VT tax computation - feedback required

I must admit that, as I need a tax package to do my tax returns, and my tax package does the tax comp, I have never had any reason to try the VT tax comp. It would just take up extra time with no benefit.

when is the llp module coming

As a user of a third party CT package, I've not had cause to use the VT tax comp.

I must say, however, that I'm much looking forward to the full CT600 package with e-filing. Is there a timetable yet for that?

I also use a third party CT package. I did have a look out of curiosity at VT tax comp and it did look a bit messy, so didn't look any further.

I too look forward to the full CT600 package and hopefully costs will be in line with other VT prices?

I have used the Vt tax comp, and so far it is fine, but you have prompted me to ask a question, which has been lying in my pending file !

" where do I show losses brought forward on the tax comp "

Thank

you,

so I haven't looked at the VT tax comp. Would be interested, however, when it is the full monty.

Once the CT module is out of the way, is there any chance of being able to import dates at any time in the future?

I haven't used the tax computation either as I use the computation in my CT package. I don't think this will change until VT provide the full CT return.

I am the same - I have looked at it but as I use another tax package for CT return filing I don't need to use it.

I would certainly like to see the CT600 package introduced.

As others have said I haven't looked at the CT comp as I use a third party product (BTC). It is very simple and reasonably priced. I can't see me changing from it even if it's included in VT for Free.

I would be much more interested in E-filing of accounts with Companies House. I note that the VT roadmap says Sep 2012. Do we really have to wait a year for that?

VT tax comp usually works fine, except that I had a problem with losses carried back and reclaiming a refund.Had to contact HMRC who said that they did not recognise figures in brackets. Did I miss something on the tax comp ?

I have been using my own two page computation for CT and DT that automatically fed back into the VT trial balance and hence the accounts.

I have now started using the VT TC and it does similar but over four pages.

The losses brought forward would be a useful feature and I recently had to add my own IBA computations.  Deferred tax would also be useful so that the tax charge can be calculated for each jurnal as it is entered on the trial balance.

I also find the VT tax comp a very useful feature,  even though I don't use it for final filing as its included in our overall tax package, (Drummohr).  Its useful as it provides a tax figure "as you go",  which I then link into the TB as mentioned above by Chas01.  This means that final adjustments like late accruals or stock adjustments automatically adjust the tax provision and creditor in the accounts.  Its also a useful check on the tax comp I produce on Drummohr,  in which one might forget details etc. as its produced "after the event".  

One question, Mr. Hodgson,  - why isn't a directors' loan account heading on the TB a standard line?  Its one of the few items that occur on just about every limited company.

We started using VT earlier this year as our method of dealing with ixbrl filing, and have been very impressed and satisfied with the product,  - wish we'd have taken it up earlier!   I'd also like to thank Mr Hodgson for using AW as a method of providing ongoing support and feedback. 

Richard Joseph

Like most users I haven't used it in anger as I had already bought FTax for companies and use HMRC filing tool for individuals, but I think it looks ok and the concept of having an all in one solution makes a lot of sense. I would imagine the market will move this way if HMRC continues to insist on companies filing their accounts with IXBRL.

.. however I also now use VT corp tax comp. It only takes a few minutes to use the VT tax comp and I now use it for 2 reasons:

1) Draft corp tax figures, that I get my assistant to include on the pre review accounts. This enables me to get her used to/trained up on simple corporation tax computations without buying an addition user licence on my tax software.

2) For me it acts as a check computation as the figures would need to agree with my tax software. I am going to sound very unprofessional, although I know it happens elsewhere, but you have a meeting with the client and then you amend the accounts, with telephone calls, etc you forget to completely update your tax software. By having VT tax computation automatically linked into the change of profit, then it will (99% of time) act as a reminder to change the tax software.

I understand why VT has added the tax computation template, as this would help practices and individual company's to use HMRC's  online filing portal, however most in my experience, most small practices also use a tax package and my view is that time could have been spent by VT in developing another accounts template instead. The one template that springs to my mind (although I do not require it) is Charities.

I have used VT tax comp for a couple of simple tax comps (I don't do many CT comps) and was happy with it. It gave me a very easy way to produce the iXBRL file for submission.

I would be very keen to see e-filing of VAT returns available within VT.

I think it is great - especially when i need to knock out quick estimates of tax on the go, and also to produce "Non-Standard" tax comps for quirky clients.

I currently use Tax Calc for CT600's so all the "standard" tax comps get produced through it - but I am eagerly awaiting VT's CT package.

I am also delighted that the LLP template is finally available :-)

I like theacca would like to see e-filing of accounts with companies house - and ideally ,I would like to see it sooner than Sept 2012. And like David613 - would like to see e-filing of VAT returns in VTT+

Got to agree with thacca, I think you are missing an opportunity with e filing of abbreviated accounts, not many standalone packages doing this and you could charge for an add on

re tax , agree with others, most people have stand alone tax packages and changing is a bit of a pain and there never seems an opportune moment to move away

keep up the good work

timewaitsfornoman

I have very recently purchased VT for the iXBRL filing feature.

