I download transactions from investment company online. The sequence of transactions is as follows:
Day 1 - Sell investment A which increases cash balance of account in MoneyDance and with investment company
Day 2 - Buy investment B which decreases cash balance of account in MoneyDance but investment company cash balance remains the same
Day 3 - Investment company removes funds from cash balance to pay for buy on Day 2 but the transaction causes MoneyDance to add transaction as a new investment called Cash thus increasing the MoneyDance cash balance.
"What MD txn type is the day3 txn?" SELL
"Can you just copy that and reverse the numbers?" HUH?
"Where does this cash txn ‘put’ the cash?" Cash balance column
"What happens if you zero day3 but keep it there. Does MD re download it?" What worked is to edit the transaction and making the shares sold and amount a zero. When I downloaded the transactions again it did not change the modified transaction or add a new one. So it looks like I got it resolved.
I would not call it a solution. What I had to do was against accounting practices. A solution would have been to mark the entry as a duplicate transaction to the buy. However, MD doesn’t offer that option.
Marking as a duplicate is not an accounting solution in my opinion. You do not have two transactions in accounting in the one account for the same thing.
To show the transaction doing it the way they are, I think you would have to handle it as a type of accrual as the funds are being taken at a different time to when the transaction is occurring.
So the buy would be handled as a buyXFR pulling the funds from an accrual account, it could be a liability account as that is money you owe. When the funds are taken from you account that is handled as an XFR between the investment account and the accrual account, thus zeroing out the accrual and reducing the cash in the investment account.
I compared the ofx data from this buy as well as a previous one and there is no discernible deference other than what you would expect. On the previous transaction there was no subsequent transaction to remove monies for the buy as it was completed in the same business day.
The buy for which this discussion was opened had occurred on one business day prior to a weekend. The actual removal of monies occurred on the following business day and thus created a new transaction. The investment company floated a loan over a weekend?
The ofx from the investment company was wrong by including where the source of the funds were coming from for that buy because in fact the funds did not pay for the buy until the next business day. MoneyDance cannot accommodate this situation.
It depends on how your market works, for example where I am settlement occurs on T+3, but I am not doing downloads (not available).
So I have a contract date on one hand and a settlement date on another, the brokerage is not carrying any loan, but I have effective ownership on the contract date and a liability at that date.
As I am handling the transactions manually I can craft something to suit the situation without needing to do complete accounting compliance. In the main I just show the buy on the contract date putting the account into a negative balance then on settlement date transfer the funds into the account.
Where you are downloading transactions you will probably have to come up with a solution that works with the download, Financial institutions can be quite creative and not always consistant.
MoneyDance transaction confirmation process for downloads is different between a financial institution and an investment company.
I prefer to be current with my financial institutions and investment companies without having to manually enter each transaction. Thus I update all my accounts every day I’m at home, Monday through Friday. The update takes less than a minute and then I confirm each new transaction. I used to add transactions from receipts but found that the amount on the receipt may be posted differently.