DMR - Questions regarding substitute declarations

[Former Member]

Dear SAP team,

Regarding the generation of DMR’s substitute declaration, there are some questions that I ask for your clarification:

1. In certain situations, the substitute declaration presents the values in an “In period” payroll view. For other situations, it presents in a “For period” view. Can you please explain why the behaviour inconsistency and in what situations each one is used?
2. In situations where you have to generate substitute declarations for previous years, it means that you will also need to generate a new Individual Declaration of the previous year for some employees. For companies with thousands of employees, it is impossible to check one by one if there are new values presented in the substitute declaration.

I believe that the DMR solution should follow this behaviour:

• Extract DMR for 04/2015 (for example), with the field “Relevant months” checked;
• DMR generates substitute declaration for the previous year (12/2014, for example);
• In the log of 12/2014, it is indicated which employees had the declared values updated.

Best regards,

[XxEmixX]

Dear Luis,

We asked about all the information regarding inperiod and for period issue to Development, and what we obtained was:

Note 2015040 (RPCMIDP0: adaptation to AT recommendations and improvements) has introduced a different behavior to the report according to the orientation received from AT.

In fact, sometimes the report consider the values of the In Period and in other cases the For period, this is automatically defined by the logic used in the substitution declarations.

By default the report use the In Period to read the amounts, however if the employee has an inconsistent result, substitution declarations must be generated for the previous periods retro-calculated. When generating these substitution declarations, the result of each month takes into account the last period (until the current month).

In version 2 of the file there are 3 reasons for inconsistency:

1.    Some amount is higher than the legal limits. For instance, SS cannot be higher than 20% of the income, IRS cannot be higher than the income…;

2.       Income is positive and some other amount is negative, or vice-versa;

3.       Negative values generated in January (this specific month does not accept negative values)

An inconsistency means that some amount cannot be informed due to AT validations and the solution is the generation of substitution declarations. These inconsistency situations are caused be retro-calculated differences, so when generating the substitution declaration the report only consider the result of each month substituted that was calculated in the last period (until the current month).

On your case, there is no need to generate a substitution declaration for the previous year, the difference from October (and other months) are being considered in March.

The report generates messages per employee for each changed applied to avoid the rejection of the file. Moreover, the specific message ‘Registros do NIF & foram atualizados no período’ is generated when the employee has the values updated (current or substituted period) taking into account the last In Period (For Period reading).

I hope that this information is useul for you.

Best regards,

Emiliano González,

SAP Community team.

[XxEmixX]

Dear Luis,

Thanks for contact us via forum. We are analizing your doubts.

Also I would like to let you know that we are working a lot on DMR looking how to improve it. There is a meeting between product managment, customers, development and SAP AGS this week. If there is any new regarding DMR I will add it to tihs reply or create a new topic and let you know where to find that information.

I see that one of your requirements is to know which employee is inconsistent, as you wrote:

• DMR generates substitute declaration for the previous year (12/2014, for example);
• In the log of 12/2014, it is indicated which employees had the declared values updated.

Theres a simple way to do it, and it is not choosing to generate substitution declarations. Let me give you an example:

You have this DMR

And the result is:

How do I know why the system did a subs?

Do not check gerar declaracoes and on the message part you will see:

So the inconsistent employee is 9379047, and you can see also a text showing why.

Best regards,

Emiliano González,

SAP Community team.