Curious about Program Inconsistencies

[carolynm]

I've been a Max user for several year and though I like the program I have one huge issue that might convince me to switch to another program. Several times during the course of each year I'll run into a situation where the program does not calculate a field properly. After an hour or two with support we usually end up deleting that form from the return, creating a new file or something similar.

Just this week I was working on a return that I remembered had prior year NOLs -but they weren't showing up anywhere in the current year file. I opened up the 2005 file (which is an amended 1040x) and sure enough the worksheet was there along with the NOL on the 1040. I have no idea why this didn't roll forward. What if I hadn't remembered that this taxpayer had losses? Perhaps I haven't ticked a box somewhere but I'd hope MAX would indicate that to me in its diagnostics.

This is just one example of problems I've had.

Does anyone else experience these kind of problems?

I don't really want to switch programs but I'm at the point where I don't have any time to waster fussing with a program - I need it to work reliably.

Carolyn

[Wayne Brasch]

I've been a Max user for several year and though I like the program I have one huge issue that might convince me to switch to another program. Several times during the course of each year I'll run into a situation where the program does not calculate a field properly. After an hour or two with support we usually end up deleting that form from the return, creating a new file or something similar.

Just this week I was working on a return that I remembered had prior year NOLs -but they weren't showing up anywhere in the current year file. I opened up the 2005 file (which is an amended 1040x) and sure enough the worksheet was there along with the NOL on the 1040. I have no idea why this didn't roll forward. What if I hadn't remembered that this taxpayer had losses? Perhaps I haven't ticked a box somewhere but I'd hope MAX would indicate that to me in its diagnostics.

This is just one example of problems I've had.

Does anyone else experience these kind of problems?

I don't really want to switch programs but I'm at the point where I don't have any time to waster fussing with a program - I need it to work reliably.

Carolyn

Carolyn,

I, of course, don't know what process you go through when you are preparing a return, but I always have the previous year's return right in front of me while I'm preparing the current year's return. That way, I don't have to worry about what didn't get brought forward properly. I also don't have to remember that a carryover of some kind needs to be considered in the current return. I see it on the previous return and make sure it is reflected in the current one. I do this for every form and schedule that may have been included in the previous return.

Wayne

[JohnH]

If you're willing to pay enough money, you can probably get a program which will have almost no mistakes. But no vendor is going to guarantee perfection, and as Wayne points out, you are taking a huge chance relying on any program to do it all right. No software is a substitute for your judgement and experience - putting all your faith in the software is guaranteed to trip you up.

[Don in Upstate NY]

I, of course, don't know what process you go through when you are preparing a return, but I always have the previous year's return right in front of me while I'm preparing the current year's return. That way, I don't have to worry about what didn't get brought forward properly.

And that is certainly a good way to make sure all the carry-overs carry over. And you can also run a tape to make sure that all the arithmetic calculations shown on the form are correct. You could even do the return manually, and then use the IRS fill-in .pdf forms to print it out (like I'm doing right now for a 990) Then compose your client letter using Word and you're done.

You could do all these things, and you SHOULD do all these things, if you're not confident that your chosen software has done them correctly. The challenge in using MAX, or ANY software, is knowing what it does and doesn't do correctly. Since no software is perfect, bring information about limitations or problem areas to light is actually a service to current and potential users. The more comprehensive and automatic your program is, and the more you rely on that program, the harder it is to achieve the confidence that all is done correctly.

A simple example -- the optional sales tax deduction on Schedule A. In TaxWise this is a manual operation. The program calculates the total income and then you go to the printed tables in the Instructions for Schedule A to select the deduction for your state, family size and sometimes county. It's a pain, but you have the correct number. On the other extreme is OrrTax. You enter your state and the local rate and the program gives you the number. Automatic, easy, and WRONG for much of New York State, because NY has different tables for different countries, even though their tax rate is the same. ATX is also automatic and asks which NY table to use. Automatic, almost as easy, and (after you verify a few) confidently correct for NY. But how do you trust it for all states without checking?

