any reason to use standalone fixed asset software?

Software. Marketing. Training. Running your business.
#1
Posts:
886
Joined:
26-Feb-2016 10:14pm
Location:
Oakland CA
Pp until 2018 fixed asset apps created much better reports and had useful features not in the built in deprec modules of Profx, Ultratax, and Go System.

for clients with a lot of assets that need book deprec, i can see still using standalone fixed asset apps.

And Ultratax stand alone fa app does integrate tightly with Ultax so that might be an outlier. Only sends total to Go System, which is kinda useless say when you have Sect 179 dispositions for S corp.

With all the aggregations, elections, Fed to State differences, State to State differences, seems like a standalone fixed asset app creates more work and errors than it helps because most fixed asset don't fully synchonize with tax prep apps.
 

#2
Posts:
821
Joined:
22-Apr-2014 12:02am
Location:
Lower 48
I do and use ProSeries Fixed Asset Manager. The only reason is that it imports the assets into ProSeries business returns and thereby prepares all of the necessary depreciation entries on the 4562, such as Section 179 property and listed property, and state return.
 

#3
Posts:
2468
Joined:
24-Apr-2014 7:54am
Location:
Wisconsin
When the fixed asset software tightly integrates with software (i.e. part of an integrated suite like UT has) it's fine.

If the fixed asset software doesn't tightly integrate, to me it's almost pointless. It would be like preparing a 1040 where you have to type in each W-2, but then have to enter the total wages and withholding lines on the tax return manually. You're doing the work twice and just opening up an opportunity to make an error.

Then again, the "big" firm in my area uses Thomson Reuters' fixed assets program and Prosystems Tax, and they should know better than I what the best setup is.
 

#4
Posts:
6043
Joined:
22-Apr-2014 3:06pm
Location:
WA State
missingdonut wrote:Then again, the "big" firm in my area uses Thomson Reuters' fixed assets program and Prosystems Tax, and they should know better than I what the best setup is.


I resemble this remark.
The firm I previously worked at used UT and the integration is really nice. Maximizing 179 expense effectiveness was really easy.
That said, once you get used to how FA and Pfx interact, it isn't as awkward as you might think.
We use the ProSystem depreciation module for simple rental properties, though.
~Captcook
 

#5
wel  
Posts:
116
Joined:
3-Sep-2016 4:29am
Location:
USA
Like most things in tax - it depends. (In this case, it depends upon your needs.) Most, if not all, widely used tax software has a depreciation module that usually does a decent job of calculating tax, AMT, etc. depreciation needed for tax filings. However, these depreciation modules typically aren't sufficient for the needs of larger enterprises. Enterprises that need to calculate depreciation on GAAP basis, have reporting needs for multiple locations, departments, etc. in multiple states, etc. Also, some jurisdications may require personal property tax filings that require reporting capabilities beyond what most income tax software can do.
(Agree that it is really nice when a good depreciation system integrates well with the tax software, like UT and FA CS.)
 

#6
makbo  
Posts:
6840
Joined:
23-Apr-2014 3:44pm
Location:
In The Counting House
With UT in particular, you can still do quite a bit, if not everything needed, for the current year in the asset input tab for each activity. (It seems necessary, since FA module is so tightly integrated -- how could FA perform a calc that UT itself couldn't handle?) The restriction I find if you don't pay for FA module is in the reports you can print. However, I find that once I get all the columns I want displayed on the input screen, a little SnagIt goes a long way.
 

#7
Posts:
2468
Joined:
24-Apr-2014 7:54am
Location:
Wisconsin
CaptCook wrote:
missingdonut wrote:Then again, the "big" firm in my area uses Thomson Reuters' fixed assets program and Prosystems Tax, and they should know better than I what the best setup is.


I resemble this remark.
The firm I previously worked at used UT and the integration is really nice. Maximizing 179 expense effectiveness was really easy.
That said, once you get used to how FA and Pfx interact, it isn't as awkward as you might think.
We use the ProSystem depreciation module for simple rental properties, though.


That makes some sense that in the two system setup, that you'd only use FA for the complex situations and ProSystem's depreciation module for the rest. In the more complex situations, if the software integrates reasonably well then it would be fine.
 

#8
Posts:
886
Joined:
26-Feb-2016 10:14pm
Location:
Oakland CA
3 tax seasons ago when I was still using ProFx for most returns, I signed up for their FA app for one season and converted TR FA data. Much to my unpleasannt surprise CA AMT neither imported nor would auto calculate when you add new assets. Maybe they fixed that later, but that was first of a ProFx killer for me.

Yes TR FA is really nice. Tried ProWare and it's no where as useful or easy.

But alas, doesn't integrate with Go System which I use now. It "exports" Fed numbers but no state numbers. Oneway and no CA which is nil Fed conformity.
 

#9
Posts:
821
Joined:
22-Apr-2014 12:02am
Location:
Lower 48
One other reason I like stand-alone software is that I can easily set up book depreciation in addition to tax depreciation. That may be easy with integrated software but, with having the stand-alone software, I haven't found the need to figure out how to do so.
 

#10
Posts:
886
Joined:
26-Feb-2016 10:14pm
Location:
Oakland CA
And reporting from stand alone deprec apps was always much better than what the tax return software produced, at least it was for ProFx and UT.
 

#11
makbo  
Posts:
6840
Joined:
23-Apr-2014 3:44pm
Location:
In The Counting House
Taxalmancer wrote:One other reason I like stand-alone software is that I can easily set up book depreciation in addition to tax depreciation. That may be easy with integrated software but, with having the stand-alone software, I haven't found the need to figure out how to do so.

With UltraTax only, no separate software, it is easy to show both book and tax and several other reporting bases for assets. Again, I don't believe there is any current year calculation that UT Fixed Assets can do that the basic software can't also do.
 

#12
eze  
Posts:
311
Joined:
8-May-2014 7:02pm
Location:
Grey Area, California
The last thing I need is another vendor or app in my life....I've limped along with whatever the tax sofware provides, and supplemented the workpapers with an old fashioned rollforward to help make better sense of the reports and tie balances to financial statements.
 

#13
wel  
Posts:
116
Joined:
3-Sep-2016 4:29am
Location:
USA
makbo wrote:I don't believe there is any current year calculation that UT Fixed Assets can do that the basic software can't also do.


I agree about the calculations. Any modern tax software package shouldn't have any trouble with CY depreciation calculations, but the depreciation reporting capabilities from tax software tends to be pretty limited. If you only need to worry about depreciation for use on an income tax return, the tax software should do just fine. If you need more, you may need to explore something more robust than what comes with the tax software (UT Fixed Assets, Sage Fixed Assets, etc.)
 


Return to Business Operations and Development



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 31 guests