Quicken Community is moving to Single Sign On! Starting 1/22/21, you'll sign in to the community with your Quicken ID. For more information: http://bit.ly/CommunitySSO

QMac 2017: What is relationship between Transfer and Category columns?

Alan3
Alan3 Member ✭✭
I'm using Quicken Mac 2017 and coming from Quicken Mac 2007.

Quicken 2007 does not have a Transfer column and I've assumed that the Transfer column in Quicken 2017 was just a convenience and not really necessary. I had assumed that there was always a correspondence between the Category and Transfer columns. For example, if the Transfer column entry was "Citi-Savings", the Category column had to be "Transfer:[Citi-Savings]" where Citi-Savings is the name I've given to one of my accounts.

Based on some questions in the Quicken Community, I did some experimenting. I learned that the two columns do not have to match. In my checking account I did an entry where I put "Citi-Savings" in the Transfer column and dining (whch is one of my ordinary categories) in the Category column. Quicken accepted these entries and it did do the transfer. That is the entry appeared in my Citi-Savings account. (I have not checked to see what happens if I do some sort of report on dining.)

Is there a scenario where the above entry would make sense? I can't think of one.

Thanks,
  - Alan

Comments

  • RickO
    RickO SuperUser, Mac Beta Beta
    edited August 2017
    There was a discussion of this a while back but I haven't found it on a quick search.

    There are many cases where having a category other than Transfer, but still showing a transfer is useful. One example is a pay statement where you want to categorize a deduction that goes to your 401k as "Retirement Savings", but you still need to show it as a transfer to your 401k account.

    A problem in the current implementation is that if you use a category other than "Transfer" AND an account in the Transfer column, then then the transaction will not show up under that category in reports. Quicken should show these as both a categorized and transfer transaction. I think there's an IDEA topic on that somewhere on the forum, but (again), I'm not able to find it.

    One other bug/glitch to be aware of... if you have Transfer:[xyz account] in the Category column and later change it to a regular category, "xyz account" will remain in the Transfer column (even if that column is hidden). 
    Quicken Mac Subscription; Quicken Mac user since the early 90s
  • smayer97
    smayer97 SuperUser, Mac Beta, Canada Beta ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited August 2018
    The key difference between QM2007 and QM2017 is that in QM2007 you could not categorize transfers. In QM2017, by having the transfer field and the category field separated, you can now categorize transfers too. 

    In QM2017, the way it works is that a transfer is recorded in the transfer field. Since QM2017 v4.3 there is a setting labeled "Allow creation of linked transfers using the category field" (see below).

    image

    If you select this then you can enter transfers in QM2017 the same way you enter them in QM2007 by pressing the '[' key in the category field and typing the account name. This will auto-populate the Transfer field with the account name.  After you enter the account name in the category field, you can then go back and categorize the transfer, if you so desire, and the transfer field will retain the account name. This also means that you may hide the transfer field, as it is mostly redundant with this option.

    That said, there is a "bug" or design oversight such that if you record a transfer with a categorization, then later decide you want to keep the categorization but not the transfer, the only way to remove the transfer is to clear the transfer field directly. This means the transfer field must be visible. There is no other way to clear the transfer. Catch-22.

    This scenario can easily arise if you reuse a payee that has a categorized transfer one time (it gets saved as such by Quicken), the same categorization and transfer gets entered...but you may not want the transfer the second time. 

    (If you find this reply helpful, please be sure to click "Like", so others will know, thanks.)
    Have Questions? Check out these FAQs (links now fixed):COMPLETE list of Product Ideas - Quicken for Mac to VOTE on

    Object to Quicken's business model, using up 25% of your screen?
    Add your vote here:
    Quicken should eliminate the LARGE Ad space when a subscription expires

    (
    Canadian user since '92, STILL using QM2007)


  • RickO
    RickO SuperUser, Mac Beta Beta
    edited August 2017

    The key difference between QM2007 and QM2017 is that in QM2007 you could not categorize transfers. In QM2017, by having the transfer field and the category field separated, you can now categorize transfers too. 

    In QM2017, the way it works is that a transfer is recorded in the transfer field. Since QM2017 v4.3 there is a setting labeled "Allow creation of linked transfers using the category field" (see below).

    image

    If you select this then you can enter transfers in QM2017 the same way you enter them in QM2007 by pressing the '[' key in the category field and typing the account name. This will auto-populate the Transfer field with the account name.  After you enter the account name in the category field, you can then go back and categorize the transfer, if you so desire, and the transfer field will retain the account name. This also means that you may hide the transfer field, as it is mostly redundant with this option.

