Which of the following can you do when customizing split valuation? Note: There are 2 correct answers to this question.

Question

Options

• AAssign an account category reference to a valuation type
• BAssign valuation classes to a valuation category
• CAssign a procurement type to a valuation type
• DSpecify price control for a valuation category

• A
  82% (42)
• B
  6% (3)
• D
  12% (6)

Explanation

Split valuation in SAP MM allows a single material to carry multiple stock values simultaneously (e.g., by origin or quality). When customizing it, option A is correct because you can assign an account category reference to each valuation type, enabling different G/L accounts per valuation type. Option C is correct because you can assign a procurement type (e.g., "E" for in-house, "F" for external) to a valuation type, letting the system automatically select the right valuation type during goods receipt.

Option B is wrong because valuation classes are assigned to valuation types, not to the valuation category. The category is just the grouping criterion (e.g., "Origin"); the types are the actual values within it (e.g., "Domestic," "Imported").

Option D is wrong because price control (S = standard, V = moving average) is set at the valuation type level, not at the valuation category level.

Memory tip: Think "types do the work" - account category references, valuation classes, procurement types, and price control all attach to valuation types, not to the valuation category. The only exception to watch for is that the category itself is assigned to the material type in Customizing, not to a type. Options B and D are traps that swap "type" for "category."

No community discussion yet for this question.