On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 6:38 AM, Martin Michlmayr <[email protected]> wrote:
> * Martin Blais <[email protected]> [2018-02-06 00:43]: > > > > 2016-07-28 * "Buy some shares of retirement fund" > > > > Assets:Invest 45.0045 VBMPX {11.11 USD} > > > > > > > 2016-10-12 * "Buy some shares of retirement fund" > > > > Assets:Invest 54.5951 VBMPX {10.99 USD} > > > > > > > Should result in a single lot with the total number of units and the > > > averaged cost: > > > > units ccy cost cost-ccy lot-date label > > > > 99.5996 VBMPX {11.0442 USD, 2016-07-28, None} > > > > > > But average cost is calculated with the second transaction so > > > shouldn't the lot_date be 2016-10-12? > > > > No, it's a choice. > > > > The thing is in the USA it may have tax consequences, e.g. LT vs. ST > > capital gains rates are different. > > I don't know much about US taxation but wouldn't it depend on the > *last* time you bought something? > Actually, to be realistic, in the US, everything I know that's allowed at average cost is treated as tax-free, e.g. in a 401k plan. The reality is that for those lots, the date doesn't really matter, and besides perhaps some generic marker like "VARIOUS" would be the better treatment than making a choice. That would introduce an inconsistency in the data type though, i.e, "sometimes the lot date field is VARIOUS". In the meantime, I think an option to decide which date should be selected (oldest or newest) is totally fair game. > Perhaps the Right Thing to do would be to provide an option to select what > > should happen automatically. > > Right, that might be a good idea. > > Actually, I wanted to ask how the average cost method will work. > Presumably, if I buy some shares and then buy more shares, it will > calculate the average cost immediately? > Personally, I prefer to keep the original holdings as long as > possible. i.e. I'd prefer to calculate the average cost only when > needed (e.g. immediately before selling some). > IIRC that's the proposal I put forward, that lot augmentations shouldn't merge immediately, but that lot reductions should trigger a merge before and after reducing (to recalculate the cost, in case you reduce at another cost than average). Will this be possible? e.g. can I tell beancount not to use anything > and then easily call the average cost function from beancount code? > Yes, I think this way it makes it automatic enough, yet it leaves some under your control. Another option will also be to leave the account as e.g., FIFO but if/when you want to force averaging, you could use the unimplemented merge marker that's supported in the syntax, e,g. "{101.23 USD, *}". -- > Martin Michlmayr > http://www.cyrius.com/ > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Beancount" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ > msgid/beancount/20180316103800.atdrkt2vel2stxx2%40jirafa.cyrius.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Beancount" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CAK21%2BhOLo9%3D9dp%3DmfMX4Po%2B0XyshR45E1V36WqKYyAwgApKZ2w%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
