Thanks

On Friday, February 26, 2021 at 11:31:16 AM UTC-8 Pedro F wrote:

> Thanks Dan, that makes a lot of sense and lines up with Ben's suggestion 
> as well. I think in my case I'll keep the income leg separate as well in an 
> "Income:Hooli:BIK" instead of adjusting the ":Salary" leg. This way I 
> retain the distinction between the "real" salary and the benefits, but 
> apart from that it should be the same.
>
> I think I now have a way forward to continue my journey with beancount!
>
> Many thanks,
>
> Pedro
>
> On Friday, 26 February 2021 at 19:01:08 UTC [email protected] wrote:
>
>> Hello Pedro, 
>>
>> except the name, which I never heard before, I think this form of 
>> benefits is rather common. The way I handle it is to simply record it as 
>> an expense, ie the fact that the money never reaches my bank account is 
>> not relevant for accounting purposes. The expense is recorded as a 
>> posting in the same transaction that record the payslip, so that the 
>> "atomicity" of the operation is not lost. 
>>
>> In your case, it seems that this requires juggling the amounts a bit: 
>>
>> 2000-01-31 * "Salary" 
>> Income:Hooli:Salary -2050.00 GBP 
>> Assets:Pension 500.00 GBP 
>> Expenses:Taxes:Income 250.00 GBP 
>> Expenses:Taxes:NI 50.00 GBP 
>> Expenses:BIK 50.00 GBP 
>> Assets:BankAccount 1200.00 GBP 
>>
>> IIUC what the end result is supposed to be. 
>>
>> Cheers, 
>> Dan 
>>
>>
>> On 26/02/2021 19:02, Pedro F wrote: 
>> > Hi everyone, I've been lurking here for a while as I migrated my 10 
>> > years worth of transactions into beancount (from a bespoke solution 
>> > involving excel and python). I'm now fine tuning things and starting to 
>> > extract nice report and I'm really pleased with beancount/fava and what 
>> > it can do, including how easy it is to intergrate with Jupyter. Thanks 
>> > for all the effort put into this great tool :) 
>> > 
>> > I'm struggling to represent how benefits in kind (BIK) are handled in 
>> my 
>> > payslip. This is likely to be very UK specific but I was hoping someone 
>> > could share some ideas. An example of a BIK is health insurance where 
>> > the employer pays for the benefit but the employee still has to pay tax 
>> > on it (basically increasing the taxable income). 
>> > 
>> > Here's a made up example of how this shows up in a payslip: 
>> > --------------------------- 
>> > Gross Pay: 
>> > - Salary: £2000 
>> > - Pension Contribution: -£500 
>> > - BIK: Health Insurance: £50 
>> > Total Pay: £1500 
>> > 
>> > Deductions: 
>> > - Income Tax: -£250 
>> > - National Insurance: -£50 
>> > Total Deductions: -£300 
>> > 
>> > Net Pay: £1200 
>> > --------------------------- 
>> > 
>> > Noteworthy points: 
>> > 
>> > - Total Pay = Salary + Pension Contribution (or, more generically, 
>> > SUM(Gross Pay items) excluding BIK entries). Pension contributions are 
>> > taken from the gross salary, decreasing the taxable income. 
>> > - Total Deductions = SUM(Deductions) 
>> > - Net Pay = Total Pay + Total Deductions 
>> > 
>> > The taxable income, that is not reported in the payslip but it's what 
>> is 
>> > reported to the tax man and what's used to decide how much tax we pay, 
>> > does include the BIK entries. If I check the details on HMRC (IRS in 
>> the 
>> > US I guess), the taxable income for this month would be £1550. 
>> > 
>> > When it comes to beancount, I could just ignore the BIK entries and log 
>> > it as: 
>> > 
>> > 2000-01-31 * "Salary" 
>> >     Income:Hooli:Salary       -2000 GBP 
>> >     Assets:Pension            500 GBP 
>> >     Expenses:Taxes:Income     250 GBP 
>> >     Expenses:Taxes:NI         50 GBP 
>> >     Assets:BankAccount       1200 GBP 
>> > 
>> > But this doesn't make it possible to calculate the taxable income and 
>> If 
>> > I add postings with the BIK entries the transaction doesn't balance. 
>> > 
>> > My goal is to be able to extract a report of my actual taxable income, 
>> > which means that I need to somehow add the BIK postings to the 
>> transaction. 
>> > 
>> > Does anyone have a sensible way to represent this? I feel like I may be 
>> > missing something very obvious :) 
>> > 
>> > Thanks 
>> > 
>> > Pedro 
>> > 
>> > 
>> > -- 
>> > 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] 
>> > <mailto:[email protected]>. 
>> > To view this discussion on the web visit 
>> > 
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/5cf5bddb-3945-48df-85a6-566df31f652bn%40googlegroups.com
>>  
>> > <
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/5cf5bddb-3945-48df-85a6-566df31f652bn%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 visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/beancount/727a6113-3db0-4f1a-b83c-6c1b1f686d05n%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to