Please remember this is a user-to-user community that relies on member participation. We encourage you to ask questions AND share your own thoughts, experience and advice.
The eligible GST rebate on expenses is reporting acurately but the HST rebate for the half year in Ontario is also transferring over to the spouse's return as well.The spouse is not reporting any employment expenses. Am I missing something here or is a fix needed.
Page 1 of 1
Problem with GST 370
MultiQuote
#2
Sasha1 
- Senior Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 119
- Joined: 09-January 07
Posted 03 March 2011 - 12:05 AM
You're right. Phoned support about this last week and was told it was a known issue and they're working on it. Told them it would be real nice if they shared their known issues with the users of their software but didn't get the sense that was going to happen any time soon.
#3 Guest_snowplowguy_*
Posted 03 March 2011 - 01:03 AM
"Known Issues"
Known to who though?
These software errors can't be considered "known issues" when the only people who know about them are the people who don't need to use the software in real life.
This is just like the problem with the Ontario Tax Credits Schedule. Arliss and Dink Meeker have created topics about this. In many cases fields from the ONBEN and/or ON479 do not get transmitted properly on efile. Apparently it was a known issue too, but just not known publicly until this afternoon when Dink Meeker pushed for an expected fix date. I am deliberately holding returns with 479 credits because I can't determine whether they will transmit accurately. Tim Parris has encountered 'known issues' with the calculation/refund of CPP on Quebec returns and started a topic on it...... only to be received with that ever familiar silence.
Once Intuit becomes aware of 'issues' that may affect the accuracy of their software the considerate approach would be to either email their Profile customers (like the marketing emails we get at renewal time) or have a topic made available to the Profile Community outlining the issues and their potential impact, rather than keeping them quiet and hoping that not too many people notice them prior to a subsequent release.
I realize that tax regulation is complex and in a constant state of flux. There are bound to be some glitches and bugs along the way, but it isn't fair to keep this information from customers who have purchased and rely on the software to perform accurately.
If there is a link that I haven't discovered in the last 10 years that I can merely click on to reveal all of these known issues then I apologize. However, when I click on "online-->update information-->known issues" in the software the list certainly does not include these serious problems.
Known to who though?
These software errors can't be considered "known issues" when the only people who know about them are the people who don't need to use the software in real life.
This is just like the problem with the Ontario Tax Credits Schedule. Arliss and Dink Meeker have created topics about this. In many cases fields from the ONBEN and/or ON479 do not get transmitted properly on efile. Apparently it was a known issue too, but just not known publicly until this afternoon when Dink Meeker pushed for an expected fix date. I am deliberately holding returns with 479 credits because I can't determine whether they will transmit accurately. Tim Parris has encountered 'known issues' with the calculation/refund of CPP on Quebec returns and started a topic on it...... only to be received with that ever familiar silence.
Once Intuit becomes aware of 'issues' that may affect the accuracy of their software the considerate approach would be to either email their Profile customers (like the marketing emails we get at renewal time) or have a topic made available to the Profile Community outlining the issues and their potential impact, rather than keeping them quiet and hoping that not too many people notice them prior to a subsequent release.
I realize that tax regulation is complex and in a constant state of flux. There are bound to be some glitches and bugs along the way, but it isn't fair to keep this information from customers who have purchased and rely on the software to perform accurately.
If there is a link that I haven't discovered in the last 10 years that I can merely click on to reveal all of these known issues then I apologize. However, when I click on "online-->update information-->known issues" in the software the list certainly does not include these serious problems.
#4
Sasha1
- Senior Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 119
- Joined: 09-January 07
Posted 03 March 2011 - 01:37 AM
Pretty much exactly what I said to the tech I talked to. His answer was that they only update the known issues at the time a new release is issued and they can't just post all known issues. It comes off as though the company I paid to purchase their software is deliberately hiding information from me. I do not understand why. If they think that keeping their posted "known issues" to a minimum makes the software look better, they are sadly mistaken. I asked the tech to make a note of my complaint but sensed very little interest.
The "fix", by the way is the good old F2
The "fix", by the way is the good old F2
#6
Dink Meeker
- Senior Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 420
- Joined: 30-November 99
Posted 03 March 2011 - 02:21 PM
My thinking exactly.....
Perhaps a list of items that are working properly would be shorter and easier to maintain! :angry:
Perhaps a list of items that are working properly would be shorter and easier to maintain! :angry:
#7
Tim Parris
- Top Contributor
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 1,534
- Joined: 02-December 06
- Gender:Male
- Location:Ottawa, ON
Posted 03 March 2011 - 03:21 PM
One problem that software companies have with publishing known issues is that the competition then may take that list of known issues and use it in an advertising scheme to discredit the product. That is why you are unlikely to find any list for any software product.
I will also comment that complaining publicly on a bulletin board about unanticipated negative enhancements (aka bugs) has also been used in competitor's advertising schemes in the past. Specifically, CCH did offer a peer level discussion board for the use of their tax product ATX and the associated Working Papers product, but due to competitors accessing the board and using the comments within their advertising, CCH was obligated to pull the board 2 weeks before the close of the tax season. If people complain that I am violating rule 7, I will point out that I have not provided links nor is ATX a competing product to any provided by Intuit Canada - it addresses a unique area of tax law not commonly addressed. I view it as a complement to the Inuit products I use.
Perhaps it would be useful to start a topic on ways that Intuit can inform users of known bugs? This should not be addressed within this topic since it only deals with the GST370.
