MoneyManager Ex: A Free Alternative to Quicken

If you dont want a program as complicated as Quicken, but want/need something more complex than a spread-sheet, you might want to consider the open-source accounting software "MoneyManager Ex". I've been using it for a bit, and it's quite easy to use:

It has features that allow generating reports, making budgets, etc.
A window opens, when you want to make transactions, which is easy to learn and use:

It doesn't have a balancing feature like Quicken, for checkbook reconciliation.  But you can reconcile the account by matching your transactions to you bank statement and checking them off as "reconciled" when they match.  Unless you write hundreds of checks or have hundreds of online transactions, it shouldn't take long to do.

If you think it might meet your checkbook register management needs, download and use it for free, and give it a try:

https://moneymanagerex.org/

https://sourceforge.net/blog/july-2020-community-choice-project-month-money-manager-ex/

     

"A person should not go to sleep at night until the debits equal the credits"

Luca Pacioli: The Father of Accounting

In 1494, the first book on double-entry accounting was published. The author was an Italian friar, Luca Pacioli. His impact on accounting was so great that five centuries later, accountants from around the world gathered in the Italian village of San Sepulcro to celebrate the anniversary of the book's publication.The first accounting book actually was one of five sections in Pacioli's mathematics book titled "Everything about Arithmetic, Geometry, and Proportions." This section on accounting served as the world's only accounting textbook until well into the 16th century.

Since Pacioli was a Franciscan friar, he might be referred to simply as Friar Luca. While Friar Luca is often called the "Father of Accounting," he did not invent the system. Instead, he simply described a method used by merchants in Venice during the Italian Renaissance period. His system included most of the accounting cycle as we know it today. For example, he described the use journals and ledgers, and he warned that a person should not go to sleep at night until the debits equalled the credits! His ledger included assets (including receivables and inventories), liabilities, capital, income, and expense accounts. Friar Luca demonstrated year-end closing entries and proposed that a trial balance be used to prove a balanced ledger. Also, his treatise alludes to a wide range of topics from accounting ethics to cost accounting.

Pacioli was about 49 years old in 1494 - just two years after Columbus discovered America - when he returned to Venice for the publication of his fifth book, Summa de Arithmetica, Geometria, Proportioni et Proportionalita (Everything About Arithmetic, Geometry and Proportion). It was written as a digest and guide to existing mathematical knowledge, and bookkeeping was only one of five topics covered. The Summa's 36 short chapters on bookkeeping, entitled De Computis et Scripturis (Of Reckonings and Writings) were added "in order that the subjects of the most gracious Duke of Urbino may have complete instructions in the conduct of business," and to "give the trader without delay information as to his assets and liabilities" (All quotes from the translation by J.B. Geijsbeek, Ancient Double Entry Bookkeeping: Lucas Pacioli's Treatise, 1914).

Numerous tiny details of bookkeeping technique set forth by Pacioli were followed in texts and the profession for at least the next four centuries, as accounting historian Henry Rand Hatfield put it, "persisting like buttons on our coat sleeves, long after their significance had disappeared." Perhaps the best proof that Pacioli's work was considered potentially significant even at the time of publication was the very fact that it was printed on November 10, 1494. Guttenberg had just a quarter-century earlier invented metal type, and it was still an extremely expensive proposition to print a book.[...]

Follow the link above for references. I'm just about to complete an online course about using the Double-entry bookkeeping system, and I think the system is brilliant. So I found this history interesting. More historical facts from Wikipedia:

[...] The earliest extant accounting records that follow the modern double-entry form are those of Amatino Manucci, a Florentine merchant at the end of the 13th century.[1] Another old extant evidence of full double-entry bookkeeping is the Farolfi ledger of 1299-1300. Giovanino Farolfi & Company were a firm of Florentine merchants whose head office was in Nîmes who also acted as moneylenders to the Archbishop of Arles, their most important customer.[2] Some sources suggest that Giovanni di Bicci de' Medici introduced this method for the Medici bank in the 14th century.

However, the oldest discovered record of a complete double-entry system is the Messari (Italian: Treasurer's) accounts of the Republic of Genoa in 1340. The Messari accounts contain debits and credits journalised in a bilateral form, and contains balances carried forward from the preceding year, and therefore enjoy general recognition as a double-entry system.[3] By the end of the 15th century, the bankers and merchants of Florence, Genoa, Venice and Lübeck used this system widely.

