Linked transfers with splits: keep as single transaction in destination account (do not separate)

tlauducc

See original idea discussion here: https://community.quicken.com/discussion/7884502/broken-feature-from-qm2007-linked-transfers-with-splits-are-separated-in-destination-account

Copy/pasted with light editing:

Why was this discussion closed? https://community.quicken.com/discussion/7878420/transfers-from-one-account-to-another-with-split-transactions

I have the same issue and it was not resolved in that discussion. It's about functionality from Quicken Mac 2007 that no longer works in Quicken Mac 2020.

See here for the definition of a linked transfer: https://www.quicken.com/support/transfers-quicken-mac

Issue: a linked transfer with multiple split lines going to the same account will show up as separate individual transactions in the destination account (it should be a single transaction in both accounts). Therefore, the destination account will not reconcile, because the bank downloads show one transfer for the sum of the multiple individual transactions QM2020 creates. In QM2007 the destination account would correctly have a single transaction that matched the bank-downloaded transaction. You could not access the split details in the destination account register, but that was better than QM2020 creating fake transactions that don't match the bank statements.

Use case: I used to let my mortgage lender escrow my property taxes and insurance. Now I self-escrow them. Every month I transfer $600 from my primary checking to a special savings account dedicated to escrow. $500 is for my property tax and $100 is for homeowners insurance. I want to track each escrow category separately (using the memo or tag field), so I use two split lines in the transfer. This QM2020 behavior means one of the two accounts won't reconcile properly; i.e. if I record the $600 split transaction in the savings account, then the checking account will have two separate transactions (one for $500 and another for $100) that do not match my bank's downloaded transactions. Swapping which account it's recorded in just moves the problem to the other account register.

Right now my workaround is to manually clear/reconcile the individual sub-transactions and manually delete the corresponding downloaded transaction from my bank - I don't like doing that because of the risk of mistakes. The only other workaround I can think of is to do two separate bank transfers every month so they're actually two separate transactions in both Quicken and my bank. But I'd rather not incur extra effort/transactions just to avoid this Quicken behavior. Are there other workarounds I'm not thinking of? How do we get this behavior changed? Is there a feature request I can +1?

Quicken Anja

Hello @tlauducc,

Thank you for taking the time to visit the Community and post your Idea request.

Ideas are reviewed by our Development and Product teams to see what features people would like to have available in the future. This way other users who have the same or a similar request can vote on your idea by clicking the up arrow (see below).

Please, be sure to add your own vote as well.

Austin@

This would be an important feature for me. I regularly record my monthly escrow transfer as one transaction with two split lines. Both split lines have the same category (the account being transferred to in brackets), but I set up the splits so I can tag each split line separately and then use the tags to track how much is going into escrow for home insurance vs property taxes. 

In the source account (checking) this reconciles fine (it is recorded as one transaction, which matches my bank statement), but in the destination account (escrow) Quicken shows two separate transactions, rather than one transaction with two splits. This then doesn’t match my escrow statement, which records it as one transaction. 

It would be awesome if multiple splits on the same transaction in the source account (both being transferred to the same account) showed up as one transaction with multiple splits in the destination account (effectively mirroring the source account), rather than making it two completely separate transactions.

J-Skibby

I support this and request the same.

This current design is an odd departure from Quicken for Windows. Building splits is supposed to save time by reducing the need for multiple transactions just to track the movement of earmarked money.

If there is no intention of mirroring Q4W then please add the ability to match downloaded transactions to multiple entries. Q4W used to all this.

smayer97

This should NOT be an option that requires voting… this is how all previous versions of Quicken work, including QWin, QM2007, etc.

Please restore the way other versions have worked, so records match downloaded transactions properly.

QuickforMac

Quicken, please update us on the progress of this ask. Quicken user since 1997 and have been on the mac platform for 8 years. It makes no sense that a split transaction from the originating account would show up as multiple transactions on the receiving account. It makes account reconciliation a complete cluster——. Thanks in advance for fixing this. Please advise.

jacobs

It makes no sense that a split transaction from the originating account would show up as multiple transactions on the receiving account. It makes account reconciliation a complete cluster——.

I can figure why they did it this way: it many (most?) cases, a split transaction will only have one transfer split line per other account. That is, you might have a transaction with three splits in which one is a transfer to Account A, one is a transfer to Account B, and one is and expense category XYZ. For instance, a loan payment might have a transfer to the loan account, a transfer to an escrow account, and interest expense. In such cases, only the split line transferring to Account A shows up in Account A.

So now, if you have a transaction with two split lines, both transferring to Account A, they both show up in Account A. Separately. And I agree, that makes reconciling Account A harder, because there are two transfer transactions in Quicken but only one real-world transaction on the monthly statement.

What you're asking for is for it to be smarter when there are multiple splits lines with transfers to the same account; you want it to combine those splits into a single transaction in the receiving account, either as a non-split transaction with the combined amounts, or with the splits intact in the transaction.

If this thread gets enough votes to reach the developers for consideration, it would be helpful for you to post your use case for what type of trasactions you have where you have multiple splits in one transactions as transfers to the same account. For instance, why not just have one split transfer to each account?

P.S. You won't get any answer from Quicken here on whether or when they will address this request; they never announce the timing for future features. Currently, this feature request has only 12 votes after about 3 years. It needs to hit at least 30 votes for the moderators here to forward the request to the development team for consideration, at which time the status of this topic in the yellow box at the top of the thread will change to "Under Consideration." That will eventually be changed to "Planned" or "Not Planned", and that will be the only indication users get about whether a feature request will be implemented.

CindyLV

We have an investment account that sends multiple transfers in a day from an investment account to a Bank Account (Money Market), often between 6-12 transfers. The Quicken downloaded transaction from the Bank Account side is a single transaction for the day.

To reconcile this, we have to manually turn the single transaction (on the destination side) into a split, then manally retype each transfer into the split. Then we go to the investment account and manually match each of their downloaded transactions with the one we just manually entered. We have to do this 3-5 times every month. It is a LOT of work

Proposed solution: It would be great if we could drag the individual transfers to the Banks's downloaded transfer, thus creating a split out of it.