Tracking an asset, increasing value

My home has recently increased in value. When entering the increased value
into the asset account, what is the most appropriate "From" and "Category"
for this value increase?

Tod

Glyn
Mon Jun 21 02:17:29 CDT 2004

Anything you like (create something new).

--
Glyn Simpson, Microsoft MVP - Money

Check http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=fh;EN-GB;mny
for UK tips and fixes for MS Money. To send Microsoft your wishes or
suggestions, use http://register.microsoft.com/mswish/suggestion.asp
or email mnyukwsh@microsoft.com especially if it's a UK specific wish.

I do not respond to any unsolicited email regarding Money

"Tod DeBie" <tod_debie@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:RyrBc.51378$wO4.25638@twister.socal.rr.com...
> My home has recently increased in value. When entering the increased
value
> into the asset account, what is the most appropriate "From" and "Category"
> for this value increase?
>
> Tod
>
>

Tod
Tue Jun 22 22:59:16 CDT 2004

The problem is that, unless I am missing something, I need to place this in
an income category, but it is not income. It will show up as income, but it
is merely an asset increasing in value. It seems like there should be a way
to increase the value of an asset without having to show it as income (yes I
know I can just exclude the category from the reports, but that seems like a
bit of a hack job to me).

Tod


"Glyn Simpson, MVP" <glyn@serf.org> wrote in message
news:uDns7N2VEHA.1128@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
> Anything you like (create something new).
>
> --
> Glyn Simpson, Microsoft MVP - Money
>
> Check http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=fh;EN-GB;mny
> for UK tips and fixes for MS Money. To send Microsoft your wishes or
> suggestions, use http://register.microsoft.com/mswish/suggestion.asp
> or email mnyukwsh@microsoft.com especially if it's a UK specific wish.
>
> I do not respond to any unsolicited email regarding Money
>
> "Tod DeBie" <tod_debie@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:RyrBc.51378$wO4.25638@twister.socal.rr.com...
> > My home has recently increased in value. When entering the increased
> value
> > into the asset account, what is the most appropriate "From" and
"Category"
> > for this value increase?
> >
> > Tod
> >
> >
>
>

Dick
Wed Jun 23 07:19:01 CDT 2004

In the sense that it makes you richer, it certainly is income. It may be
unearned income or unrealized income. You can create your own income
category, if you like. You can also leave the category blank, if it makes
you feel better about it.

"Tod DeBie" <tod_debie@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:oe7Cc.60947$wO4.8922@twister.socal.rr.com...
> The problem is that, unless I am missing something, I need to place this
in
> an income category, but it is not income. It will show up as income, but
it
> is merely an asset increasing in value. It seems like there should be a
way
> to increase the value of an asset without having to show it as income (yes
I
> know I can just exclude the category from the reports, but that seems like
a
> bit of a hack job to me).

Tod
Thu Jun 24 23:43:55 CDT 2004

The problem is that it is unrealized income, but it will be shown as
realized income (which may go away at a future date, which will then be
shown as a loss). The problem will reappear if I actually realize the
income at some future date, because I will then be realizing the income, but
money will only show it as a transfer. This seems like a poor solution for
what must be a very common use case.

Tod


"Dick Watson" <littlegreengecko@mind-enufalready-spring.com> wrote in
message news:OAvAAxRWEHA.212@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
> In the sense that it makes you richer, it certainly is income. It may be
> unearned income or unrealized income. You can create your own income
> category, if you like. You can also leave the category blank, if it makes
> you feel better about it.
>
> "Tod DeBie" <tod_debie@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:oe7Cc.60947$wO4.8922@twister.socal.rr.com...
> > The problem is that, unless I am missing something, I need to place this
> in
> > an income category, but it is not income. It will show up as income,
but
> it
> > is merely an asset increasing in value. It seems like there should be a
> way
> > to increase the value of an asset without having to show it as income
(yes
> I
> > know I can just exclude the category from the reports, but that seems
like
> a
> > bit of a hack job to me).
>
>

Dick
Fri Jun 25 07:26:15 CDT 2004

Where are you worried about it showing up as realized income and what makes
it appear as "realized" to you? In some report somewhere? In tax data? The
answer as to it showing up in a report is so what? You KNOW it isn't
realized and where does Money make any distinction between realized and
unrealized income? The answer as to the latter is to create a category that
you set to NOT show up on tax reports.

