UltraTax CS Buyer's Remorse

Hi Everyone. The title says it all. I recently switched over to UltraTax and I'm regretting my purchase. I have not yet converted my data over. I was previously using Drake and it worked fine, but I would like something a bit more robust. After my research I settled on UT. I love the split windows and being able to see calculation updates on one screen while working in another. I also like the level of diagnostics. So why do I have buyer's remorse? Lack of support. They have no training available, except for incomplete PDF walkthrough's that don't actually walkthrough the entire process. With Drake, there were live demos and training and I figured that was just standard with all software companies. They are not helpful in providing guidelines on using a separate esignature solution or uploading signed documents not via their portal. I have created practice returns from last season with no issues, but the lack of customer support and confusion on basic inquires concerns me. I have another week to return this software (I will lose out on $300 which is fine). Before I do, is there anything better?

Has anyone moved away from UT or move to UT from another provider? Did you regret the move?

I hated UT from the day I first used it back in the late 2000s (the firm I worked for had used UT most of its existence). Since it is what I knew, I carried on with it under my own companies but hated it the entire time. I switched to LaCerte for the 2019 tax year and while it is not perfect, it is a heck of a lot better, IMO, and the calculation engine is immensely faster than UT. It is a little pricier than UT but I think it is worth it, especially if you utilize SmartVault and DocuSign integrations, or even Intuit Link. While I have mentioned I distrust Intuit because of how they function, I hold the same opinion for most software companies, including TR. One plus to UT is some of their interfaces make more sense, whereas in LaCerte you sometimes have to look around a fit bit to find the correct entry screen--you think you have it, only to realize when looking at the return that it is not the correct input. K1 distributions are a good example, there are multiple areas it can be entered but only ONE field on ONE screen flows through to K1--the others hit Schedules L and M2, for example.

LaCerte and ProSeries have a fair number of videos to help guide you through workflows and I found them very helpful in learning new software. They also did a workflow process demonstration with me, including a few more in-depth demos of certain functions, and it went smoothly. Nearly all tax returns converted properly, typically only requiring minor tweaks to match prior information as filed using UT.

My former employer switched to Ultra Tax in late 2019, so I only got to use it for one season. He always asked my opinion on software but never discussed cost except in general terms. He did say that training was available, but at a price he was not prepared to pay. There were two preparers (him and me) and two admin who would have used it.

I thought Ultra Tax to be quite robust but we had issues with Gruntworx integration - lots of duplication. That may (or may not) have been resolved by training before going live.

What is it about Drake that is not robust enough for you?

I hated UT from the day I first used it back in the late 2000s (the firm I worked for had used UT most of its existence). Since it is what I knew, I carried on with it under my own companies but hated it the entire time. I switched to LaCerte for the 2019 tax year and while it is not perfect, it is a heck of a lot better, IMO, and the calculation engine is immensely faster than UT. It is a little pricier than UT but I think it is worth it, especially if you utilize SmartVault and DocuSign integrations, or even Intuit Link. While I have mentioned I distrust Intuit because of how they function, I hold the same opinion for most software companies, including TR. One plus to UT is some of their interfaces make more sense, whereas in LaCerte you sometimes have to look around a fit bit to find the correct entry screen--you think you have it, only to realize when looking at the return that it is not the correct input. K1 distributions are a good example, there are multiple areas it can be entered but only ONE field on ONE screen flows through to K1--the others hit Schedules L and M2, for example.

LaCerte and ProSeries have a fair number of videos to help guide you through workflows and I found them very helpful in learning new software. They also did a workflow process demonstration with me, including a few more in-depth demos of certain functions, and it went smoothly. Nearly all tax returns converted properly, typically only requiring minor tweaks to match prior information as filed using UT.

Thank you for your feedback. I received a pretty good quote for Lacerte Choice (higher than UT, but for more returns, so in essence the price wasn't awful). My issue was with the demo software. It was very buggy and after explaining this to the salesman, he admitted others complained about the same issues and to just go ahead purchase the non-demo software which "should" be fine. I was skeptical after that, especially for the price. I too, am not a fan of Intuit.

My former employer switched to Ultra Tax in late 2019, so I only got to use it for one season. He always asked my opinion on software but never discussed cost except in general terms. He did say that training was available, but at a price he was not prepared to pay. There were two preparers (him and me) and two admin who would have used it.

I thought Ultra Tax to be quite robust but we had issues with Gruntworx integration - lots of duplication. That may (or may not) have been resolved by training before going live.

What is it about Drake that is not robust enough for you?

