github-starred/actual
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/actualbudget/actual.git synced 2026-07-16 07:04:23 -05:00
Code Issues 3.0k Packages Projects Releases 58 Wiki Activity

[GH-ISSUE #5484] [Bug]: Creating a new Linked Account does not always create a Starting Balance #16594

New Issue
Open
opened 2026-04-14 19:38:30 -05:00 by GiteaMirror · 7 comments
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-14 19:38:30 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @atgrey24 on GitHub (Aug 5, 2025).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/issues/5484

Verified issue does not already exist?

  • I have searched and found no existing issue

What happened?

In the discord, multiple users have been asking for help when their account balances to not match reality. The solution is usually that they do not have a Starting Balance transaction.

The workflow for creating a linked account never prompts the user for a start date or starting balance, and relies on the bank sync provider to handle this properly. The workflow should be updated to prompt the user for this information.

How can we reproduce the issue?

Bug #3218 seems related and describes one case where SimpleFIN fails to create a starting balance.

However, many users experiencing this issue use GoCardless, so there are other cases when this can happen.

Where are you hosting Actual?

Pikapods

What browsers are you seeing the problem on?

Chrome, Microsoft Edge

Operating System

Windows 10

Originally created by @atgrey24 on GitHub (Aug 5, 2025). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/issues/5484 ### Verified issue does not already exist? - [x] I have searched and found no existing issue ### What happened? In the discord, multiple users have been asking for help when their account balances to not match reality. The solution is usually that they do not have a Starting Balance transaction. The workflow for creating a linked account never prompts the user for a start date or starting balance, and relies on the bank sync provider to handle this properly. The workflow should be updated to prompt the user for this information. ### How can we reproduce the issue? Bug #3218 seems related and describes one case where SimpleFIN fails to create a starting balance. However, many users experiencing this issue use GoCardless, so there are other cases when this can happen. ### Where are you hosting Actual? Pikapods ### What browsers are you seeing the problem on? Chrome, Microsoft Edge ### Operating System Windows 10
GiteaMirror added the bank syncbug labels 2026-04-14 19:38:30 -05:00
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-14 19:38:31 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@youngcw commented on GitHub (Aug 5, 2025):

This seems like two separate things. A bug that needs a replication process, and then a feature request. Are there replication steps for the starting balance not getting created?

Can make a feature request for configurable starting dates if there isn't one already?

<!-- gh-comment-id:3156068691 --> @youngcw commented on GitHub (Aug 5, 2025): This seems like two separate things. A bug that needs a replication process, and then a feature request. Are there replication steps for the starting balance not getting created? Can make a feature request for configurable starting dates if there isn't one already?
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-14 19:38:32 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@atgrey24 commented on GitHub (Aug 5, 2025):

Sorry if this was the wrong place for it. I wasn't sure if gaps in the process were considered a bug or a new feature request. I don't have any replications steps other than that linked bug, as I haven't seen it myself and I don't have access to GoCardless. I've just seen a couple people in the discord get tripped up where it turns out they didn't have one.

I'll create this as a feature request instead

<!-- gh-comment-id:3156469122 --> @atgrey24 commented on GitHub (Aug 5, 2025): Sorry if this was the wrong place for it. I wasn't sure if gaps in the process were considered a bug or a new feature request. I don't have any replications steps other than that linked bug, as I haven't seen it myself and I don't have access to GoCardless. I've just seen a couple people in the discord get tripped up where it turns out they didn't have one. I'll create this as a feature request instead
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-14 19:38:32 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@matt-fidd commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2025):

Maybe a different approach here would be to look for an existing "Starting Balance" transaction instead of just checking if an account is empty, it would fix the linked bug as well. Though, that would of course break if users changed the payee of the default transaction.

Maybe we should focus on the documentation instead. Adding a clear step to check the balance against your bank and add a starting balance transaction if needed might help to stem the issues in Discord.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3157215244 --> @matt-fidd commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2025): Maybe a different approach here would be to look for an existing "Starting Balance" transaction instead of just checking if an account is empty, it would fix the linked bug as well. Though, that would of course break if users changed the payee of the default transaction. Maybe we should focus on the documentation instead. Adding a clear step to check the balance against your bank and add a starting balance transaction if needed might help to stem the issues in Discord.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-14 19:38:33 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@youngcw commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2025):

I think that at some point we should rework the new account flow. It would be nice if the starting date could be set to something other than the current day. The starting balance could be set even if the user is connecting to a sync provider. Maybe if connecting to a sync provider the user only adds in the start date and the linking sets the starting balance.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3157258144 --> @youngcw commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2025): I think that at some point we should rework the new account flow. It would be nice if the starting date could be set to something other than the current day. The starting balance could be set even if the user is connecting to a sync provider. Maybe if connecting to a sync provider the user only adds in the start date and the linking sets the starting balance.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-14 19:38:33 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@matt-fidd commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2025):

I think that at some point we should rework the new account flow. It would be nice if the starting date could be set to something other than the current day. The starting balance could be set even if the user is connecting to a sync provider. Maybe if connecting to a sync provider the user only adds in the start date and the linking sets the starting balance.