I don't think that many users actually try to use Money to account for the
tax basis of assets via asset accounts--or if they do, they don't go to
great lengths to track the current asset value for accurate net worth
calculations along the way. Many things like this are just easier in Excel
anyway.

BTW, there's NOTHING preventing you from putting just ONE transaction in the
asset accounts to adjust each one for current value and then deleting that
at some point in the future to get back to basis. Then the transfer of the
asset account value, say into a real estate sale transaction, would just be
basis and you could enter another element into that split to realize the
income of the gain in value. You could change the one "value adjustment"
transaction over time to get accurate net worth accounting and still get
back to basis at the end game just by deleting or voiding the "value
adjustment" transaction.

"Tod DeBie" <tod_debie@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:f4OCc.3635$SO5.784@twister.socal.rr.com...
> The problem is that it is unrealized income, but it will be shown as
> realized income (which may go away at a future date, which will then be
> shown as a loss). The problem will reappear if I actually realize the
> income at some future date, because I will then be realizing the income,
but
> money will only show it as a transfer. This seems like a poor solution
for
> what must be a very common use case.

Tod
Fri Jun 25 18:33:35 CDT 2004

I know how to deal with it. The limitations can be worked around. It is
just odd that Microsoft has been investing all sorts of effort in upgrading
Money every year, but does not have a built in way to deal with a very
common situation. It would be easy for them to build in some very nice
functionality around this.

Tod



"Dick Watson" <littlegreengecko@mind-enufalready-spring.com> wrote in
message news:%23JumS%23qWEHA.3596@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...
> Where are you worried about it showing up as realized income and what
makes
> it appear as "realized" to you? In some report somewhere? In tax data? The
> answer as to it showing up in a report is so what? You KNOW it isn't
> realized and where does Money make any distinction between realized and
> unrealized income? The answer as to the latter is to create a category
that
> you set to NOT show up on tax reports.
>
> I don't think that many users actually try to use Money to account for the
> tax basis of assets via asset accounts--or if they do, they don't go to
> great lengths to track the current asset value for accurate net worth
> calculations along the way. Many things like this are just easier in Excel
> anyway.
>
> BTW, there's NOTHING preventing you from putting just ONE transaction in
the
> asset accounts to adjust each one for current value and then deleting that
> at some point in the future to get back to basis. Then the transfer of the
> asset account value, say into a real estate sale transaction, would just
be
> basis and you could enter another element into that split to realize the
> income of the gain in value. You could change the one "value adjustment"
> transaction over time to get accurate net worth accounting and still get
> back to basis at the end game just by deleting or voiding the "value
> adjustment" transaction.
>
> "Tod DeBie" <tod_debie@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:f4OCc.3635$SO5.784@twister.socal.rr.com...
> > The problem is that it is unrealized income, but it will be shown as
> > realized income (which may go away at a future date, which will then be
> > shown as a loss). The problem will reappear if I actually realize the
> > income at some future date, because I will then be realizing the income,
> but
> > money will only show it as a transfer. This seems like a poor solution
> for
> > what must be a very common use case.
>
>

Dick
Fri Jun 25 21:22:24 CDT 2004

Based on how often this hasn't come up, I think you overestimate how common
it is for Money users to mess with this. But I certainly agree there are
many things that could be added to Money that haven't been.

"Tod DeBie" <tod_debie@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:jD2Dc.191$Fy.60@twister.socal.rr.com...
> I know how to deal with it. The limitations can be worked around. It is
> just odd that Microsoft has been investing all sorts of effort in
upgrading
> Money every year, but does not have a built in way to deal with a very
> common situation. It would be easy for them to build in some very nice
> functionality around this.