Non-taxable Mutual funds merger event treated as Capital Gains

leishirsute
leishirsute Quicken Windows Subscription Member ✭✭✭✭
edited 5:42AM in Investing (Windows)

Quicken is treating a mutual funds merger as capital gains in the Capital Gains report.

Using the "Mutual Funds Conversion" transaction type, Quicken performs the action:

the original fund is Removed and a lot is Added to the new fund for each original lot.

This is a non-taxable event, but the Captial Gains report in Quicken reports the removal of all lots as a Capital Gain.

Was this the proper way to rename a fund?

Should Quicken be treating the conversion as a taxable Capital Gain in the Capital Gains report?

I reported the problem.

It appears that the Tax Planner, and Tax Summary and Tax Schedule reports correctly do not include the incorrect Capital Gains showing in the Capital Gains report.

Deluxe R65.29, Windows 11 Pro

Best Answer

  • q_lurker
    q_lurker Quicken Windows Subscription SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    Answer ✓

    Typically, I’ve seen Remove Shares transactions get reported in the Capital Gains report as entries with no gain/loss. Is that what you are seeing?

    My spin on that is that the programmers (a long time ago) opted to include those transactions in the report rather than exclude them, since they could not really know the underlying reason for the removal. Better to over-report (include) than under-report.

    That “don’t know” circumstance still applies even though they “know” this remove came from a MF conversion. Once the transactions are created in the list, they are all independent. There is no tag that carries along associating that remove to the MF conversion.

Answers

  • q_lurker
    q_lurker Quicken Windows Subscription SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    Answer ✓

    Typically, I’ve seen Remove Shares transactions get reported in the Capital Gains report as entries with no gain/loss. Is that what you are seeing?

    My spin on that is that the programmers (a long time ago) opted to include those transactions in the report rather than exclude them, since they could not really know the underlying reason for the removal. Better to over-report (include) than under-report.

    That “don’t know” circumstance still applies even though they “know” this remove came from a MF conversion. Once the transactions are created in the list, they are all independent. There is no tag that carries along associating that remove to the MF conversion.

  • leishirsute
    leishirsute Quicken Windows Subscription Member ✭✭✭✭

    Yes. I just noticed that. So, there is no issue. My original post should be deleted. Thanks.

    Deluxe R65.29, Windows 11 Pro

  • q_lurker
    q_lurker Quicken Windows Subscription SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭

    Still a worthwhile and reasonable question that gets asked every so often.

Categories