You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
For most people, tax is probably not part of a bank transaction list. Rather, the income shown on a bank statement is the income with taxes already subtracted.
In some cases (e.g. for business owners), the tax might be manually paid, or the tax could show up for another reason.
This is a problem, because if the tax is counted as an expense, it will probably dwarf all other expenses in a given month, and it's not very relevant since tax is not something that can be controlled.
Ignoring the tax transaction is not a good solution, because it potentially creates and income skew. For example, if the income is $10, and tax is $4, ignoring the transaction will make it look like the income is $10 (which is wrong) and including the transaction will create an expense of $4 (which can be kind-of misleading).
Ideally we would want to see a single positive entry in the charts of $6 which is the absolute income after taxes are subtracted.
The tax problem essentially be modelled as a negative refund so solving #85 will also help in solving this issue.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This commit consist of three parts:
- Actions: An action to delete a transaction group
- Transaction List: An indicator on the transaction list that
transactions are grouped (and a method to ungroup them)
- Charts: Summing and filtering of transactions that are grouped
together
This feature is implemented as a way to handle refunds, i.e. avoid
having refunds show up as both an expense and income
Closes#85 and closes#87
For most people, tax is probably not part of a bank transaction list. Rather, the income shown on a bank statement is the income with taxes already subtracted.
In some cases (e.g. for business owners), the tax might be manually paid, or the tax could show up for another reason.
This is a problem, because if the tax is counted as an expense, it will probably dwarf all other expenses in a given month, and it's not very relevant since tax is not something that can be controlled.
Ignoring the tax transaction is not a good solution, because it potentially creates and income skew. For example, if the income is $10, and tax is $4, ignoring the transaction will make it look like the income is $10 (which is wrong) and including the transaction will create an expense of $4 (which can be kind-of misleading).
Ideally we would want to see a single positive entry in the charts of $6 which is the absolute income after taxes are subtracted.
The tax problem essentially be modelled as a negative refund so solving #85 will also help in solving this issue.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: