INFOR LN MIGRATION RECONCILIATION

    Infor LN Migration Reconciliation — Governed, Signed, Repeatable

    Production infor ln migration reconciliation framework. Eleven standard signed reports per load across counts, sums, hashes, trial balance, production WIP, project WIP, intercompany elimination and ITAR/DFARS chain-of-custody. Same evidence pack for every reviewer.

    11 reports
    Per load, signed
    Multi-company
    Per-company evidence
    Intercompany
    Elimination reconciled
    Custom rules
    Configuration-driven

    Why infor ln migration reconciliation has to be governed, not ad-hoc

    Without a framework, every load becomes a negotiation. With one, every load produces signed evidence per company per period that every reviewer accepts.

    Infor LN customers running multi-company configurations have reconciliation surfaces that touch every business team: controllers want trial-balance reconciliation per Financial Company, manufacturing wants production-WIP reconciliation per Logistical Company, project managers want WIP and EVM reconciliation per project, intercompany accounting wants elimination evidence across all company pairs, and (for aerospace/defense customers) DCMA wants ITAR chain-of-custody evidence. Without a framework, each team runs their own spreadsheet, finds discrepancies independently, and the migration team spends weeks chasing root causes.

    Syntra ETL's infor ln migration reconciliation framework standardizes the questions across all reviewers: eleven signed reports per load covering technical reconciliation (counts, sums, hashes), business reconciliation (trial balance, AP/AR aging, production WIP, project WIP) and compliance reconciliation (intercompany elimination, ITAR/DFARS chain-of-custody, HGB/IFRS reporting). Every reviewer sees the same evidence, in the same format, with the same drill-down path back to source LN records.

    Custom reconciliation rules — fixed-asset categorization variants, EVM calculation specifics, intercompany markup conventions — get added to the framework as version-controlled configuration. The framework runs them alongside the standard rules on every load. The end-state is a per-load evidence pack that controllers, manufacturing leads, project managers, intercompany accounting, internal audit, external audit, statutory reviewers and (for aerospace/defense) DCMA all sign off on directly — no spreadsheet exchange, no parallel reconciliation effort.

    What the reconciliation framework standardizes

    1
    Technical reconciliation
    Record counts, sum totals, hash signatures per company per period — proves every record made it from LN to Fusion intact.
    2
    Business reconciliation
    Trial balance, AP/AR aging, production WIP, project WIP per company per period — proves Fusion operates identically to LN.
    3
    Compliance reconciliation
    Intercompany elimination, ITAR/DFARS chain-of-custody, HGB/IFRS retention — proves compliance obligations are met.
    4
    Custom reconciliation
    Customer-defined rules as version-controlled configuration — fixed-asset categorization, EVM variants, intercompany markup conventions.

    The eleven standard reports in the Infor LN reconciliation framework

    Every report signed, every report drillable to source LN records, every report consumed by named reviewers.

    🔢

    Record-count report

    Source LN counts per package per company per period vs Fusion-loaded counts — zero variance threshold, surfaces before downstream loads run.

    ⚖️

    Sum-total report

    Debit, credit, quantity, amount per company per period reconciled to the cent — Baan-precision rounding rules documented.

    🔏

    Hash-signature report

    Content-hash drift per business key — surfaces row-level transformation bugs with field-level diff for bulk fix.

    📊

    Trial-balance report

    LN trial balance per Financial Company per period vs Fusion trial balance per Ledger per period — drillable to journal line.

    💸

    AP aging report

    LN AP aging per Financial Company vs Fusion AP aging per BU per period — vendor-level reconciliation with open-invoice traceability.

    💰

    AR aging report

    LN AR aging per Financial Company vs Fusion AR aging per BU per period — customer-level reconciliation with open-receivable traceability.

    🏭

    Production-WIP report

    LN production-order WIP per Logistical Company vs Fusion work-order WIP per BU — material, labor, overhead reconciled.

    📋

    Project-WIP report

    LN project commitments and actuals vs Fusion PPM commitments and actuals — EVM measures, budget burn, forecast-to-complete.

