options.  Can you explain how Display Options selection(s) work?  When we select "All Employees", we are not getting the expected output results.  All Employees does not show up - In particular, the Display Option "Only Employees with Data Not Matching BSI Values".  No output pulls in when "All Employees" is selected for employees who does not match BSI Values.

Display Options:

- All Employees

- Only Employees with Data Matching BSI Values

- Only Employees with Data Not Matching BSI Values

We contacted BSI and was told to contact SAP.  

Thanks,

Rosette

[greg_zifchock]

Vermont Child Care Contribution Tax Effective 7/1/2024

When can we expect to see something from SAP/BSI for this new tax?

[kim_grantham1]

BSI released the Vermont Child Care Contributions in TUB 141 using two new tax types:

• 123 - EE CHILD CARE CONTRIBUTION
• 124 - ER CHILD CARE CONTRIBUTION

Hopefully we will get the configuration from SAP soon.

Thanks,

Kim