nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

ACCOUNT-DEPENDENT RECATEGORIZATIONS

r3face

Please, please, please- add simple feature to be able to create auto-categorization rules dependent on the account. It is such a simple use case: I have two checking accounts - one for me and one for another family member. For my account I am doing a detailed categorization, e.g. if I use Uber - it goes to a transportation category. Once a family member with another checking account uses Uber, I don't care about a precise category and dump everything in a "general expenses" category.

Please add this feature!!!!

Find more posts tagged with

Reports

Online Banking

Add/Edit Transactions

Accepted answers

volvogirl

Exactly, that's what I said. If it isn't for your spouse's checking then their accounts should be in a separate data file from yours.

Chris_QPW

r3face said:

it is a very simple and value add improvement. I hope someone from Quicken Prod Dev is reading this

Personally (as a Programmer for more than 40+ years) believe that this really should be easy to add, but this suggestion has been posted before and the Quicken Mac developer manager said that it was too complicated for what they considered its value was, and wasn't going to be implement it.

How that can possibly be true when Quicken certainly knows the account that it is putting transactions into while doing the renaming of transaction in that account, and the only other parts to the is change the GUI a bit, and store one more parameter (list of accounts) for each renaming rule is beyond me. I certainly don't have access to the Quicken Mac code or Windows code, so maybe they know something that I can't imagine, but they have made it quite clear (for a change) that they aren't going to implement it.

All comments

volvogirl

You probably should have their checking account in a separate data file and not co-mingled with your accounts. Unless they file their taxes on the same tax return as yours, like your spouse.

r3face

Of course not - what if it is my elderly dependent parent or my dependent son or spouse? Of course I file a family return like I am sure millions of other households

volvogirl

Exactly, that's what I said. If it isn't for your spouse's checking then their accounts should be in a separate data file from yours.

NotACPA

Any Q data file should contain the info that applies to a SINGLE Federal tax return.

If the "other person" is a dependent who's tax info is included on YOUR return, having it all in a single file is expected.

IF the "other person" does NOT file on your tax return, their info belongs in a separate file.

Creating this separate file will completely address your issue ... since categories used, and "auto-categorization" (AKA, memorized transactions and renaming rules") are file dependent. You can have separate constucts in separate files.

r3face

> @NotACPA said:
> Any Q data file should contain the info that applies to a SINGLE Federal tax return.If the "other person" is a dependent who's tax info is included on YOUR return, having it all in a single file is expected.IF the "other person" does NOT file on your tax return, their info belongs in a separate file.Creating this separate file will completely address your issue ... since categories used, and "auto-categorization" (AKA, memorized transactions and renaming rules") are file dependent. You can have separate constucts in separate files.

I understand there are workarounds, but my point is it would be such a simple and value adding improvement for so many users - adding a simple step "check account #" before applying a category to downloaded transactions.

NotACPA

Who says it's simple? And, if it's so simple, why hasn't it happened yet?

Probably because it isn't simple at all.

r3face

it is a very simple and value add improvement. I hope someone from Quicken Prod Dev is reading this

UKR

Until a programmer gets a round tuit and does something about your suggestion, how about a relatively simple workaround ...

Set all your accounts to manually review and accept downloaded transactions
Create Memorized Payee List entries with distinct Payee Names for each account and correct categories, e.g.

Uber {Mine} Transportation for your use of Uber in your personal account
Uber {Family} General expenses for your family members' use of Uber

When accepting downloaded transactions edit the new transaction entry to use the correct payee name, which in turn will pull in the correct category, review and finally accept.

Alternatively, manually create new transactions in the appropriate registers, using the above payee names and categories, BEFORE you download transactions from the banks. That allows Quicken to simply match what's been downloaded to the already existing and correctly categorized transactions and not create any new problems.

Chris_QPW

r3face said:

it is a very simple and value add improvement. I hope someone from Quicken Prod Dev is reading this

r3face

> @Chris_QPW said:
> Personally (as a Programmer for more than 40+ years) believe that this really should be easy to add, but this suggestion has been posted before and the Quicken Mac developer manager said that it was too complicated for what they considered its value was, and wasn't going to be implement it.
>
> How that can possibly be true when Quicken certainly knows the account that it is putting transactions into while doing the renaming of transaction in that account, and the only other parts to the is change the GUI a bit, and store one more parameter (list of accounts) for each renaming rule is beyond me. I certainly don't have access to the Quicken Mac code or Windows code, so maybe they know something that I can't imagine, but they have made it quite clear (for a change) that they aren't going to implement it.

Can't agree more! As someone with 20 years experience implementing ERP systems (SAP, Oracle, PeopleSoft, NetSuite etc.) I only concur with your assessment. I can come up with a handful of improvements like this. It's all about handling volume of transactions and value add automation. I don't want to be glued to the screen for hours spending time fixing transactions which is absolutely waste of time coming at the cost of making a true value add analysis and data driven decision making.