ATX conversion to Drake and other General Q's

[jshtax]

What shortfalls does the conversion to Drake have? I know 2012 will be a whole new ballgame but would like to hear how past conversions went.

I have the 2011 Demo and had thought the software looked very cheap but when showing it to clients (since we do interactive taxes with them) they had no issue as it went smooth and was easy for them to follow. Since it has passed the first sniff test I am curious about issues Drake users have. I spoke with the sales person today and point blank asked....When you have a customer leave regardless of where they came from what are you hearing the biggest issue is. He told me fixed asset entry. I am curious if anyone out here can shed some light on issues or shortcomings Drake might have? Thanks in advance for your help.

[Guest Taxed]

I have converted from ATX 2011 to Drake 2011 without any major issues. All demographic data is intact. I did 1040 only for testing purpose. 1041 are not converted and I have 1065 where conversions don't matter much anyways for me as I like to redo each year fresh.

Where I saw some issues is with depreciation schedules and some carry forwards (NOL, cap losses).

But I have encountered similar issues with conversions to other programs.

What I did was run the return in ATX 2011 and print the preparer copy, then after conversion compared and fixed the missing data. Takes about 5 to 10 minutes to check and once the tax and refund figure matched, it was ready to be saved.

Drake handles depreciation schedules slightly different than ATX. It does NOT select it for you based on asset type. You must select it from the menu.

Jklcpa can probably give you a better analysis of the conversion. Also JohnH is another source for feedback.

[jklcpa]

I didn't have too many issues either, and I converted 2011 ATX to 2011 Drake for 1040, 1041, 1065, 1120 and 1120S returns. I hardly ever used any overrides except on my Delaware returns because ATX simply couldn't get some of the calculations correct, so maybe that helped in the ease of conversion.

After using it this past season, the positives for me are the increase in speed of all processes and its handling of the out-of-state credits. Drake handles those credits correctly and much easier than ATX which always required fiddling with the numbers. That was a very welcome surprise that was a real timesaver for me. I live right on the PA border, and can be in NJ or MD within 20 minutes, so lots of my clients are multistate.

I don't do any business work without a balanced set of books, so I know before inputting what the bottom line and balance sheet will be. I find the auto balance feature to be annoying because it is constantly trying to fixing the $1 rounding on its own. It happens frequently with any of the programs when individual items are rounded from another part of the program that flow to the balance sheet. Fixed assets and the related depreciation are one of the most common causes of this. I had the auto balance feature turned off in ATX too.

One thing I had to enter on all the returns is the county of residence on the demographics screen. If you do a large number of returns, you could set up a macro for that field. It was easy for me since all my DE resident clients all live in the same county, uh, because we only have 3 in the entire state.

The conversion issues I did have -

• one individual return with vacation home carryover didn't come over properly because the property is out of service as a rental, but I was leaving the asset info in ATX in the event of its eventual sale. I made printouts of the schedules from ATX and made it a permanent file record for that one client.
• I spent time checking every single asset converted, and they all converted perfectly with no errors! The one thing was that my state piggybacks federal law, so there are no differences and I never used that "state if different" box in ATX, but Drake put the #s there, so now I get a state report. No big deal, I just don't print it.
• The main issue of conversion was with the business returns 1065 and 1120 series in the detailed worksheets. The bottom line totals were correct, but the lines didn't match up in conversion. For example, on the detail worksheet for line 26 on 1120 for other deductions, I might have entered an amount for accounting expense in ATX that ended up on the bank charges line in Drake. It wasn't necessary to really fix those, because the totals were correct, but I did fix them anyway while I had the file open.
• Almost everything came over exactly to the dollar. There were a couple of returns that had dollar rounding of the tax, but again, really had no effect.
• I don't recall exactly what didn't convert properly on several of the 1065s, but it was something on Sch K that affected every subsequent schedule it flowed to: the M-1, M-2, balance sheet balances, K-1s and basis schedules. Whatever it was, I found and fixed it easily enough in the 2011 converted Drake file prior to rolling over to the current year, so that what rolled over as beginning balances were correct on all schedules. Once I saw the what the cause was on the first affected 1065, the others were easy to spot and fix.

[joelgilb]

Drakes fixed assets converted perfectly for me as well. I do have a few comments about the FA module though:

The Fixed Asset Manager (FTM) is not as strong as some of the profressional FTMs. but I find it is sufficient for my needs. With ATX 2011 and earlier (not sure about 2012 as my ATX 2012 integrated with the external FTM), I had to buy the full FTM to get history and future depreciation lapsing schedules.

ATX input (IMHO) made it easier for those with less expertise to easily choose the correct asset methods and lives ,by hiding some of the more technical issues in depreciation behind menu choices. With Drake, I feel you need to understand asset classes, depreciation methods and assets lives a little better. This one can be taken as a strength or a weakness though. My personal thought is that Drake, forces preparers to better understand the depreciation rules and insure that the correct methods and lives are used, and is therefore a strength, not a weakness.

[jklcpa]

I agree with all of that, Joel. I, too, have always had a separate program for depreciation because I need more flexible and extensive reports for my accounting clients. I have the Fixed Assets program from Tompson Reuters, which used to be called DSII (Deprec. Solution II) from Creative Solutions. The Fixed Assets II has become the depreciation module that integrates in with Ultra Tax.

[joelgilb]

I agree with all of that, Joel. I, too, have always had a separate program for depreciation because I need more flexible and extensive reports for my accounting clients. I have the Fixed Assets program from Tompson Reuters, which used to be called DSII (Deprec. Solution II) from Creative Solutions. The Fixed Assets II has become the depreciation module that integrates in with Ultra Tax.

Would like to switch completely from CCH. How much is the FA program from Thompson Reuters?

[jklcpa]

I don't know what a new user would be charged. My renewal price is due in a couple of weeks at $328.

[jshtax]

I am surprised this many people keep assets updated during the year. I just plug them in when the taxes are completed.

[jklcpa]

Some of my larger business clients that have partnerships or corps make large equipment purchases where it's easier for me to project out the depreciation and analyze whether or not to take sec 179, or how much 179 to take by keeping the fixed asset schedules up to date. Then there are the hypotheticals where a client calls in when he gets offers to purchase one of his commercial rentals (shopping centers). Those numbers are pretty big, and I need accurate data if I'm going to project out his tax impact on the potential sale. That DSII program will handle the bulk disposal and future depreciation with ease. It has a variety of sort/print options that make my life easier when doing my financial reporting or budgeting for clients that have retails stores with multiple locations and multiple types of assets too. Keeping it up-to-date is easiest for me and meets the needs of my clients best.