Re: Mutual fund cost basis changes between 2.6.6 and 2.6.19

2018-01-13 Thread Deva - 
Noted. As suggested, I have kept both 2.6.11 and 2.6.19 for now. Hopefully, 
when 3.0 is released, I can run a single version to maintain the correct cost 
basis.

Cheers.
On 13-Jan-2018, at 8:31 PM, John Ralls 
> wrote:



On Jan 12, 2018, at 9:43 PM, Deva - 
> wrote:

Thanks John.

I haven’t filed a bug/enhancement before - GnuCash has been wonderful as it is! 
I will look into how to do this and add the use case as you suggested.

In the meantime, should I downgrade to 2.6.11 (last version where cost basis is 
correctly reported)? The reason I upgraded was because I saw some post on the 
list stating that if I upgrade to Mac OS High Sierra, then GnuCash needs to be 
at 2.6.19. So I upgraded GnuCash in preparation of the Mac OS upgrade.

If I downgrade to 2.6.11, will it be compatible with Mac OS High Sierra?

I don’t say it enough - this community’s immense support is deeply appreciated. 
Not just on technical aspects, I have gotten so many good ideas on accounting 
concepts as well, just by reading through other’s posts. Many thanks to all of 
you for your timely help!

Cheers.
On 12-Jan-2018, at 8:44 PM, John Ralls 
> wrote:



On Jan 12, 2018, at 3:43 AM, Deva - 
> 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 Mutual 
Fund and the latter decided to merge Fidelity’s gilt fund into its own - now 
called L 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

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. 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.

The issue with 2.6.17 and earlier on High Sierra is a mismatched version of 
libz. You can work around it on the earlier versions by copying 
/usr/lib/libz.1.dylib to Gnucash.app/Contents/Resources/lib. That’s more easily 
done from the command line as Finder prefers not to show either /usr or the 
inside of app bundles, though it can be coerced to.

Note as well that you can have both 2.6.11 and 2.6.19 on a Mac. Either rename 
one of the bundles or keep them in separate directories.

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.

Re: Mutual fund cost basis changes between 2.6.6 and 2.6.19

2018-01-13 Thread John Ralls 


> On Jan 12, 2018, at 9:43 PM, Deva -  wrote:
> 
> Thanks John.
> 
> I haven’t filed a bug/enhancement before - GnuCash has been wonderful as it 
> is! I will look into how to do this and add the use case as you suggested.
> 
> In the meantime, should I downgrade to 2.6.11 (last version where cost basis 
> is correctly reported)? The reason I upgraded was because I saw some post on 
> the list stating that if I upgrade to Mac OS High Sierra, then GnuCash needs 
> to be at 2.6.19. So I upgraded GnuCash in preparation of the Mac OS upgrade.
> 
> If I downgrade to 2.6.11, will it be compatible with Mac OS High Sierra?
> 
> I don’t say it enough - this community’s immense support is deeply 
> appreciated. Not just on technical aspects, I have gotten so many good ideas 
> on accounting concepts as well, just by reading through other’s posts. Many 
> thanks to all of you for your timely help!
> 
> Cheers.
>> On 12-Jan-2018, at 8:44 PM, John Ralls > > wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jan 12, 2018, at 3:43 AM, Deva - >> > 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 Mutual Fund and the latter decided to merge Fidelity’s gilt 
>>> fund into its own - now called L 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
>>> 
>>> 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 
>> . 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.

The issue with 2.6.17 and earlier on High Sierra is a mismatched version of 
libz. You can work around it on the earlier versions by copying 
/usr/lib/libz.1.dylib to Gnucash.app/Contents/Resources/lib. That’s more easily 
done from the command line as Finder prefers not to show either /usr or the 
inside of app bundles, though it can be coerced to.

Note as well that you can have both 2.6.11 and 2.6.19 on a Mac. Either rename 
one of the bundles or keep them in separate directories.

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.

Re: Mutual fund cost basis changes between 2.6.6 and 2.6.19

2018-01-12 Thread Deva - 
Thanks John.

I haven’t filed a bug/enhancement before - GnuCash has been wonderful as it is! 
I will look into how to do this and add the use case as you suggested.

In the meantime, should I downgrade to 2.6.11 (last version where cost basis is 
correctly reported)? The reason I upgraded was because I saw some post on the 
list stating that if I upgrade to Mac OS High Sierra, then GnuCash needs to be 
at 2.6.19. So I upgraded GnuCash in preparation of the Mac OS upgrade.

If I downgrade to 2.6.11, will it be compatible with Mac OS High Sierra?

I don’t say it enough - this community’s immense support is deeply appreciated. 
Not just on technical aspects, I have gotten so many good ideas on accounting 
concepts as well, just by reading through other’s posts. Many thanks to all of 
you for your timely help!

Cheers.
On 12-Jan-2018, at 8:44 PM, John Ralls 
> wrote:



On Jan 12, 2018, at 3:43 AM, Deva - 
> 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 Mutual 
Fund and the latter decided to merge Fidelity’s gilt fund into its own - now 
called L 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

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. 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.

Re: Mutual fund cost basis changes between 2.6.6 and 2.6.19

2018-01-12 Thread John Ralls 


> On Jan 12, 2018, at 3:43 AM, Deva -  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 
> Mutual Fund and the latter decided to merge Fidelity’s gilt fund into its own 
> - now called L 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
> 
> 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 
. 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.