I agree it is a bit backwards from an accounting perspective. But some of 
my payees wait up to several weeks to cash checks, and I prefer to have an 
accurate picture of my spendable balances. My mental model has the money 
leaving the account when I issue a check, so that whenever the payee ends 
up cashing it is immaterial to me.

On Sunday, April 14, 2019 at 11:35:32 AM UTC-4, Martin Blais wrote:
>
> Seems to me you're doing it backwards, I'd have recognized the expense 
> first, then booked the asset change when the money actually leaves the 
> checking account.
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 6:09 PM <[email protected] <javascript:>> wrote:
>
>> Rather than booking outstanding checks as an asset under 
>> "Assets:Chase:Checking:Payable", you could track them under Liabilities. 
>> Here's how I handle checks:
>>
>> 2019-03-01 * "My Building" "March 2019 Rent" #rent
>>   Liabilities:AccountsPayable 1000.00 USD
>>   Assets:Checking:Chase
>>
>> 2019-03-10 * "My Building" "Check #12345" #rent
>>   Liabilities:AccountsPayable -1000.00 USD
>>   Expenses:Rent:MyAddress
>>
>> This way, the money "leaves" your checking account as soon as you write 
>> the check, but it is still tracked as an outstanding liability. When the 
>> check is cached, it gets booked under the appropriate expense account.
>>
>> On Saturday, April 13, 2019 at 2:11:00 PM UTC-4, Aamer wrote:
>>>
>>> I agree, this behavior is somewhat surprising. I might be misisng 
>>> something, but this seems to conflict with Martin's advice to view account 
>>> names as "tags" (
>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/beancount/MqIk8nfgtx0/8YSzZpQTEAAJ).
>>>
>>> In this case, the hierarchy does matter since the balance directive will 
>>> sum up to the parent account. Similarly, Fava's UI seems to also indicate 
>>> that hierarchy is important.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 4:07 PM Zhuoyun Wei <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> One thing that surprises me (I noticed this just now, when writing the 
>>>> last reply) is that Beancount "balance" directive computes the balance of 
>>>> the parant account along with all child accounts.
>>>>
>>>> Say you have 1000.00 USD in the checking account, and you write a check 
>>>> of 100.00 USD to your friend. Now you have 900.00 USD in the parent 
>>>> account 
>>>> alone and 100.00 USD in the child / leaf ":Payable" account. And the 
>>>> assertion:
>>>>
>>>> 20XX-XX-XX balance Assets:Bank:Checking 1000.00 USD
>>>>
>>>> passes. This very behavior makes it easy for you to compare the balance 
>>>> in Beancount with the balance in your bank. At the same time, you could 
>>>> know how many money you could spend (without overdraft) by manually 
>>>> subtract the amount in ":Payable" from the parent tree.
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Zhuoyun Wei
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Apr 13, 2019, at 20:44, Zhuoyun Wei wrote:
>>>> > In the case of writing checks, my approach is to use two transactions:
>>>> > 
>>>> > 
>>>> > 2019-01-01 * "John Doe" "Settle up Splitwise" #check ^check123
>>>> >   Assets:Chase:Checking   -100.00 USD
>>>> >   Assets:Chase:Checking:Payable
>>>> > 
>>>> > 2019-02-01 * "CHECK 123" ^check123
>>>> >   document: "2019-02-01.check-123.pdf"
>>>> >   Assets:Chase:Checking:Payable -100.00 USD
>>>> >   Equity:ARAP:JohnDoe
>>>> > 
>>>> > 
>>>> > The first trasnaction is entered manually by me, on the day of 
>>>> writing 
>>>> > the check, in a separate file ("checks.bean"). The second transaction 
>>>> > is imported by "bean-extract" from the CSV my bank provides, at the 
>>>> end 
>>>> > of each month (along with the image of the check).
>>>> > 
>>>> > Sometimes it takes quite a while for your checks to clear, so using 
>>>> two 
>>>> > transactions is essential. This way, you can easily determine how 
>>>> many 
>>>> > checks and money are not cleared by examing the transactions in the 
>>>> > ":Payable" account, and also avoid blank checks / NSF by examing the 
>>>> > balance of the parant account (excluding the leaf account). The bonus 
>>>> > touch is, the two transactions are linked ("^check123"), so in Fava 
>>>> you 
>>>> > could click the link to show corresponding trasactions, no matter how 
>>>> > many days they are apart.
>>>> > 
>>>> > I remember someone in the mailing list wrote a plugin called 
>>>> > ZeroSumAccounts, which did similar things.
>>>> > 
>>>> > 
>>>> > -- 
>>>> > Zhuoyun Wei
>>>> > 
>>>> > On Sat, Apr 13, 2019, at 12:43, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
>>>> > > * Zhuoyun Wei <[email protected]> [2019-04-12 23:27]:
>>>> > > > > For example, there is no way in the base format to note whether 
>>>> a transaction has been reconciled or not.
>>>> > > > By "reconciled", I am assuming the LWN editor is refer to the 
>>>> difference between "*" and "!" transactions?
>>>> > > 
>>>> > > I'm not sure what his process is exactly.  Using flags might be part
>>>> > > of it.
>>>> > > 
>>>> > > But it might also be things like: when you write a check, you 
>>>> create a
>>>> > > transaction for the check (normally you record the money as leaving
>>>> > > your bank account when you write the check and not when the person
>>>> > > deposits the check, but in reality the money is on your bank account
>>>> > > until it gets deposited by the other person).  So you may have to
>>>> > > reconcile why your bank account balance is different to what your
>>>> > > books say by looking at a list of uncashed checks.
>>>> > > 
>>>> > > That kind of things.  Basically, your books won't always show bank
>>>> > > account balances all the time.
>>>> > > 
>>>> > > -- 
>>>> > > Martin Michlmayr
>>>> > > https://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/360165f8-609c-4c84-a66b-77fe80458421%40www.fastmail.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] <javascript:>.
>> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] 
>> <javascript:>.
>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/a06a8f13-3caf-442a-a2e3-8b52a6fbc999%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/a06a8f13-3caf-442a-a2e3-8b52a6fbc999%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>> .
>> 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/f6c60d0f-5300-42a3-9da9-4bdc2a7c651a%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to