Answering two at once:
Fred: No I did not work in split view. I was just working at the single
account level.
David: Are you saying I need to instruct GnuCash to treat the transfer
as a sale even though there was no sale thus no realized gains/losses
and no actual change in the cost basis?
On 2023-07-05 10:07, David Carlson wrote:
AC,
Fred implied, but didn't elaborate on the point that the shares in the
original brokerage account had a cost basis that was incurred when they
were purchased. When you transfer them out, that is equivalent to a sale
or closing transaction, and the cost basis should be adjusted accordingly,
even though there were no funds involved. Of course, that exact cost basis
needs to be added to the receiving account as if the shares were purchased
at the original price. This used to be described in great detail in one of
the help manuals, including the somewhat tricky procedure to enter realized
gains when an actual sale happens but I haven't checked lately to see if
those parts are still there. I know that if you do not do those things and
later run a trial balance or if you use the Investment Portfolio report,
you will quickly see the error of your ways.
On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 11:33 AM Fred Bone <f...@mandfb.me.uk> wrote:
On 04 July 2023 at 16:29, AC said:
I recently moved some mutual funds from one brokerage to another. The
process did not involve a sale, it was just a transfer of control from
the
old to the new.
In my current books I keep mutual funds listed as subaccount under each
brokerage as such with their respective security/currency:
Investments
-Brokerage 1 (currency)
--Fund A (security A)
--Fund B (security B)
-Brokerage 2 (currency)
--Fund A (security A)
--Fund C (security C)
--Fund D (security D)
I wanted to expand this to add the new brokerage and then perform a
transfer of the funds from one to the other. Let's assume I moved the
funds under Brokerage 1 to Brokerage 3. So the tree would look like the
simplified version below (leaving out Brokerage 2 as it is unaffected):
Investments
-Brokerage 1 (currency)
--Fund A (security A)
--Fund B (security B)
-Brokerage 3 (currency)
--Fund A (security A)
--Fund B (security B)
The securities are the same because it's the same original mutual funds,
just moved to another brokerage. The tree would be left intact with the
funds under Brokerage 1 being zeroed out and the funds under Brokerage 3
starting off with the incoming values.
My natural tendency was to create a transfer directly within Brokerage 1
Fund A that moved all the shares over to Brokerage 3 Fund A but that
didn't create the transaction I expected.
By example, I transferred Fund A on July 1 which contained 10 shares at
the price of the shares on that day. So in Brokerage 1 I entered -10
shares with a total sell price of X as listed on the statement from
Brokerage 1. The price is autocalculated and the balance correctly goes
to
zero.
Looking inside the Brokerage 3 Fund A account I only see a transaction
that has an amount in the buy column but no shares and a balance of zero.
I can manually enter the same number of shares in that partially empty
transaction but why was my thought about the transfer incorrect? Should
it
have not transferred those shares over as well?
Did you work in split view?
I can replicate what I think you are saying if I don't enter the separate
splits.
If I go about it the obvious way (in split view) and enter balancing
amounts then it all works.
However, I'm still on 2.6.21 ...
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
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.
_______________________________________________
gnucash-user mailing list
gnucash-user@gnucash.org
To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
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.