I will also comment that complaining publicly on a bulletin board about unanticipated negative enhancements (aka bugs) has also been used in competitor's advertising schemes in the past. Specifically, CCH did offer a peer level discussion board for the use of their tax product ATX and the associated Working Papers product, but due to competitors accessing the board and using the comments within their advertising, CCH was obligated to pull the board 2 weeks before the close of the tax season. If people complain that I am violating rule 7, I will point out that I have not provided links nor is ATX a competing product to any provided by Intuit Canada - it addresses a unique area of tax law not commonly addressed. I view it as a complement to the Inuit products I use.
Perhaps it would be useful to start a topic on ways that Intuit can inform users of known bugs? This should not be addressed within this topic since it only deals with the GST370.
#8 Guest_snowplowguy_*
Posted 03 March 2011 - 03:50 PM
In my original reply, my first suggestion was to email its paying customers, as they do with the renewal emails, or when a new version is available. What about a weekly newsletter type of email?
As a minimum level of courtesy, paying customers deserve to be made aware of existing errors (known issues) and bugs that would cause returns to be submitted incorrectly. It doesn't necessarily have to be made public, but this information needs to be relayed to people who rely on the software in order to make their living.
Whether the competition has any chance of discovering software errors should not have any bearing on whether or not this information should be kept secret from their customer. I'm sure the competition has enough of its own issues to be concerned with.
As a minimum level of courtesy, paying customers deserve to be made aware of existing errors (known issues) and bugs that would cause returns to be submitted incorrectly. It doesn't necessarily have to be made public, but this information needs to be relayed to people who rely on the software in order to make their living.
Whether the competition has any chance of discovering software errors should not have any bearing on whether or not this information should be kept secret from their customer. I'm sure the competition has enough of its own issues to be concerned with.
#9
Dink Meeker
- Senior Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 420
- Joined: 30-November 99
Posted 03 March 2011 - 06:05 PM
Agreed!
And are they not creating their own negative advertising campaign by withholding this information. The software becomes anti-productive (filing amendments and adjustments that didn't need to be filed), Unprofitable (my clients will not care who is at fault, they will just start looking for a new preparer)and Unreliable (I can assure every issue we have weighs in my decision come renewal time)
So this route may be a 50/50 proposition for Profile, it's definitely a no-win solution as the preparer.
And are they not creating their own negative advertising campaign by withholding this information. The software becomes anti-productive (filing amendments and adjustments that didn't need to be filed), Unprofitable (my clients will not care who is at fault, they will just start looking for a new preparer)and Unreliable (I can assure every issue we have weighs in my decision come renewal time)
So this route may be a 50/50 proposition for Profile, it's definitely a no-win solution as the preparer.
#10
Sasha1
- Senior Member
-
- Group: Members
- Posts: 119
- Joined: 09-January 07
Posted 03 March 2011 - 07:35 PM
Dink Meeker, on 03 March 2011 - 10:05 AM, said:
Agreed!
And are they not creating their own negative advertising campaign by withholding this information. The software becomes anti-productive (filing amendments and adjustments that didn't need to be filed), Unprofitable (my clients will not care who is at fault, they will just start looking for a new preparer)and Unreliable (I can assure every issue we have weighs in my decision come renewal time)
So this route may be a 50/50 proposition for Profile, it's definitely a no-win solution as the preparer.
And are they not creating their own negative advertising campaign by withholding this information. The software becomes anti-productive (filing amendments and adjustments that didn't need to be filed), Unprofitable (my clients will not care who is at fault, they will just start looking for a new preparer)and Unreliable (I can assure every issue we have weighs in my decision come renewal time)
So this route may be a 50/50 proposition for Profile, it's definitely a no-win solution as the preparer.
Not to mention a great big waste of time.
1) See a number that looks like it doesn't belong
2) Spend the time to follow where it's coming from
3) Convince yourself it is not a data entry error of some sort
4) Phone support and jump through all the hoops only to find out they already knew about it
5) Shake your head
6) Walk through the office and tell all preparers and reviewers to watch for this
7) Watch them shake their heads.
Time well spent.
#11
Peter@Intuit
- Junior Member
-
- Group: Intuit Staff
- Posts: 69
- Joined: 30-January 07
- Gender:Male
- Location:Calgary
Posted 03 March 2011 - 10:27 PM
Hi all,
I just wanted to comment on this thread. When we receive an escalation from our Customer Support Team, we review it to ensure that it is a program issue, assess which release we can correct it, and determine severity of the impact to our clients to determine if we need to release a patch and/or Known Issue.
There will be instances of bugs that are determined to be relatively minor, which we may not necessarily post a Known Issue on.
Regarding the forms raised in this thread, the ON-BEN issue (discussed in another thread) was discovered late Friday, and a Known Issue is slated to be posted (I believe it was to be posted today, and the issue was also corrected in the 2010.4 release). Regarding the GST370, frankly, I would say that is something we dropped the ball on by not having that posted, and for that, I do sincerely apologize. This has been corrected in 2010.4 as well.
I have passed along your comments/concerns to those that make some of the communication decisions.
Peter
I just wanted to comment on this thread. When we receive an escalation from our Customer Support Team, we review it to ensure that it is a program issue, assess which release we can correct it, and determine severity of the impact to our clients to determine if we need to release a patch and/or Known Issue.
There will be instances of bugs that are determined to be relatively minor, which we may not necessarily post a Known Issue on.
Regarding the forms raised in this thread, the ON-BEN issue (discussed in another thread) was discovered late Friday, and a Known Issue is slated to be posted (I believe it was to be posted today, and the issue was also corrected in the 2010.4 release). Regarding the GST370, frankly, I would say that is something we dropped the ball on by not having that posted, and for that, I do sincerely apologize. This has been corrected in 2010.4 as well.
I have passed along your comments/concerns to those that make some of the communication decisions.
Peter
Page 1 of 1