    That said, there is a "bug" or design oversight such that if you record a transfer with a categorization, then later decide you want to keep the categorization but not the transfer, the only way to remove the transfer is to clear the transfer field directly. This means the transfer field must be visible. There is no other way to clear the transfer. Catch-22.

    This scenario can easily arise if you reuse a payee that has a categorized transfer one time (it gets saved as such by Quicken), the same categorization and transfer gets entered...but you may not want the transfer the second time. 

    (If you find this reply helpful, please be sure to click "Like", so others will know, thanks.)

    @smayer97... can you find the IDEA post related to including categorized transfers in reports? Or maybe I'm just imagining it.
    Quicken Mac Subscription; Quicken Mac user since the early 90s
  • smayer97
    smayer97 SuperUser, Mac Beta, Canada Beta ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited August 2017

    The key difference between QM2007 and QM2017 is that in QM2007 you could not categorize transfers. In QM2017, by having the transfer field and the category field separated, you can now categorize transfers too. 

    In QM2017, the way it works is that a transfer is recorded in the transfer field. Since QM2017 v4.3 there is a setting labeled "Allow creation of linked transfers using the category field" (see below).

    image

    If you select this then you can enter transfers in QM2017 the same way you enter them in QM2007 by pressing the '[' key in the category field and typing the account name. This will auto-populate the Transfer field with the account name.  After you enter the account name in the category field, you can then go back and categorize the transfer, if you so desire, and the transfer field will retain the account name. This also means that you may hide the transfer field, as it is mostly redundant with this option.

    That said, there is a "bug" or design oversight such that if you record a transfer with a categorization, then later decide you want to keep the categorization but not the transfer, the only way to remove the transfer is to clear the transfer field directly. This means the transfer field must be visible. There is no other way to clear the transfer. Catch-22.

    This scenario can easily arise if you reuse a payee that has a categorized transfer one time (it gets saved as such by Quicken), the same categorization and transfer gets entered...but you may not want the transfer the second time. 

    (If you find this reply helpful, please be sure to click "Like", so others will know, thanks.)

    You can add your VOTE to Ability to Include or Exclude Transfers on Reports.

    First, click on the underlined link above to go there, then click VOTE at the top of THAT page, so your will vote count for THIS feature and increase its visibility to the developers.

    While you are at it, you may want to add your VOTE to related IDEAS found on the List of Requests for Report Related Features. Click on the underlined link, then follow the instructions to add your vote to more related ideas. 

    (If you find this reply helpful, please be sure to click "Like", so others will know, thanks.)
    Have Questions? Check out these FAQs (links now fixed):COMPLETE list of Product Ideas - Quicken for Mac to VOTE on

    Object to Quicken's business model, using up 25% of your screen?
    Add your vote here:
    Quicken should eliminate the LARGE Ad space when a subscription expires

    (
    Canadian user since '92, STILL using QM2007)


  • RickO
    RickO SuperUser, Mac Beta Beta
    edited August 2017

    The key difference between QM2007 and QM2017 is that in QM2007 you could not categorize transfers. In QM2017, by having the transfer field and the category field separated, you can now categorize transfers too. 

    In QM2017, the way it works is that a transfer is recorded in the transfer field. Since QM2017 v4.3 there is a setting labeled "Allow creation of linked transfers using the category field" (see below).

    image

    If you select this then you can enter transfers in QM2017 the same way you enter them in QM2007 by pressing the '[' key in the category field and typing the account name. This will auto-populate the Transfer field with the account name.  After you enter the account name in the category field, you can then go back and categorize the transfer, if you so desire, and the transfer field will retain the account name. This also means that you may hide the transfer field, as it is mostly redundant with this option.

    That said, there is a "bug" or design oversight such that if you record a transfer with a categorization, then later decide you want to keep the categorization but not the transfer, the only way to remove the transfer is to clear the transfer field directly. This means the transfer field must be visible. There is no other way to clear the transfer. Catch-22.

    This scenario can easily arise if you reuse a payee that has a categorized transfer one time (it gets saved as such by Quicken), the same categorization and transfer gets entered...but you may not want the transfer the second time. 

    (If you find this reply helpful, please be sure to click "Like", so others will know, thanks.)