Hmmm. UT didn't even give me the option of training. Maybe they only offer that to larger firms. As for Drake, not being able to see calculations real-time bothers me. Market DIY software has this. The input screens are not that intuitive (even though I'm now used to it) and so much is crammed on each input screen that I feel it takes longer to complete a return, as I need to make sure I didn't miss anything. I noticed this past tax season, that my return statuses did not update. I had to log into online support to see that all were accepted, yet they still, to this day, show as pending in the software. These are not complete deal breakers, however, in addition to being a sole practitioner, I'm also in a leadership role at a large company, so time and efficiency is valuable to me. I do like Drake's support and that I can easily query their site; I just wish it were more robust.

I used UT back at a prior firm 10yrs ago and REALLY enjoyed it. Then, I switched to a firm using CCH ProSystem, which I loathed deeply.

My new firm uses Lacerte and I'm relatively pleased with it so far. As mentioned, the Intuit resources are pretty solid for training and videos for just about anything you need.

We'll be reevaluating our prep software next summer since we went with Onvio for proj mgmt/doc mgmt/time&billing and didn't want to train on too many pieces of software at one time. There's some inherent advantages to moving to UT, but we'll see whether that makes sense.

My issue was with the demo software. It was very buggy and after explaining this to the salesman, he admitted others complained about the same issues and to just go ahead purchase the non-demo software which "should" be fine.

It occasionally throws a random error and needs to shut down, but not nearly as often as UT did. UT was horribly unreliable in my usage of it, and I was also always facing some sort of accessibility problem. You may have seen a recent post about how I cannot access UT16 and I really do not feel like reinstalling it, but I plan on using LaCerte for any "back" returns I need to prepare.

Generally, when LaCerte throws an error, it is when I switch from input to form screen. It is then resolved by shutting down the software and reopening it, which is a pretty quick process. Nothing has required me to engage tech support and this is after 2 years now of working with it.

I used UT from 2002 to 2019. There are lots of things I disliked about it, but overall it was good. The biggest problem is it’s future, which is why I switched to CCH Axcess. I have buyers remorse there, and it has given me some appreciation for what I had with UT. But I still think UT lacks any viable software solution for the future.

Support was nonexistent with UT. They prefer training which was okay, but very expensive and not worth the return.

I like CCHs online support, their videos, and their training was good. Still not sure about their live support.

UT's support USED to be great. Now it absolutely sucks. I remember calling them quite a bit for various issues and always had U.S. based support that quickly addressed issues, but that also quickly went away. One time we had an issue where UT had corrupted all client data files for a particular year--believe it or not, they managed to get us up and running again without ever touching a backup, because they knew what to do with various files utilized by the software. Now, I wouldn't trust them to recognize whether I do or do not have UT installed!

i've used UT, CCH ProFx, Lacerte, and trialed Drake. I used ProFx for so long that my fingers twitch in my sleep for the keyboard commands. What i've learned is: they all suck. They're all terrible programs, each in their own special way.

I'm using UT now because i'm also using Practice CS for time and billing and due dates. UT and Practice integrate in a way that i find helpful. If it wasn't for that I don't think i would use either one. Or, rather, it takes away my desire to use either one.

FWIW i didn't like CCH support any more than UT support or Lacerte support or Drake support.

i've used UT, CCH ProFx, Lacerte, and trialed Drake. I used ProFx for so long that my fingers twitch in my sleep for the keyboard commands. What i've learned is: they all suck. They're all terrible programs, each in their own special way.

I'm using UT now because i'm also using Practice CS for time and billing and due dates. UT and Practice integrate in a way that i find helpful. If it wasn't for that I don't think i would use either one. Or, rather, it takes away my desire to use either one.

FWIW i didn't like CCH support any more than UT support or Lacerte support or Drake support.

There really is no perfect software. From your experience, which would you use if not packaged with another product? I may decide to stick with UT for this upcoming season in order to give it a fair assessment and have Drake PPR as backup in case something happens.

I moved from Drake to UT for the 2015 season. I used Drake at a previous firm and CCH Prosystems at the beginning of my career. I agree with fish: all the tax programs suck, and they all have their own quirks. For me, UT fit my needs and fixed some of the limitations I was having with Drake. Your situation could easily be different.

The big question I would ask in your position is "What is the right software solution for my firm in 3-5 years" and making my decision based on that. If there's short term pain toward the long term plan, then just suck it up and move forward. If UT isn't the software for your firm moving forward, then you definitely want to cut ties as soon as possible.

I've generally avoided UT support for the reasons stated above. For my testing of UT, and ultimately my transition to the software, I keypunched every prior year return. Granted, I didn't have as many returns back then, but it was extremely helpful in figuring out the program and determining whether it was the right move for my firm. Have you run your actual returns in the program yet?

But I still think UT lacks any viable software solution for the future.

For better or worse, they are building their new software platform in Onvio.

The big question I would ask in your position is "What is the right software solution for my firm in 3-5 years" and making my decision based on that.