    🔄

    Intercompany report

    Every intercompany pair reconciled — originating transaction, intercompany journal, IFRS elimination entry traceable end-to-end.

    🛡️

    ITAR/DFARS report

    Controlled records traced through every transformation with classification preserved — DCMA/DSS audit-ready evidence pack.

    🌍

    Statutory report

    HGB 10-year retention evidence, IFRS reporting reconciliation, SAF-T export evidence — country-specific reviewers get the evidence they need.

    The Infor LN reconciliation framework — how it runs per load

    A repeatable per-load sequence that produces the signed evidence pack within hours of load completion.

    1

    Source extract & hash — At extract time

    Every LN record extracted with content-hash per business key. Source manifest signed at extract — record counts, sum totals, hash signatures captured deterministically.

    2

    Load to Fusion + post-load hash — During load

    FBDI/HDL payloads loaded to Fusion, successful records re-hashed post-load. Error rows captured locally with field-level diagnostic for bulk fix.

    3

    Technical reconciliation — Post-load (minutes)

    Counts, sums, hashes compared per company per period. Variance flags surface immediately. Hash drift gets row-level drill-down for transformation-bug diagnosis.

    4

    Business reconciliation — Post-load (hours)

    Trial balance, AP/AR aging, production WIP, project WIP compared across LN and Fusion per company per period. Drill-down to journal line and originating transaction.

    5

    Compliance reconciliation — Post-load (hours)

    Intercompany elimination across company pairs, ITAR/DFARS chain-of-custody, HGB/IFRS retention obligation — compliance-specific reports produced per applicable jurisdiction.

    6

    Evidence pack sign-off — Post-pack assembly

    Eleven signed reports assembled into timestamped audit-ready pack. Signed by controller, finance lead, manufacturing lead, projects lead, intercompany accounting, compliance lead. Retained per jurisdiction policy.

    Who consumes the Infor LN migration reconciliation pack

    Same pack, multiple audiences — eliminates the multi-week sign-off-by-spreadsheet cycle.

    📊

    Controllers

    Trial-balance reconciliation per Financial Company per period to the cent — same evidence the auditor will review.

    🏭

    Manufacturing leads

    Production-WIP reconciliation per Logistical Company — material issued, labor posted, overhead applied reconciled per operation.

    📋

    Project managers & PMO

    Project-WIP reconciliation per project per period — EVM measures, budget burn, commitments and actuals reconciled.

    🔄

    Intercompany accounting

    Per-pair intercompany reconciliation — originating transaction, intercompany journal, IFRS elimination entry traceable end-to-end.

    🔍

    Internal & external audit

    Row-level hash evidence with full drill-down lineage — eliminates 'we'll spot-check' answers that extend migration sign-off by weeks.

    🛡️

    DCMA / DSS / statutory

    ITAR/DFARS chain-of-custody, HGB 10-year retention, IFRS reporting, SAF-T export — country and program-specific reviewers get the evidence they need.

    Frequently asked questions

    What is an Infor LN migration reconciliation framework?+

    An infor ln migration reconciliation framework is the governed structure that proves Fusion is operationally identical to LN — across counts, sums, hashes, trial balances, production WIP, project WIP and intercompany eliminations. Without it, every load becomes a negotiation: did we get all the journals? Are the AP totals right? Did intercompany clear? The Syntra ETL framework standardizes the questions and produces signed answers per company per period, automatically, on every load. Three layers: technical reconciliation (record counts, sum totals, hash signatures), business reconciliation (trial balance, AP/AR aging, production WIP, project WIP) and compliance reconciliation (intercompany elimination, ITAR/DFARS chain-of-custody, HGB/IFRS reporting).

    How does the Infor LN reconciliation framework handle multi-company configurations?+

    Multi-company LN reconciliation is genuinely harder than single-company because it has to work at three levels simultaneously: per Logistical Company (operational data — items, production orders, sales/purchase), per Financial Company (accounting — GL trial balance, AP/AR aging), and across companies (intercompany journals, intercompany inventory transfers, intercompany project allocations, IFRS elimination entries). Syntra ETL's framework reconciles at all three levels in parallel, producing per-company evidence plus cross-company evidence in the same signed pack — so controllers, intercompany accounting teams and consolidation teams all sign off on the same numbers.

