RGFan

Don/Crank, Looks like another that you already resolved, so thank you. If you need anything else on it, let me know. Ryan

Hi Crank, I am checking into this, and will let you know what I find out. Thanks, Ryan

Good morning everyone, I have read through this entire thread, and I believe that you have been able to help one another with the open questions/issues, but if I am mistaken, don't hesitate to correct me. I said it in another post, but this forum is excellent, and for those of you that are using it, I congratulate you on the teamwork and viability of its use. Please respond with any concerns or feedback and I will go from there. Ryan

Hi everyone, Has anyone experienced this within the past couple of days? I am going to check with everyone here on what has been escalated so that I can get my arms around it, but want to know if it has happened very recently in your experience. I am properly subscribed to this and will ensure I do what I can to close it down. Thank you for your feedback, Ryan

Hi Randall/Don, Any outstanding questions on this one? I am trying to size everything up and want to make sure you have your questions answered on this one at this point. Thanks, Ryan

Good suggestions, and good questions. I postetd my thoughts earlier, but support the requests for an additional forum, etc. Thanks, Ryan

Beckster/Kea, Nice work on this one! It looks like you are in good shape, but let me know, as I want to make sure I don't miss something. As with the others I have posted today, I am now subscribed, and will be watching for inbound things so I can see new things as they come up. Thanks, Ryan

Hi Julie, I looks like Art was able to help here, so unless I hear back from you, I will consider this a closed issue. Let me know otherwise. Thanks, Art. Ryan

Hi everyone, As with the others, I will try and sure up what you know and will get back to you on the response I am able to get from the right folks here. Thanks, Ryan

Hi to you both. I am checking to see what options there may be on this, as I am not familiar with it myself. I will get with the right folks who programmed it and will let you know what I find out. Take care, Ryan

Hi to you both. I am going to check into this, but I believe Crank is correct, as this is appears to be a limitation on the version you are using. I will let you know. Thanks, Ryan

Hi everyone. First, this continues to be one of the best forums I have seen, in terms of users really being engaged and helpful to one another on things that come up, so I congratulate you on that. I will be talking to my management group about all of the suggestions I have seen, including addiontal forums, etc. Thanks to Mike for reaching out to me, as I got very busy with the Tax Season and have not checked in here for some time. I plan to change that and have subscribed to the threads, and will do my best to keep up on new inbound issues as they come in. I know TRX is your first option when it comes to support, and we should continue to use them (I will also work with both teams in the off season to discuss things so they can be improved), but I will do my best to attend to your needs if they hit the forum. At the end of the day, for me, it is about you enjoying your tax season and not being hindered by issues, no matter who should ultimately help. Regarding your thoughts, that are non-issue specific, please feel free to provide whatever is on your mind. In fact, if someone would like to open a new Topic under a "Suggestions" title or something, folks can go in and add thoughts as they come to you, and it will keep them all together for our consumption later. I apologize for leaving you hanging without answers, and will be working very hard to get them all taken care of as quickly as I can. In the meantime, best of luck as you continue through the tax season, and I will be responding to each issue as answers come in. Take care, Ryan

Good morning, Crank...and all others. I am working quickly today to get my arms around what is open and what still needs attention, and it appears as though I can call this one good to go? If not, please let me know, as I am very happy to help. I have subscribed to this and will also be watching all other inbound issues so that I can help you as best as I am able. Thank you. Ryan

Hi Terry/Ed, I just wanted to acknowledge that I have seen this and will be working it as fast as I can. I have also subscribed to this so that I can keep track of it, and future issues/concerns that come up. I hope aside from this, Terry, that your tax season has been good so far. Talk to you soon. Ryan

Hi Beckster, and all others. Can I call this one closed or can I help you with anything else? I have subscribed to this for future questions, and I am sorry to have left you hanging; as with each of you, I have been super busy with Tax Season, but i want to support you all, so let me know on this one and I will keep track of future issues as they come in. Hope you are having a great tax season. Ryan

Thank you. I was able to get the following from our NC programmer, which confirms what has already been mentioned: NC 1040 instruction booklet, Page 29. 2010 Tax Rate Schedule (which is where they are getting the 6% tax rate) Caution: Use ONLY if your taxable income (Form D-400, Line 13) is $68,000 or more. If less, use the North Carolina Tax Table beginning on Page 21. The example given below was for a taxable income of $11,672 which is well below the $68,000 level. If you look on Page 22 of the attached NC 1040 instruction booklet, the Tax Table amount for $11,672 is $701. Ryan

Hi Terry, Very good thoughts here, and I can understand the frustration. We are not the support group you contacted, but I purposely have followed this forum because I can get this info directly to the programmers that need to see it. Stay tuned until I can get a response from them on this, and thank you for taking the time to express yourself on this forum. I want this to be a good experience for you as a RedGear employee, so I will see what I can do. Thanks, Ryan

Good evening everyone, The comments are very nice to see and I want to take a quick minute to acknowledge what has been added here. It is true that we have another smaill module called "Wage Reporting" that can be easily added to your current packages, and it is very inexpensive. I am not sure of the details because that is something between you and TRX, but it is simple to use and easy to access. Be sure to contact them so that you can get using it, and let me know if you have any additional thoughts or questions. Thanks again. Ryan

Hi Beckster, I think I may have found someone that can help us with your issue, but I need an email address from you in order to have them contact you. Can you send that to me? Thanks, Ryan

Art, I apologize for missing that. From our testing we don't see any issues with it working correctly. Because conversions can have so many variables by system, it is always good to run a couple of returns, and check them before doing too many, but we don't see any issues with the data coming into 2010 correctly, etc. Please let me know if you run into anything at all that you think we can look at specifically. Mike provided me with a couple of returns and it was very helpful to see specifics, and we are willing to do the same for you once you run a few. Thanks, Ryan

