Sep 4, 2021, 11:00 by david.carlson....@gmail.com: > I guess it depends on how fussy you are about details. Since there is no way > to see the reconciliation date there is little reason to insist on that date > being correctly recorded. The GnuCash code displays an incorrect starting > balance in the Reconciliation window. When you follow Derek's suggestion and > just ignore the starting balance error in the current month's reconciliation, > the old transaction is recorded as being reconciled in the current month. > > If you really do want to record the correct reconciliation month for every > transaction, you need to unreconcile all transactions after the date of the > statement> before> the month that is not correct before starting the > rereconciliation. > So it's already been mentioned a few times that there are a few days to see the rec date on a transaction. I use it myself when producing ledgers for review to confirm when certain transactions cleared (like when you write a cheque that doesn't cash for 3 months and you need to show both dates).
My professional advice is that there's no one "right way" to run your books. As we were told in intro (and again in intermediate, advanced and theory) accounting, the purpose of accounting is to capture and produce information. So what you capture and produce depends on what information is important to you. If all you care about is making sure that you haven't missed any transactions on your bank statements, then reconcile on any date you like. If you need a longer auditing record that matches recs to their statements, like I do, then you need to fiddle with your rec dates. _______________________________________________ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@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.