    What's included in the standard Infor LN reconciliation report set?+

    Eleven standard signed reports per load: record-count report per package per company per period, sum-total report (debit/credit/quantity/amount) per company per period, hash-signature report with row-level drift detection, trial-balance report per Financial Company per period drillable to journal, AP aging report per BU vs LN AP aging per Financial Company, AR aging report per BU vs LN AR aging per Financial Company, production-WIP report per Logistical Company, work-order operation-status report, project-WIP report per project per period with EVM measures, intercompany elimination report across all company pairs, and ITAR/DFARS chain-of-custody report for aerospace/defense customers. Plus custom reports per customer-defined reconciliation rule.

    How does the reconciliation framework support parallel-run sign-off?+

    Parallel-run is the most common cutover risk mitigation: LN and Fusion both process operational transactions for 1–2 month-end cycles, and reconciliation has to prove Fusion produces identical financial results before cutover sign-off. Syntra ETL's framework supports parallel-run with automated daily extracts from both systems, delta-replay capability for missed transactions, and side-by-side reconciliation reports per company per ledger per period. Variance flags surface at the journal-line level so root cause is identified within hours, not weeks. Customers report parallel-run validation as the single most important sign-off artifact for finance executives.

    How does the reconciliation framework handle Infor LN intercompany flows?+

    LN intercompany flows are notoriously hard to reconcile because they span multiple Logistical Companies, multiple Financial Companies and multiple sub-ledgers (intercompany journals in tfgld, intercompany inventory transfers in tdinv, intercompany project allocations in tppdm). Syntra ETL's framework walks every intercompany pair, reconstructs the originating transaction (which Logistical Company shipped, which Financial Company billed, which Logistical Company received), and reconciles the corresponding Fusion intercompany journals plus the IFRS elimination entries for consolidated reporting. Output: per-pair intercompany reconciliation evidence that the consolidation team signs alongside finance.

    How does post-load reconciliation handle Baan-precision rounding?+

    LN's Baan-derived data model uses 5–6 decimal places for unit cost and 4–6 decimal places for currency conversion rates — finer precision than Fusion's default 2 decimal places for posted amounts. Direct rounding from LN to Fusion creates penny-level drift across multi-million-line periods. Syntra ETL's reconciliation framework handles this with documented rounding rules per currency per cost component: rounding-difference journals captured at conversion time, line-vs-document level rounding reconciled per LN's convention, and the resulting Fusion totals proven equal to LN within the documented precision envelope. Auditors get the rounding-rule documentation as part of the evidence pack.

    Can the reconciliation framework be extended with custom rules?+

    Yes. Every customer has reconciliation rules specific to their accounting policy, statutory environment or operational model — fixed-asset categorization rules, project EVM calculation variants, intercompany markup conventions. Syntra ETL's framework supports customer-defined reconciliation rules written as configuration (not code), version-controlled in Git, signed by the rule owner, and run alongside the standard rules on every load. Custom rules produce signed evidence in the same pack format, so reviewers see standard and custom evidence in one place. No bespoke validation scripts, no shadow reconciliation spreadsheets.

    How does the reconciliation framework feed compliance audit reviews?+

    The signed reconciliation pack is consumed directly by every compliance reviewer: HGB 10-year retention auditors get the original-document evidence and trial-balance reconciliation, IFRS reviewers get the elimination-entry evidence and consolidated reporting reconciliation, SOX reviewers get the ITGC evidence (change control, separation of duties, audit logs), SOC 2 reviewers get the operational-control evidence (extract logs, transformation logs, load logs), and (for aerospace/defense customers) DCMA and DSS reviewers get the ITAR/DFARS chain-of-custody evidence. Same pack, multiple audiences — eliminates the multi-week sign-off-by-spreadsheet cycle that traditionally delays go-live.

    Plan your infor ln migration reconciliation framework

    30-minute call. Walk through your LN multi-company structure, intercompany footprint, compliance obligations and reviewer landscape — leave with a concrete reconciliation framework plan.