On 4/16/2022 6:56 AM, Alexander Damm wrote:
" If I understand correctly what you mean by "accruals" you mean that
this report requires you to treat some liabilities differently than
others. You need to be able to distinguish between them. This would not
require a new "account type", just a partitioning of liabilities between
"ordinary liabilities" << a place holder under liabilities; its children
would be ordinary liabilities >> and "accruals" << a second place holder
under liabilities; its children would be accounts that are "accruals" >>
Then you only need to "scrape" the Balance Sheet as produced by gnucash."
yes that is exactly what I would like to have.
So you're suggesting to use the field "placeholder" in the table accounts
and match all the accruals accounts under one account with the
name:"accruals" and the account_type:"liablility" and the placeholder: "1"
and the parent_guid: "(form the main accruals account)" ?
regards alex
Yes, I am suggesting that it isn't gnucash that needs to change in order
for it to produce OUTPUT that contains the DATA you need for German
reporting and that you then write something (or convince somebody to do
that for you) to "scrape" from the report produced by gnucash (and
exported from gnucash). You also have to structure your CoA so that the
data in the report will be easily separated out as needed,
That puts this specific German requirement OUTSIDE of gnucash proper so
we don't need a "German version", "Ruritanian" version, etc. Each to be
maintained annually as the jurisdictions change what they require. This
seems obvious to me (isolating what has to be different) based on my
professional experience (*) . Bear in mind, I'm in the US where not only
the Federal government but each state might have different requirements.
Michael D Novack
(*) in other words, if in my working days I had been asked to design
such a program (have "general ledger" produce the file as required by
the government) THIS is the approach I would have advised the client to
ask for (wearing my "business analyst hat") explaining that the
separation would make the annual changes quicker/cheaper and then
switching to my "systems analyst hat", how I would have speced it out
for the programmers. Understand? Making the annual changes, no need to
test the entire LARGE "general ledger" system but only the trivial add
on that took a file from "general ledger" and massaged it to the
required format for the government. Only THAT part would need to be
tested when being changed.
_______________________________________________
gnucash-devel mailing list
gnucash-devel@gnucash.org
https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