Beckster, I will have the team double check the birthday's as indicated above. Also (FOR ALL), please note the additional changes/fields we have added over the past few days. My team is working very hard on other systems but based on your feedback, I have had them get some additional things done on ATX and wanted to point them out to you: 8283 grid – all fields added. 6251 – checkbox will allow the TW 6251 form to populate calculations. For this one to work, you will just need to uncheck and recheck the Preparer’s copy checkbox on the top of 6251 prior to converting, then the form will create with a checkbox in TW to print form and show the form with calculations. 2210 – the two amounts on the top of the form will convert if it’s a direct input or if those fields are auto populated from calculations from another location. Either way they are entered, they will now convert over. 4952 – has a few fields added. They are mapped to only fields that are direct inputs, not amounts that show as calculated from other forms. Also, one of the issues raised in the forum was with assets prior depreciation. It dumps from ATX differently depending on the return so our team has added another mapping so that it will be covered both ways depending on how it dumps. We tested the changes with the customer’s live returns and they now work. I know for some of you, this info and respective changes come too late, but we are appreciative of your feedback and use of returns, etc. As stated before, you have the option of going with what you already converted, or doing them again with the latest changes we have implemented. For those that have not converted, you will certainly benefit from the issues raised by counterparts on this forum, and as I mentioned, we appreciate that from our standpoint. Please let me know if I can answer additional questions, etc. Ryan

Hi Kea, Yes, there are many programs available for conversion, including several business systems. If you have specific questions around any of them, let me know. Thanks a bunch. Ryan

Hi Art, I would not reprocess the 60 you have done, since you have already made manual corrections to those. You can, however, take 1 or 2 of them and run them again to see the differences that I have noted. Any new conversions you do at this point will pick up the changes we have made, so you will be good to go with those going forward. Let me know if I can help you with additional things you may find. Ryan

Thanks, Mike. I understand the dissapointment, and don't have a satisfying answer that will help at this point. We were not informed of the issues, and just happened across this community post from a co-worker. To answer your questions, yes, the fixes are available now, and they will be applicable to the business returns once that system is released this month as well. I will email you directly with how to get us those returns, and we will take a look accordingly. We will do our best as a development team to help you as you get closer to the season, and we understand the need to eliminate or avoid any unnecessary work. Thank you, Ryan

Good evening. I want to try and take what the team has come up with and summarize it for everyone to take a look at. Please let me know if you have any questions with regard to this response: First, here are the corrections that have been made to our program, as a result of researching pieces of your feedback: 1. Almost all returns have an erroneous entry in the foreign address input field – our mappings have been updated to remove random entry. 2. All MFJ returns have box checked for spouse claimed on another return – With further review of this mapping the dump is the same regardless if the spouse box is checked or not. It is more likely a spouse would not be claimed on another person’s return. We do not want that box checking incorrectly anytime a client has a MFJ return. Due to ATX dumping with no differences to map correctly, this field has been removed. This will no longer be an issue to clients with the disclaimer that you will need to check by hand if spouse claimed on another return. 6. All W-2 input fields for SSN are blank even though the correct entry for T or S has come over – This was happening if allowing ATX to auto populate would not convert the TP & SP SSN. This has been resolved by our team and it will now convert both as a direct input on the W-2 or as an auto populated field. 7. All 1099 forms have missing or incorrect address fields – This was occurring if the address was foreign and auto populating. For all 1099 forms this has been resolved, and will now convert for direct input changes and auto populate for both domestic and foreign addresses. As a sidenote, the direct feedback from this forum has been helpful for us to see real examples from the field and we have made some of these changes to be more universal, so there will be improvements to all of our conversion programs. Second, there are a number of other legitimate issues that were raised, and we have tried to summarize our thoughts on those as well: 3. None of the e-file input forms are correctly populated – We have never considered this for mapping, mostly because our competitors do not, and it is difficult in a number of ways. 4. Direct deposit information is not carried over. – We have begun mapping these fields from some of the competitors, but when we work to get the best coverage for a system, while releasing it timely for our customers, we typically lower this info in terms of priority. I have made a note of it, and we will see what we can do next year to improve that coverage 5. All dates for signatures and letters default to current computer date.-no override available. – This is not a conversion issue; the letter date can be overriden on the LTR screen “Letter date if different” and an invoice date can be overridden. This is on the INV screen “Date to print on invoice” It looks like both of these dates can be defaulted to a specific date that will show up all returns if that is what the user wants. We are not sure if there is a default for a signature date but we do not think so. We will try and follow up with the programmers of this particular code. 8. Virtually none of the depreciation schedules are converting properly. – We agree that our assets conversion is fairly limited in this system. Due to restriction of time we were not able to get as much coverage, but we will look to make some adjustments on this for year in order to see some improvements. Some other miscellaneous thoughts that may be helpful: Our current conversion program does not include anything for state returns and that could be part of what you experience with some returns. That is in line with our competitors, for the most part, so at the current time it is not included. For the Sch D, we would need to see the actual return with the Sch D that does convert and one that does not. In researching ATX again, it appears as there are multiple locations for entry so we need to look at each one in play. The situation is similar for the 6251 - as we haven't done much with the mappings on this form, but potentially could if we looked at a couple of returns you have mentioned. NOL’s will generally need to be adjusted because we cannot do a mirror image return. We would need to see what NOL’s you are referring to in order to be of better assistance now and in the future for other customers. Thanks, Ryan