It could depend on the tool and how it presents the case. At first I assumed you'd still send your out of pocket to Expenses, but if the reconciliation doesn't come from Income, your Income/Expense reports may be misleading, not symmetrical. I could see using both *Expenses:Insured:Home* and subsequently *Income:Insurance* and then the transactions are easy to filter.
If you don't want to see the deficit reflected in your net worth, I'm warming to the Assets:Receivable idea. You are reasonably expected to receive the funds, as much as your Liabilities are expected to receive back from you. It just seems weird to not send money to Expenses when you're buying (replacement) things/services. Another option could be to use *Equity:Insurance*. Literally none of Assets, Income, or Expenses. On Fri, Jun 21, 2024 at 10:24 AM Chary Chary <[email protected]> wrote: > In general, this case is not special for beancount, this is just an > accounting question > > You can always google (or ask chatgpt) on small business would account for > such events, the methodology is 500 years old and is well established > > On Friday, June 21, 2024 at 4:21:47 PM UTC+2 Chary Chary wrote: > >> If you want to log it properly, you can't book it neither against expense >> nor against income. >> >> Say you have received large payment and booked it against income. in this >> case your net worth has all of a sudden increased, but this is not correct, >> because you have received it against future or past payments. >> If you were a company, then you could be made responsible for financial >> fraud by making your net worth look better than it is >> >> So, in my example both paying to fix the damage from your bank account >> and payment from insurance company go against Assets >> :AccontsReceivable:Insurance >> >> Suppose insurance covers 100% of your damage, then my scheme insures that >> your net worth does not change even in the case you spent all of your cash >> to repair for damage initially (this is because you know you will be >> reimbursed) >> >> >> On Friday, June 21, 2024 at 3:31:49 PM UTC+2 Brian Lalor wrote: >> >>> Hm, that’s interesting. After starting this thread I thought maybe I’d >>> just book it against Expenses:Home:Repair, but looking at expenses >>> incurred, there are things like lodging and repairs/replacement of >>> non-structural items (like, say, books damaged by water) that are separate >>> from the repair costs to the house. Should the insurance reimbursement be >>> booked against some kind of Income category? It’s not really income in the >>> salary sense, but that is sort of the path of ingress for “new money”. >>> >>> — >>> Brian Lalor (he/him) >>> [email protected] >>> >>> On Jun 21, 2024, at 9:23 AM, Chary Chary <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> I think it has to go either against accounts payable or accounts >>> receivable depending whether you get payment before or after you paid for >>> damage >>> >>> Like this: >>> >>> >>> 2020-01-18 * "Fixing house water damage from personal money" >>> Assets:Checking -1000.00 USD >>> Assets:AccontsReceivable:Insurance 1000.00 USD ; We know we >>> will get this money back from insurance company >>> >>> 2020-02-19 * "Getting payment from insurance companyone month later" >>> Assets:Checking 1000.00 USD >>> Assets:AccontsReceivable:Insurance -1000.00 USD >>> >>> >>> On Friday, June 21, 2024 at 2:12:15 PM UTC+2 Brian Lalor wrote: >>> >>>> What’s a good way to book reimbursement for an insurance claim? It’s >>>> not really income, but booking against the category that the premium is >>>> paid from doesn’t feel right, either (especially as the reimbursement in >>>> this case exceeds the amount spent on the premium for the previous year). >>>> >>>> — >>>> Brian Lalor (he/him) >>>> [email protected] >>>> >>>> >>> -- >>> 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 view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/181851ef-91fc-40c3-965d-b8dca382a70dn%40googlegroups.com >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/181851ef-91fc-40c3-965d-b8dca382a70dn%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >>> >>> -- > 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 view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/8898a8a1-2d75-49e0-b539-b20044b2a671n%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/8898a8a1-2d75-49e0-b539-b20044b2a671n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- 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 view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/CANRuw3xaPhYW%3DVs6Y9VuW%2BFqc1MmqzUrgbcx46n2ew5HEaGgGA%40mail.gmail.com.