I can give you some feedback as follows:

1. As mentioned above E-filing at Companies House of the abbreviated accounts is an important feature, which every user WOULD use.

2. The tax comp is useful, but I would say not used by the majority. Don't use it myself.

3. VT is primarily an accounts production package, so surely accounts related features should get priority, eg e-filing.

4. It would be useful if the large company template could be used for companies which didn't require an audit or maybe have another company template with some additional disclosures, which falls between the small company and large company template - a medium company template.

5. Alternative speak, provisions (eg warranties, repairs) should be included in the small company template. This is a common adjustment for many small companies. I know you can amend the templates etc, but it is a little fiddly to amend the provisions note, and it all takes time.

6. I don't use VTT+. What I would like to see is a separate interface for inputting journals for the accounts. Not a full blown book-keeping package like VTT+, but a very user-friendly interface for typing in your journals which links into your main VT file TB.

You would have buttons across the top, which would give you a formatted TB, a nominal ledger, and a journal listing. Also a draft P&L and balance sheet. It would also link into VT at the touch as a button, so you could make your final disclosure adjustments etc. 

On the plus side:

The importing of the figures from csv file works very well. Good feature and is why I purchased the software.You have 2 colours, one for P&L, one for B/S. Why not different colours for fixed assets, current assets etc.

I agree.

I always use the VT Final accounts with VT Transaction even if I'm just posting journals. I  came from software that was database based (Iris and before that Sage) So I'm more comfortable in that environment rather than a spreadsheet. However, getting to my point, most of what you request in option 6 is already in there. I think you haven't found the buttons yet! Unless I haven't found it I dont think there is a draft P&L and Balance Sheet which is why I use VT Transaction.

I have never even considered using VT transaction to post journals etc .... for me the essence of VT accounts is the extended trial balance type input of the TB where you can see everything on one page in front of you. I also don't understand the draft P&L / BS comment theACCA ... surely both are sitting there in final accounts waiting for you too click on their tab any time you wish to?

 Usually, I want to make sure the accounts are final before firing up my tax software so it's useful to have something so that I can keep a running check on the tax provision while working on the accounts.

I would be more likely to use it to produce the real CT600 if VT beats my tax software to get online filing to Companies House fully up and running.

I'm 32. In my first Job (1998) I used Auditman, In subsequent jobs I used Iris and Sage. I have never worked from an ETB. That probably answers why I'm more comfortable in VTT+. For me the benefits of VT have nothing to do with the ETB or being excel based. For me its that accounts prep in VTT+ is so much quicker than producing schedules in Excel and posting totals to a Final Accounts Programme. I love features like being able to easily edit, reallocate and reverse transactions.

I  do all my accounts prep in VTT+ and spend about ten mins at the end of an assignment putting accounts in statutory format. I will quite often use the P&L and Balance Sheet from VTT+ to discuss the accounts with the client. IMHO they will have a better chance of understanding two pages than the full statutory accounts.

Steve, by the way my username isn't theACCA. TH is my initials and the ACCA needs updating to FCCA

So far it has done the job very well for the clients I have used it on.

Again, it would be useful to have a funciton to directly file the CT return with Companies House.

Thanks for your response Philip

I would use the VT Corporation tax facility and welcome its development. 

The one major thing that I think is missing from VTT+ is a bank statement import facility though and for me, and the clients that use VT cashbook, that would be number one on the priority list. 

For me it is a much higher priority than adding CT software. Currently it stops me using VTT+, and stops me recommending it to clients.

You've gone to the trouble of developing an ixbrl tax comp for those who wan't to use HMRC software and not invest in tax software. I can see how that fulfils the needs of those that want to use the HMRC software because they do not have enough returns to do to justify paying for sofware. For the next level there is already reasonably price software that does the job.

I pick sofware based both on time saving and cost. I am quite happy to pay more for something that is more efficient. I currently use BTC which is very quick. I struggle to see how you're going to improve on it, in terms of speed, by a noticable amount.

In my opinion VT is the best bookkeeping software and accounts production software around. I'm worried that the time and effort being devoted to Corporation Tax will be to the detriment of the accounts and particularly VTT+ which could do with a few improvements (bank/transaction imports, VAT filing and multiuser) to keep it apace with the cloud bookkeeping packages which are getting better and better.

Just my observations. In no way trying to upset of argue with anyone who may disagree.

I agree. I have just moved a client to a cloud programme.  I would have preferred to keep them on VTT+, which is in a league of it's own but for the import problem.

With just a small handful of CT returns, being able to generates the iXBRL tax comp and attach onto HMRC software is a boon.

I can see that the cloud has packages which would benefit certain types of client, but there are downsides, especially for those who don't have a need for what it can offer. But for balance, I've just moved a client onto VTT+, for their financial year which started last week. Its a reasonably substantial company which trades internationally, and so far they haven't needed any hand-holding at all, which to me says it all.

