In Hauge v. Hauge, 145 Wis. 2d 600, 427 N.W.2d 154 (Ct. App. 1988), the husband claimed that the court erred in considering the accounts receivable from his dental practice as both an asset to be divided and as a component of his income for purposes of setting support and maintenance. Recognizing that double counting of accounts receivable is impermissible, we concluded that the evidence failed to bear out the husband's claim. "The evidence disclosed that the amount of these accounts remained relatively static or rose slightly over a period of several years preceding the divorce. The circuit court was entitled to infer a similar accumulation into the future. Although the husband may collect a small portion of his income each year from accounts receivable, he apparently continues to accumulate a comparable receivable in each succeeding year. At the point of retirement or sale of his practice, he will be entitled to the outstanding accounts as an asset to replace those previously depleted through income."