I think it is not appropriate to use corporate acquisition to record move to admiral shares in retir

universeuniverse Member ✭✭
edited May 2018 in

Comments

  • Howard RoarkHoward Roark Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited February 2018
    I'd say the Corporate Acquisition/Cost Basis issue is not really material.

    First: Just because you're not going to pay taxes on the capital gains, doesn't mean the change in value since purchase is unimportant. Though you can certainly ignore it if you wish.

    Second: Your version of Quicken has a transaction type (Mutual Fund Conversion) specifically designed for the purpose ... though it too should carry forward the proper cost basis.
  • q_lurkerq_lurker SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 2018
    "Correct or Wrong?"

    I would say you are wrong. I believe it is appropriate to monitor cost basis (as Quicken defines and uses the term) in both retirement accounts and investment accounts. You have voiced an objection to the commonly recommended approach without committing to what you would prefer to see take place. There are undoubtedly other ways to 'skin the cat', but I will continue to put forth that the Corporate Acquisition (or Mutual Fund Conversion, in more recent Quicken versions) is a very valid approach.

    You are free to use whatever alternate method you want in your own files.
  • Bob_LBob_L SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 2016
    q.lurker said:

    "Correct or Wrong?"

    I would say you are wrong. I believe it is appropriate to monitor cost basis (as Quicken defines and uses the term) in both retirement accounts and investment accounts. You have voiced an objection to the commonly recommended approach without committing to what you would prefer to see take place. There are undoubtedly other ways to 'skin the cat', but I will continue to put forth that the Corporate Acquisition (or Mutual Fund Conversion, in more recent Quicken versions) is a very valid approach.

    You are free to use whatever alternate method you want in your own files.

    To be safe, I would go with the corporate acquisition instead of the conversion.  I say that because I identified an issue with that some time back (confirmed by others) where it would mess up the IRR calculations and I don't know if that has ever been fixed (I should probably get around to re-testing to that that but haven't as of yet).
    Quicken Premier Subscription, Windows 10 Pro
  • universeuniverse Member ✭✭
    edited November 2016
    q.lurker said:

    "Correct or Wrong?"

    I would say you are wrong. I believe it is appropriate to monitor cost basis (as Quicken defines and uses the term) in both retirement accounts and investment accounts. You have voiced an objection to the commonly recommended approach without committing to what you would prefer to see take place. There are undoubtedly other ways to 'skin the cat', but I will continue to put forth that the Corporate Acquisition (or Mutual Fund Conversion, in more recent Quicken versions) is a very valid approach.

    You are free to use whatever alternate method you want in your own files.

    Thanks much for your advice.  I had not detected the conversion action, although I should have.  I did try it but I may go back to the CA option.
  • universeuniverse Member ✭✭
    edited November 2016

    I'd say the Corporate Acquisition/Cost Basis issue is not really material.

    First: Just because you're not going to pay taxes on the capital gains, doesn't mean the change in value since purchase is unimportant. Though you can certainly ignore it if you wish.

    Second: Your version of Quicken has a transaction type (Mutual Fund Conversion) specifically designed for the purpose ... though it too should carry forward the proper cost basis.

    Thanks.  I appreciate your advice on the CA.  I failed to detect the MF conversion, although I should have.
    I may try both just to experience the visual and actual difference.
Sign In or Register to comment.