    Oh right...that's where it was. My comment on the above IDEA post relates to including categorized transfers in the category sections of reports.
    Quicken Mac Subscription; Quicken Mac user since the early 90s
  • smayer97
    smayer97 SuperUser, Mac Beta, Canada Beta ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited August 2017

    The key difference between QM2007 and QM2017 is that in QM2007 you could not categorize transfers. In QM2017, by having the transfer field and the category field separated, you can now categorize transfers too. 

    In QM2017, the way it works is that a transfer is recorded in the transfer field. Since QM2017 v4.3 there is a setting labeled "Allow creation of linked transfers using the category field" (see below).

    image

    If you select this then you can enter transfers in QM2017 the same way you enter them in QM2007 by pressing the '[' key in the category field and typing the account name. This will auto-populate the Transfer field with the account name.  After you enter the account name in the category field, you can then go back and categorize the transfer, if you so desire, and the transfer field will retain the account name. This also means that you may hide the transfer field, as it is mostly redundant with this option.

    That said, there is a "bug" or design oversight such that if you record a transfer with a categorization, then later decide you want to keep the categorization but not the transfer, the only way to remove the transfer is to clear the transfer field directly. This means the transfer field must be visible. There is no other way to clear the transfer. Catch-22.

    This scenario can easily arise if you reuse a payee that has a categorized transfer one time (it gets saved as such by Quicken), the same categorization and transfer gets entered...but you may not want the transfer the second time. 

    (If you find this reply helpful, please be sure to click "Like", so others will know, thanks.)

    +1
    Have Questions? Check out these FAQs (links now fixed):COMPLETE list of Product Ideas - Quicken for Mac to VOTE on

    Object to Quicken's business model, using up 25% of your screen?
    Add your vote here:
    Quicken should eliminate the LARGE Ad space when a subscription expires

    (
    Canadian user since '92, STILL using QM2007)


  • Alan3
    Alan3 Member ✭✭
    edited August 2017
    RickO said:

    There was a discussion of this a while back but I haven't found it on a quick search.

    There are many cases where having a category other than Transfer, but still showing a transfer is useful. One example is a pay statement where you want to categorize a deduction that goes to your 401k as "Retirement Savings", but you still need to show it as a transfer to your 401k account.

    A problem in the current implementation is that if you use a category other than "Transfer" AND an account in the Transfer column, then then the transaction will not show up under that category in reports. Quicken should show these as both a categorized and transfer transaction. I think there's an IDEA topic on that somewhere on the forum, but (again), I'm not able to find it.

    One other bug/glitch to be aware of... if you have Transfer:[xyz account] in the Category column and later change it to a regular category, "xyz account" will remain in the Transfer column (even if that column is hidden). 

    Thanks for your comment and 401k example. I doubt that your example would have occurred to me on my own. I think of my categories as either expense categories or income categories. It seems to me your "Retirement Savings" category is something different than an income or expense.

    Still, I make no claim that my record keeping methods are better than other people's.
  • RickO
    RickO SuperUser, Mac Beta Beta
    edited August 2017
    RickO said:

    There was a discussion of this a while back but I haven't found it on a quick search.

    There are many cases where having a category other than Transfer, but still showing a transfer is useful. One example is a pay statement where you want to categorize a deduction that goes to your 401k as "Retirement Savings", but you still need to show it as a transfer to your 401k account.

    A problem in the current implementation is that if you use a category other than "Transfer" AND an account in the Transfer column, then then the transaction will not show up under that category in reports. Quicken should show these as both a categorized and transfer transaction. I think there's an IDEA topic on that somewhere on the forum, but (again), I'm not able to find it.

    One other bug/glitch to be aware of... if you have Transfer:[xyz account] in the Category column and later change it to a regular category, "xyz account" will remain in the Transfer column (even if that column is hidden). 

    Another paycheck example might be a Flex Health Care savings plan deduction. That's a little more "expense like". But you might also want to show it as a transfer to the cash account that you use to track the Flex plan.
    Quicken Mac Subscription; Quicken Mac user since the early 90s
  • mybank2002
    mybank2002 Member ✭✭✭
    Thanks for the post, I came here looking for what "allow creation of linked transfers using the category field."

    This link provides some useful help on "Transfer Category" or "Linked Transfers"
    https://www.quicken.com/support/transfers-quicken-mac
This discussion has been closed.