KMyMoney vs Gnucash

[Wm]

Sat, 23 Aug 2014 10:10:53 <20140823101053.657e1652 at saxicola.co.uk>  Mike 
Evans <mikee at saxicola.co.uk>

>On Sat, 23 Aug 2014 09:33:28 +0100
>Wm <wm+gnc at tarrcity.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Sat, 23 Aug 2014 09:44:02 <2782782.Nl99BsMnSE at legolas.kobaltwit.lan>
>> Geert Janssens <janssens-geert at telenet.be>
>>
>> >On Saturday 23 August 2014 08:31:48 Wm wrote:
>> >> Thu, 21 Aug 2014 15:21:31 <20140821152131.408a06e4 at atmarama.ddns.net>
>> >> Gour <gour at atmarama.net>
>> >>
>> >> >Hmm, does you suggestion allow to have two independant counters for
>> >> >quotes and invoices not leaving holes in either of the sequence
>> >> >(counting invoices without gaps/holes is required by the law here)?
>> >>
>> >> Where are you that document sequences must *legally* be continuous in
>> >> this day and age?  I'm going to guess Croatia which is now part of the
>> >> EU unless I'm mistaken.  Since other EU members don't insist on
>> >> contiguous document sequences how can Croatia?
>> >>
>> >> It makes life convenient for both auditors and accounting cheats but
>> >> serves no other purpose really if you think about it for more than a
>> >> 60 seconds.
>> >>
>> >> Are you sure it is a legal requirement rather than something you'd
>> >> prefer?
>> >
>> >I know my accountant insists on this as well. I'm pretty sure in
>> >Belgium this this a
>> >*very* common practise.
>>
>> I know it is often insisted upon for convenience but is it a legal
>> requirement?  I think you will find it is not.
>>
>> If my document sequence is
>> Geert-yyyy-mm-dd
>> Gour-yyyy-mm-dd
>> that is perfectly legal.
>>
>> The distinction I am making is between legality (which Gour raised and I
>> am challenging) and preference.
>>
>> The reason I mentioned the 60 seconds is, what if my business is mainly
>> on-line and I don't have control of the document sequence?  Does my
>> business suddenly become illegal if I report honestly and traceably? I
>> think not.
>>
>> If anyone is interested in a bit of history I once came across this
>> non-problem in a system in the 1980's.  Where was document nnn they
>> asked. I said, it doesn't exist as it was never produced, would you like
>> me to create a 0 total invoice?  Yes, please was the answer.  5 minutes
>> later the auditor was happy.
>>
>> Doh!  Document sequences prove nothing.
>>
>> I mean, if they did, gnc would be illegal in most jurisdictions because
>> the actual sequence is a non-sequential guid that most users probably
>> aren't aware of.
>>
>
>In the UK the rules for VAT invoices state:
>"A VAT invoice must show:
>
>       an invoice number which is unique and follows on from the number 
>of the previous invoice - if you spoil or cancel a serially numbered 
>invoice, you must keep it to show to a VAT officer at your next VAT 
>inspection"

Read that in context, please, I just have.

A gnc transaction guid is about as unique as you can sensibly get [1]

Anyway, the emphasis in your quote is on the *if*

*IF* you spoil or cancel a serially numbered invoice

if you don't do serially numbered invoices and haven't spoiled one and 
do normal stuff you don't have to bother.

Mike: I think we are both in the UK and I don't want you to spread false 
legislation.  Clear?

HMRC preferred behaviour does not equate to a legal requirement.  There 
are thousands of businesses that don't do sequential as it is not a 
legal requirement.

>Note the "follows on from the number of the previous invoice" part.  So 
>it IS a requirement in the UK as far as HMRC are concerned.

I have to be firm on this.  It is *NOT* a *LEGAL* requirement.

Sorry for shouting. If you keep on saying something wrong and I will 
keep on correcting your interpretation.

>  Do not make them angry, or even slightly annoyed, is my advice.

I can go for that but I thought we were talking *legal* rather than 
dishonest and "should I dob the VAT inspector a bottle of alcohol" in 
this sub-thread

>http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/vat/managing/charging/vat-invoices.htm

[1] with the very unusual exception of some details that shouldn't occur 
in day to day use and a user should be able to explain if asked, i.e. 
their is room for a theoretical guid duplication in gnc, I think; if 
that ever happens in practice I doubt an honest person would be taken to 
court for saying "I charged fairly, I reported fairly, the sequence was 
fucked".

-- 
Wm...