With the above comment in mind, my preference would be for development of the CT600 before anything further on VTT+, which seems to me and my clients to be just fine as it is.

Philip, you asked for further comments on the CT600. One area which my present (highly reputed) software provider has got wrong, is on the Charity and Community supplementary pages. The validation process was wrong within the software, and it took them two days (not remotely complaining - it's just a fact) to evolve and test a workaround. It may be that the HMRC validation is confusing in relation to boxes E1, E2 and E3 on the third page of that supplement. I think they were going to use my error report in their discussions with HMRC. Just flagging it up.

I have the same suggestion : It would be good to have Loss Brought Forward and Loss Carried Forward after the amount utilised.

No-one is going to stop using (or not buy) VT because the CT module is not ready, but there are people who will not use it because it cannot import dates.

I am fairly ambivalent to what bookkeeping software my clients use and I am quite content with VTT+ for my own purposes. I do, however, pay quite large fees to PTP for a unlimited CT licence and therefore I am very turned on by the thought of a VT alternative. I don't understand why it is free but that is Philip's concern not mine!

I would also love them to get the Companies House xbl filing as soon as possible as there really is no viable standalone alternative out there .... I tried one this year but it is painful so have reverted to paper. 

I sometimes wonder what VT see themselves as. I have always viewed it as an accounts production supplier who give away free bookkeeping software but most of the effort in the last few years seems to suggest I have that round the wrong way. Again, not a criticism as I think they are the best supplier that I deal with when comparing value for money and customer service.

I use the Companies House on-line filing and find it really easy. I am sure VT could do it better (eliminate the re-keying, for example), but it is not something I would lose any sleep over.

Great news. Thanks Philip. File could be csv with columns for Account Name, Date, Description, Analysis Account, Amount (+ for deposit, - for payment), VAT. Anything that fills all the basic VTT+ fields would do, as it is so easy to move columns around or add new ones in a csv file.

Despite filing 50+ CT600s a year, we have always used HMRC software to file CT600s and done our own comps on a spreadshhet template. When ixbrl came in we tried using the HMRC software to do comps but this took ages, so it was a godsend when VT came up with the comps and I have been using them since June to good effect.

Top of my wish list would be the ability to file abbrev accounts with Companies House - we currently file online using Co. House template, but it is so clunky!

Well done again VT!

Having just downloaded a csv statement from Lloyds it came as follows:

Of course the debit and credit being from the bank's point of view, not the customers.

And a csv download from Santander (old Abbey account) came with no headers but in the following 4 columns

With the amount as negative when an expense.

Hope that helps.

Hi Philip - I have no idea how long this sort of thing takes. Any idea when you expect it to be complete? I have a client I want to convert from QuickBooks but I need to be able to import his old transactions into VTT+ first.

Still not seen an answer as to how I can enter a claim to carry back losses. Can it be done in VT ?

Also I couldn't see how to make a group relief loss claim. ( small company & small group )

Any ideas ?

Philip - Of course. I would never dream of giving you grief for getting an estimate wrong. It can't be harder than it seems to me because I have absolutely no idea what's involved, so I am in no position to have an opinion. I am very grateful for the effort on transaction import. Some other software suppliers respond to feature requests by telling you you are wanting the wrong thing.

I've used the CT comp as I am a relatively young business with small number of clients, so licencing a separate tax package would be fairly prohibitive. Seems to work well enough.

The facility to file independantly to Comapnies House sounds interesting.

I have just tried the CT comp in VT Final Accounts and found it difficult to quickly identify the input cells. For example, I was searching for "additions" instead of "expenditure", so couldn't find where to input the figure  for a while. It would help a lot if the input cells were highlighted, for example with a different colour or by putting them all in one place.

Despite my earlier comment, it is actually quite handy to have the tax figure generated  automatically. Doesn't change my priorities expressed earlier though. Keep up the good work.

Another suggestion; only a very minor thing. It would be good to have a reconciliation of the VT-calculated CT to the CT in the P&L, with a warning if they don't reconcile. That way, if you made an adjustment, but forgot to recalculate the tax, it  would be flagged up. Minor point though.

Chatman,   why don't you link the calculated CT on the CT tab to the CT charge on the P&L (and balance sheet creditor) so you have a dynamic moving P&L and BS entry each time you adjust the accounts.   Just point to the CT calculated figure cell reference as a plus formula (debit) for the P&L account, and as a minus formula (credit) for the BS reserve.   We have always done this,  and its very helpful in a number of ways.   We actually file CT using a different package, but its a very useful check to have the CT calculating itself on the go,  to check that the final entries on the CT submission package are correct. 

Richard Joseph

I seem to be in minority here - I use Excel to produce accounts and CT tax comp and HMRC product.  I use the VT ixbrl tagging for accounts and CT comp. Both accounts and CT comp take about 15 minutes to tag, which is then OK for subsequent accounting years, so no tagging after the initial tag.  I find it easy, quick and a reasonable cost.  Some of the CT tax packages are too expensive, and accounts prep is not as quick as Excel

Iain McGregor