> On Jan 12, 2018, at 3:43 AM, Deva - <pobox.d...@outlook.in> wrote: > > Hello, > > I am on Mac OS Sierra v10.12.6. > > Until a few days ago, I was using GnuCash 2.6.6 and just in the last 2 days, > I upgraded to the latest version 2.6.19. > > After running a preliminary test of some of the reports I use for tax > reporting purposes, I noticed that the cost basis on one of my mutual funds > has changed significantly (see attached screenshot for the transactions on > that mutual fund account). > > Some history on this fund. It used to be called Fidelity Flexi Gilt Fund and > I had invested INR 850,000 and accumulated 70,362.427 shares as of 16-Nov-12. > But on 23-Nov-2012, Fidelity sold its mutual fund business in India to L&T > Mutual Fund and the latter decided to merge Fidelity’s gilt fund into its own > - now called L&T Gilt Fund. > > When this merger happened, I simply used the stock split assistant to reduce > the no. of shares by 34,769.081 based on the account statement sent by L&T. > > As of 2.6.6, the (average) cost basis on the balance sheet report correctly > showed INR 850,000 even after the “stock split” transaction. But in the > latest version 2.6.19, the balance sheet report shows the same cost basis as > 429,978.69. I think it has reduced the cost basis by the cost of the shares > reduced from the merger i.e., 34,769.081 shares. > > This is causing such differences to show up as imbalance in my reports! > > Has the computation of cost basis changed between these versions? If so, how > should I go about accounting for cases such as above to maintain proper cost > basis? > > Odd thing though is that I have a no. of stocks that declared a stock split, > but in those cases, the cost basis is correctly maintained even after the > split. This behaviour is only seen in mutual fund shares (as far as I can > tell). > > I rely on GnuCash reports for my annual tax reporting, so it’s important that > the reports I generate have a proper explanation for the numbers shown. > > Thanks in advance for your time.
Yes, the calculation of average cost changed in 2.6.12 to fix a bug, but that opened another can of worms, see https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=775368 <https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=775368>. I intend to have a solution for 3.0 and if you can add the details of your use-case to the bug that will help. Regards, John Ralls _______________________________________________ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user ----- Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