A FUNDAMENTAL confidence problem I see in almost all software is the inability to verify that the numbers on the printed return correspond to the numbers in the electronic return. Drake is/was probably the best in this area because they were creating their .IRS files directly from the .pdf files of the printed return. ATX had problems in this area several years ago when some of the e-file numbers were taken from worksheets that didn't necessarily correspond to the printed final results. (One that caught me was using a negative number on the charitable contributions worksheet for value received on a college football luxury box donation. No error message, but the printed and e-file totals were different.)

Given that you cannot verify what is actually sent in on an e-file, and rejecting the "well then don't e-file" response as rather unrealistic for a long term solution, it seems that you must ultimately rely on the reputation and perceived level of quality control exercised by your software vendor. Making that decision in an unemotional business manner seems to be beyond most of us.

[kcjenkins]

Just this week I was working on a return that I remembered had prior year NOLs -but they weren't showing up anywhere in the current year file. I opened up the 2005 file (which is an amended 1040x) and sure enough the worksheet was there along with the NOL on the 1040. I have no idea why this didn't roll forward. What if I hadn't remembered that this taxpayer had losses? Perhaps I haven't ticked a box somewhere but I'd hope MAX would indicate that to me in its diagnostics.

Carolyn

I'm wondering if the problem could have been that you rolled over the original return, rather than the amended one? I did that one time, then wondered where the asset that I remembered adding was. Then I realized that I'd rolled over the original, and that asset was only on the amended return. Thankfully it was significant enough that I remembered it, so noticed that it was missing.

[redux]

I'm wondering if the problem could have been that you rolled over the original return, rather than the amended one? I did that one time, then wondered where the asset that I remembered adding was. Then I realized that I'd rolled over the original, and that asset was only on the amended return. Thankfully it was significant enough that I remembered it, so noticed that it was missing.

Where's Monkeyman when you need him? That is why he's here isn't it? Wasn't that his stated purpose for becoming a member here ie "so he could help with program problems."

Maybe he simply doesn't have enough time to help with program problems because he's too busy posting advetisements for the company as in http://www.atxcommunity.com/index.php?showtopic=537

[carolynm]

Thank-you Don you have echoed my sentiments. I think it's great if some of you have time to do all that checking - I don't. I do a thorough job but do not compare every page. I do compare tax summaries and do a general review once I'm complete. An example: Yesterday I was entering information into a return for a fellow who had a marginally profitable business by all outward appearances. The Schedule C was showing $20K in taxable income and I knew it was wrong and was able to determine what was missing after going through supporting documents. I don't just enter and print.

I do however rely on my program to do the calculations correctly. Or publicize what it does not compute. I can easily override or enter the correct information and go on but that ALWAYS makes me wonder if I'm the one making the mistake, and inevitably I waste time trying to pinpoint the source of the error.

KC -no I was rolling forward the right return. I even tried doing it a second time to be sure. I'm thinking it's something to do with the fact that it is a 1040X - all I know is I"m getting an incorrect result rolling forward this return.

So back to the topic at hand -am I the only one finding inconsistencies in the program? Each year I run across something. I remember last year there was a depreciation schedule that would not roll forward come thick or thin. With Tech Supports help I finally got it to work but we had to jump through many hoops and I probably spent about 5 hours on the issue - I could have easily reentered the list by then.

Carolyn

[RitaB]

return.

So back to the topic at hand -am I the only one finding inconsistencies in the program? Each year I run across something. I remember last year there was a depreciation schedule that would not roll forward come thick or thin. With Tech Supports help I finally got it to work but we had to jump through many hoops and I probably spent about 5 hours on the issue - I could have easily reentered the list by then.

Carolyn

As a matter of fact, just today I was looking at a depreciation summary and it had the accumulated depreciation as $148. I knew that was wrong, looked back at 2003, 2004, 2005 returns, added the accumulated depreciation and entered it. Reprinted. Don't know why it was incorrect on 2006; it was correct on the 2005 return. It makes me wonder how many things I didn't catch. I really don't have time to check accumuated depreciation. That one just jumped out at me. Kinda frustrating.