Two trip variants

[Former Member]

Hi Experts,

I have a query here, we have to use two payment methods for travel expenses, HR payroll and Vendor payment through FI.

We have to use Payroll for core employee and vendor payment for contractors.

Athough all employee including core and contractors have same travel previligies.

I am about to start configuration, can you please advise me whether I should go for one trip variant or two trip variants (one for payment through payroll and one for vendor payment).

Please advise.

Thanks and Regards

Abhishek

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Abhishek,

The return values for L+G and PA3 in feature TRVPA determines whether there is integration to payroll or not (see documentation for this feature). However the fields for decision operation are BUKRS (company code), WERKS (Personnel Area) and BTRTL (Personnel sub-area) and I am guessing that you have defined your employee classification (permanent/contractors/etc.) at the Employee group level. If this is the case then you will need to call a program where you can make the decision based on the PERSG (employee group) field.

I am not sure how creating two trip variants can achieve this.

Thanks

Ankur 

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Ankur,

you are sure about this setting?

I can also have payroll integration AND pay to emplyoee via a vendor account. (taxable amounts)

I think the best would be to have two different trip provision variants.

But like to hear your opinion before confusing Abhishek.

Best regards,

Sigi

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Siegfried,

I think Abhishek's query was in relation to what settings are required to pay expenses for core employees via payroll and for contractors via the vendor payment, that's what I understand from the post above.

In my reply I was NOT suggesting to pay expenses to EMPLOYEES via both payroll integration and vendor account but I suggesthed that one can achieve this via TRVPA only if they have different EE groups for eg. Permanent then for this group the values for L+G and PA3 can be 1 and if they have EE group as Contractors (and they are assigned to non-payroll relevant area) then the value for  L+G and PA3 for this scenario can be 0.

I am not sure how you can achieve this by creating two trip variants. Would love to hear your solution?

Thanks

Ankur

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

as soon as you have the *KP (search vendor by employee) entry in GL account assignment PRT3, posting run will look for all employees for employee vendor during posting. If this doesn't exist, trip cannot be posted and drops from further processing in PRRW. Trips with employees having a vendor can be processed.

So you need to use either two charts of accounts for your employee groupings, or two trip provision variants (can be copied initially in IMG)

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Ankur,

in some countries you have payroll integration NOT for payment but for data which is needed for tax reasons.

Best regards,

Sigi

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Michael,

drops = error in posting run. So I would say this is not a solution here...

Chart of accounts is also not a solution I guess - because chart of account is set by fiance on leagal entity level.

So two trip provision variants is also my preferred solution. Only disadvantage is maintenance effort for a extra TPV only for external stuff.

Best regards,

Sigi

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Seig,

So you believe that two variants is only solution, or is there any other option also available to meet my requirment.

Thanks

Abhi

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi Abhi,

from my knowledge this would be the only clear solution to handle this approach.

Cheers,

Sigi