I've generally avoided UT support for the reasons stated above. For my testing of UT,

But I still think UT lacks any viable software solution for the future.

For better or worse, they are building their new software platform in Onvio.

This is what led me to move on. Where do I need to be in 5 years? I tested Onvio. It’s years from being ready. By the time it is it will be light years behind any other cloud package. TR has proven they can buy software, but they can’t develop it.

I had two other problems with UT:

Account manager/sales rep turnover. I had 4 different people the last 6 years. They never wanted to talk about our needs or ideas. They just wanted to sell me more bloviated software.

During the Covid year we had some serious stability issues. For example, state withholding would disappear and reappear. They refused to acknowledge it was anything more than an isolated issue. I had talked to 3 other firms in two states with identical concerns that had reported it as well.

I've used UT for about 17 years. I switched to Lacerte for one tax season and my two CPAs and I absolutely hated it. I spent more time over-riding forms and on support than I was doing work. Well, ok maybe a bit of an exaggeration but the software was not good.

Join this FB UT users group. We have a lot of very helpful people. https://www.facebook.com/groups/757176094367835

Or this one: https://easyarne.forumotion.com/

The UT support is actually decent but from what I hear, it won't compare to Drake support. Then again I have always wondered why Drake users needed so much support.

UT is great software. Stick with it.

i've used UT, CCH ProFx, Lacerte, and trialed Drake. I used ProFx for so long that my fingers twitch in my sleep for the keyboard commands. What i've learned is: they all suck. They're all terrible programs, each in their own special way.

I'm using UT now because i'm also using Practice CS for time and billing and due dates. UT and Practice integrate in a way that i find helpful. If it wasn't for that I don't think i would use either one. Or, rather, it takes away my desire to use either one.

FWIW i didn't like CCH support any more than UT support or Lacerte support or Drake support.

There really is no perfect software. From your experience, which would you use if not packaged with another product? I may decide to stick with UT for this upcoming season in order to give it a fair assessment and have Drake PPR as backup in case something happens.

If not packaged with another product, i would probably stay with ProFx. Except i find it to be expensive, and i hate the way they nickel and dime me, and i hate the way they bill and how they set up their bill payment, and everything you want is another module that needs to be purchased (want to do a data scan? that's another module. Want to do a projection for next year? that's another module). Finally, i really dislike that it seems like it is still programmed in DOS and hasn't been updated since 1992. Looks and feels exactly the same as when i started. I dislike that there isn't a uniform way that they have input fields and pages across entity types, and that each year as things change CCH seems to just shoehorn in a new input field wherever they can find room on the input page so the fields aren't necessarily grouped together. The QBI input seems to be scattered across the program as some programmer decided he needed a new input field. And, OMG... they STILL use paper input pages!!! someone scanned in the paper input pages from the old days of data processing and said... looks good, let's just go with that.

I would stay with Profx because it is reasonably fast; i can open multiple tax returns at the same time (i can open the corporate return and the individual return at the same time - UT doesn't let me open more than two returns at the same time); and when i put the return up on a screen in front of a client it "looks" like what it does when printed out on paper.

For as much money as i spend on tax software i think the product should be much better.

I've used UT for about 17 years. I switched to Lacerte for one tax season and my two CPAs and I absolutely hated it. I spent more time over-riding forms and on support than I was doing work. Well, ok maybe a bit of an exaggeration but the software was not good.

Join this FB UT users group. We have a lot of very helpful people. https://www.facebook.com/groups/757176094367835

Or this one: https://easyarne.forumotion.com/

The UT support is actually decent but from what I hear, it won't compare to Drake support. Then again I have always wondered why Drake users needed so much support.

UT is great software. Stick with it.

Thank you! I will definitely join the FB group

For as much money as i spend on tax software i think the product should be much better.

Completely agree. It's funny because my corporation spent over $1M on ERP implementation and over $100k each year on the software & support just to have numerous outside workarounds and 3rd party add-ons.

btw. I just love the wealth of knowledge and guidance on this forum.

I think the lesson in all of this is:

The best software is the one you have, even if it isn’t.

Converting software is the worst thing one can possibly do, but sometimes it’s a must.

I loved Lacerte, but that was in the Dos world. And I didn’t trust Intuit enough to switch.

I really learned to like UT. But I lost faith in its future and was given a good opportunity with Axcess. Did I mention I hate conversions?

Has UT improved its calculation engine? I recall waiting 10-15 minutes to preview a large multi-state return from input screen. That is asinine. LaCerte, for the same return, is perhaps around 60-90 seconds.

No the calculation engine has not improved. It is probably slower now.
It has taken over an hour to print to pdf and create the efiles for large multistate returns. Support claims to know nothing about this.