[GNC] Problem with Splits

[Christian Kluge]

Hello,

I just want to apologize, somehow the subject of this thread escaped my
mind maybe because the OP’s post I bit not understandable.

I obviously know what split transactions are and yes, if one account
remains unsplit I would go from there.

Kind regards

Christian Kluge

Am 12.02.2019 um 21:40 schrieb Michael or Penny Novack:
> On 2/12/2019 2:49 PM, Christian Kluge wrote:
> 
> Sorry, I made the assumption that since talking about "splits" you
> already knew about entering "split transactions. Your example below,
> showing it as multiple transactions, indicates otherwise. So taking your
> example (a $100 expense paid for by $50 cash and a $50 loan ......
> 
> As I said, start with the UNSPLIT side. So I would enter from the
> expense account, date, description, amount, and then instead of entering
> the account of the other side (can't, more than one, that's what "split"
> means) I would click on "split" above.
> 
> That brings up a different view for THAT transaction. There would be a
> line for the debit (the expense account) with $100 and below that a line
> also with $100 but "Imbalance" since account not yet specified. I would
> change the amount on that line to $50 and enter cash for the account and
> hit enter. That brings up a new line below with the new balance still
> unspecified, still $50 and Imbalance. I specify the account "loan" and
> hit enter, now no balance remaining, and enter again restores the  view
> << you no longer see the split details in that view >>
> 
> Advice --- do not shortcut and hit that last enter twice quickly. You
> want to see/confirm that there was no balance for Imbalance remaining.
> 
> THAT describes a "one sided split" transaction. Do not attempt a
> transaction split on both sides until/unless you are very experienced
> entering splits << entering two sided often can mean first "lying" about
> an amount and correcting that only after the other side of the
> transaction has been done >>
> 
> Michael D Novack
> 
> 
>> Am 11.02.2019 um 22:15 schrieb Michael or Penny Novack:
>>> On 2/11/2019 2:40 PM, Christian Kluge wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> my general rule of thumb is to always entering from an asset or
>>>> liability account.
>>>>
>>>   The proper "general rule" for a (one side) split transaction is to
>>> enter it from the side (debit or credit) that is NOT being split. That
>>> this is most often either and asset or a liability account just the
>>> consequence of that most often the side of the transaction not being
>>> split.
>>>
>>> Starting with an account on the side of the transaction being split will
>>> make entry almost as difficult as entering a transaction that is split
>>> on both sides.
>>>
>>> You need an example? Say you are paying for your share of an expense X
>>> and the person you are sharing with allows you to pay part in cash and
>>> owe the rest. You would begin this split from the expense account (the
>>> credit side being split  between cash (asset) and loan (liability)
>>>
>> This I would enter as either three transactions:
>>
>> By expense to liabilities $100
>> By liabities to cash $50
>> By liabilities to loan $50
>>
>> or if I assume that the loan exists even before I pay in cash:
>>
>> By expense to loan $100
>> By loan to cash $50
>>
>> Also who wants to change accounts all the time.
>>
>> If I recording cash transactions I don’t go into revenue or expense
>> accounts but stick with cash.
>>
>> I my examples above several expense/liability transactions would occur
>> before I even would post the cash transaction.
>>
>> Kind regards
>>
>> Christian Kluge
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> gnucash-user mailing list
>> gnucash-user at gnucash.org
>> To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe:
>> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user
>> If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see
>> https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information.
>> -----
>> Please remember to CC this list on all your replies.
>> You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
> 
>