Luca Pacioli, a Franciscan friar and collaborator of Leonardo da Vinci, first codified the system in his mathematics textbook Summa de arithmetica, geometria, proportioni et proportionalità published in Venice in 1494.[4] Pacioli is often called the "father of accounting" because he was the first to publish a detailed description of the double-entry system, thus enabling others to study and use it.[5][6] There is however controversy among scholars lately that Benedetto Cotrugli wrote the first manual on a double-entry bookkeeping system in his 1458 treatise Della mercatura e del mercante perfetto.[7][8][9][9][1 [...]

So perhaps it was the Florentine Merchants who invented the system? Well whoever it was, I'm a fan!

Follow the link for embedded links and more information.

     

Oregon: The Best Tax Preparing State

Oregon: Land of many well-prepared tax preparers

A few years ago, Congressional investigators issued a report that should've caused Oregonians to swell with pride. And irritation.

Oregon's tax returns, the investigators found, were more likely to be accurate than the rest of the country's -- about $250 more accurate as of 2001, the Government Accountability Office found.

Unfortunately, that meant 1.56 million individual Oregon taxpayers paid $390 million more in federal taxes than they would have if they lived elsewhere, the report said.

Oregon: We do our taxes right. And we pay for it.

Last year, I reviewed online tax prep sites. This year, I figured I'd help those wanting live person helping.

As you see, you're in good hands in Oregon.

Still, you can overpay for your service. Not everyone needs to pay a Certified Public Accountant by the hour to do their returns. [...]

It goes on to give some good definitions of what LTPs, LTCs, EAs and CPAs are and what they do.

His follow-up column was also instructive:

Selecting a tax professional? It's OK to be picky

[...] So, where to start looking for a tax pro? Ask a friend or someone whose judgment you trust whom he uses. If you shop around, interview more than one in person. You'll get a better feel for pedigree, fees, specialties and personality.

"Some tax pros are not great communicators," said Joseph Anthony, a licensed tax consultant with Joseph Anthony & Associates Inc. in Portland. "You should know going in what you should expect from your tax pro." [...]

It goes on to offer advice, including questions you should ask.

     

Our true national debt: $130,000,000,000,000.

What!?! Isn't it supposed to be "only" 14 trillion, instead of 130? Not if you use REAL accounting practices, like real businesses have to do.

The Other National Debt

[...] Accountants get a bad rap — boring, green-eyeshades-wearing, nebbishy little men chained to their desks down in the fluorescent-lit basements of Corporate America — but, in truth, accountants wield an awesome power. In the case of the federal government, they wield the power to make vast amounts of debt disappear — from the public discourse, at least. A couple of months ago, you may recall, Rep. Henry Waxman (D., State of Bankruptcy) got his Fruit of the Looms in a full-on buntline hitch when AT&T, Caterpillar, Verizon, and a host of other blue-chip behemoths started taking plus-size writedowns in response to some of the more punitive provisions of the health-care legislation Mr. Waxman had helped to pass. His little mustache no doubt bristling in indignation, Representative Waxman sent dunning letters to the CEOs of these companies and demanded that they come before Congress to explain their accounting practices. One White House staffer told reporters that the writedowns appeared to be designed “to embarrass the president and Democrats.”

A few discreet whispers from better-informed Democrats, along with a helpful explanation from The Atlantic’s Megan McArdle under the headline “Henry Waxman’s War on Accounting,” helped to clarify the issue: The companies in question are required by law to adjust their financial statements to reflect the new liabilities: “When a company experiences what accountants call ‘a material adverse impact’ on its expected future earnings, and those changes affect an item that is already on the balance sheet, the company is required to record the negative impact — ‘to take the charge against earnings’ — as soon as it knows that the change is reasonably likely to occur,” McArdle wrote. “The Democrats, however, seem to believe that Generally Accepted Accounting Principles are some sort of conspiracy against Obamacare, and all that is good and right in America.” But don’t be too hard on the gentleman from California: Government does not work that way. If governments did follow normal accounting practices, taking account of future liabilities today instead of pretending they don’t exist, then the national-debt numbers we talk about would be worse — far worse, dreadfully worse — than that monster $14 trillion–and–ratcheting–upward figure we throw around. [...]

This article goes on to show, point by point, using real accounting principles, what the actual debts are that will be coming home to roost. And along the way, explaining the political reasons as to how and why it's been allowed to happen.

More proof that government is not only not the answer; it's often the problem. Of course we need government, but we also need BALANCE. Especially on the balance sheet, as every real accountant knows.