True, there's a lot of work to do on the bank sync side. I keep meaning to set aside a week or two to refactor the whole lot, but I've been hoping plugins came first to make it a bit easier.

I like the idea of setting a start date. The 90 day limit is carried over from GoCardless too I believe, I don't think it's a problem for SimpleFIN and Pluggy.ai so there's scope to extend that too.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3157264102 --> @matt-fidd commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2025): > I think that at some point we should rework the new account flow. It would be nice if the starting date could be set to something other than the current day. The starting balance could be set even if the user is connecting to a sync provider. Maybe if connecting to a sync provider the user only adds in the start date and the linking sets the starting balance. True, there's a lot of work to do on the bank sync side. I keep meaning to set aside a week or two to refactor the whole lot, but I've been hoping plugins came first to make it a bit easier. I like the idea of setting a start date. The 90 day limit is carried over from GoCardless too I believe, I don't think it's a problem for SimpleFIN and Pluggy.ai so there's scope to extend that too.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-14 19:38:34 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@youngcw commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2025):

I think that at some point we should rework the new account flow. It would be nice if the starting date could be set to something other than the current day. The starting balance could be set even if the user is connecting to a sync provider. Maybe if connecting to a sync provider the user only adds in the start date and the linking sets the starting balance.

True, there's a lot of work to do on the bank sync side. I keep meaning to set aside a week or two to refactor the whole lot, but I've been hoping plugins came first to make it a bit easier.

I like the idea of setting a start date. The 90 day limit is carried over from GoCardless too I believe, I don't think it's a problem for SimpleFIN and Pluggy.ai so there's scope to extend that too.

Waiting on plugins would make sense for a lot of that, but setting the start date would probably be fine to add now and it can get carried over to a plugin.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3157265835 --> @youngcw commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2025): > > I think that at some point we should rework the new account flow. It would be nice if the starting date could be set to something other than the current day. The starting balance could be set even if the user is connecting to a sync provider. Maybe if connecting to a sync provider the user only adds in the start date and the linking sets the starting balance. > > True, there's a lot of work to do on the bank sync side. I keep meaning to set aside a week or two to refactor the whole lot, but I've been hoping plugins came first to make it a bit easier. > > I like the idea of setting a start date. The 90 day limit is carried over from GoCardless too I believe, I don't think it's a problem for SimpleFIN and Pluggy.ai so there's scope to extend that too. Waiting on plugins would make sense for a lot of that, but setting the start date would probably be fine to add now and it can get carried over to a plugin.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-14 19:38:35 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@atgrey24 commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2025):

I think that at some point we should rework the new account flow. It would be nice if the starting date could be set to something other than the current day. The starting balance could be set even if the user is connecting to a sync provider. Maybe if connecting to a sync provider the user only adds in the start date and the linking sets the starting balance.

I included something like that as a possible solution in the feature request I made to replace this bug #5490. Feel free to close or remove this bug as you deem appropriate.

Maybe we should focus on the documentation instead. Adding a clear step to check the balance against your bank and add a starting balance transaction if needed might help to stem the issues in Discord.

Not enough people actually read the documentation, at least not until after they have encountered a problem. Its probably still worth adding, but would be best to prevent the issue in the first place.

<!-- gh-comment-id:3160643673 --> @atgrey24 commented on GitHub (Aug 6, 2025): > I think that at some point we should rework the new account flow. It would be nice if the starting date could be set to something other than the current day. The starting balance could be set even if the user is connecting to a sync provider. Maybe if connecting to a sync provider the user only adds in the start date and the linking sets the starting balance. I included something like that as a possible solution in the feature request I made to replace this bug #5490. Feel free to close or remove this bug as you deem appropriate. > Maybe we should focus on the documentation instead. Adding a clear step to check the balance against your bank and add a starting balance transaction if needed might help to stem the issues in Discord. Not enough people actually read the documentation, at least not until after they have encountered a problem. Its probably still worth adding, but would be best to prevent the issue in the first place.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
AI generated
API
bank sync
budgeting
bug
can’t replicate
dependencies
docker
documentation
electron
experimental feature
feature
feedback
goal templates
good first issue
help wanted
importers
maintenance
needs info
needs testing
needs triage
needs votes
openid
payees
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 regression
reports
responsive
rules
schedules
server
✨ merged
split transactions
tech debt
tech-support
theme
transaction import
transaction reconciliation
transactions
translations
upstream
user interface
✅ approved
wontfix
No Label bank sync bug
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
GiteaMirror ninjasurge
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/actual#16594
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?