Community mailing list archives


Re: Account Code Modification

twanda AG, Ermin Trevisan
- 01.04.2015 09:41:30
It is not the particular account code itself, it is the compliance with
generally accepted accounting principles, audit trails and
record-keeping laws which do exist in most civilized countries.
How are you supposed to maintain your audit trail when you like to
change your account codes during an accounting period while postings
already exist in the accounting journal? In an electronic accounting
system you could maybe keep track of it when establishing a full
versioning system like for software revision control, but what happens
to your physical papers/receipts and their account allocation? It is
only a sort order (for those countries, which do not have explicit
regulations for it), but it is a very important one which is supposed to
be well established during accounting periods.

>From an abstract and very theoretical point of view, you might be right,
but in real life it is anything but helpful to allow for it. If you
really need to change your account code, close the accounting period,
open the new accounts and transfer the balances if necessary.

twanda AG
Ermin Trevisan
Artherstrasse 19
CH-6318 Walchwil 
T    +41 41 758 1515
M    +41 79 208 7373

On Mit, 2015-04-01 at 10:08 +0000, Graeme Gellatly wrote:
> It isn't first and foremost a legal question, that was just the excuse
> given at the time, and I challenge you to find any internationally
> applicable law or accounting rule to say that account codes are sacred
> and cannot be changed.
> Maybe for some localisations it is (mostly European ones it seems),
> and I fought at the time for it to be left in localisations or made
> optional, but to the best of my knowledge most modern jurisdictions
> couldn't care less what your account code is, as it is just a
> descriptor.  In any case, it is ridiculous that you can change an
> account from an expense to a liability or asset or whatever, change
> its name etc but you cannot change what is actually for most people
> just a sort order. 
> On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 10:32 PM, Ermin Trevisan <>
> wrote:
>         This is first and foremost a legal question and not a technical issue.
>         Please check this discussion:
>         Cheers, trevi