On Fri, Jul 21, 2023 at 10:51 AM Henry Law <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2023-07-21 at 11:43 -0400, Michael or Penny Novack wrote: > > A good, clear example why something like that should be allowed. > > Been watching the replies to this with interest: there's a lot of > knowledge out there. > > But, thinking about it, the problem that I ran across was that the two > splits in the offending transaction had ended up with a CR and a DB for > the same amount to the same account; it was a null transaction. I > hesitate to say this, having been proved thoroughly wrong before, but > surely there can't be a reason to want a transaction like that? > I've done this with multiple splits when money is transitioning. Suppose I have a brokerage account and I sell 20 shares of XYZ at $5/share, transferring it to checking I'd have a four-way split: Sell (remove) 20 shares XYZ for $100 ($5 / share) Add $100 to SWEEP fund Remove $100 from SWEEP fund Add $100 to checking. (I'm sorry that I'm not using "Debit" and "Credit") Nevertheless, you can see the transaction above has both a debit and a credit to the same account (SWEEP fund). This is how the broker records the transaction, so I record it (it makes future reconciliation easier). _________________________________ Richard Losey [email protected] Micah 6:8 _______________________________________________ gnucash-user mailing list [email protected] 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.
