Software switch

[srk]

I am an individual practioner with larger firm experience where I learned tax preparation on CCH ProsystemFX. When I went on my own, made the swith to Lacerte (couldn't afford Prosystem). Now I am considering switching to ATX (from Lacerte) but I have never prepared tax returns on the form input entry side of tax software.

May practice involves a few high net worth individuals and several S Corporations (gross receipts avg $1M - 10M) doing business in multiple states... and consequently business owners with individual returns in those states as well.

Can I get any input from other practitioners with their experience either in using ATX for a similar client base or experience in switching from Prosystem or Lacerte?

[jainen]

>>I am considering switching to ATX (from Lacerte) <<

You have not stated your reasons for considering such a change.

Lacerte would seem to be a good choice for the practice you describe -- you need a very robust program that imports K-1s flawlessly. You need to be confident that multiple states are handled correctly, especially if you are not personally an expert in each one. You need extremely detailed diagnostics because time is a huge factor on those high-end returns, probably even more important than cost! I don't know if you rely on Lacerte's tax analysis feature, but it's possible that a single item there could pay for your whole subscription.

You already spotted what may be the most important factor of all -- the data entry screens. This is after all only a matter of preference, but represents a very large learning curve. The only way to resolve that is to get the 2006 Max program and try it out for two months.

[Mike D]

I too switched to ATX from Microvision Tax Relief back in 2002 when they sold out to Ultratax. I prepare some high-end personal returns and a few multi state personal, partnership, corps, sub s, etc. ATX is an excellent product for simple 1040 returns.

If you are used to what all these tax software companies allude to as seamless multi state integration, ATX is not for you. You will need to follow each state and physically enter additional data as necessary. Like any other software there are no seamless results simply work a rounds. I have found that with ATX there is a learning curve associated with multi state integration which although is not insurmountable, it does require more hands on.

The cost benefit of ATX as compared to LaCerte, Ultatax, CCH, etc. was my motivation for switching from Microvision Tax Relief in the first place. It takes more time and hands on to complete these complex tax returns however once the work a rounds are perfected it appears to be manageable for me.

I hope this will assist you in selecting your new tax software.

Michael M Dubin CPA

[Lion EA]

I too have a small practice but not simple returns, lots of multiple states, for instance. ATX doesn't help the preparer through multiple states and is weak on diagnostics. I'm still evaluating but leaning toward the high-end products. I've spent a little time in UltraTax CS and ProSystem fx and need to get into the Lacerte demo. Call the ones that interest you for demo disks and keep us posted on what strengths and weaknesses you find.

[RJM]

I switched from Prosystems FX with former employer for 5 years, to ATX as a self-employed. Most of my returns are larger, and a few with moderate complexity. I found the switch to the ATX forms-based input to be very easy, and intuitively superior to the input-form-based Prosystems. Several things are not automated in ATX (integrating children and parent returns comes to mind), but the "workarounds" referred to by previous poster never seem to take much extra time. My experience with Prosystems 5 years ago was sometimes unpleasant, because there were often program errors that would not be corrected until significantly into tax season. I have no experience with multi-state k-1's in ATX, however.

[Richcpaman]

I switched from Prosystems FX with former employer for 5 years, to ATX as a self-employed. Most of my returns are larger, and a few with moderate complexity. I found the switch to the ATX forms-based input to be very easy, and intuitively superior to the input-form-based Prosystems. Several things are not automated in ATX (integrating children and parent returns comes to mind), but the "workarounds" referred to by previous poster never seem to take much extra time. My experience with Prosystems 5 years ago was sometimes unpleasant, because there were often program errors that would not be corrected until significantly into tax season. I have no experience with multi-state k-1's in ATX, however.

SRK:

I still use Lacerte for some of my more complex returns, and I use ATX for everything else. I do have multiple state returns, and ATX does enough to make the price differential meaningful for me for doing 300+ returns. I use the Pay-per-return for Lacerte, and pay the full ATX price. I pay about $300 to Lacerte a year now. Down from $450-500 in the past. The Carry over/forward functions in Lacerte far surpass the ones in ATX.

It may be the solution for you to ease the transition.

Rich

[joanmcq]

I also started doing tax with a large firm and Profx. With ATX I do miss the 'state if different' column for K-1 entry. With ATX you must manually enter K-1 differences (at least with CA returns) on Sch CA; there is no state entry area for K-1s. But I could not afford the high priced guys when I started out as a sole practitioner, and don't have too many clients with K-1s so I muddle through. Another area where one has to pay careful attention is in the sale of business assets, if basis is different for the state than the federal. the differences have to be entered manually in a worksheet; they do not flow automatically from the asset entry.