The standard sales tax deduction is always lower for me. I spend a lot of
money each year flipping houses. (Lots of little expenses.) I don't see the
standard sales tax deduction ever being higher than my actual sales tax
expenditure. So, your post isn't helpful to me.

"Chris Cowles" wrote:

- quote -

"Lemmywinks" <Lemmywinks[at]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:3259A9F8-E69D-429E-9510-5E7560D41C23[at]microsoft.com...
- quote -

You may want to do that, but you don't have to do that. The IRS does not
require it. I take the standard sales tax deduction for the state of Florida
and am satisfied with the benefit. Unless you're a profligate spender, how
much incremental advantage can their be, for the incremental effort
required?
--
Chris Cowles
Gainesville, FL

Scanning and storing receipts is a critical feature for me. I currently use
Money 2005 and I will not upgrade until this feature is implemented. Because
the IRS allows me to deduct all of the money I spend on sales tax, I need to
save ALL of my receipts. This fills up a box in no time and frankly I'm
tired of storing receipts. I have looked at products like Paperport and
Neatreceipts but I'd rather have something that can corilate my money
transaction with an image of the reciept. (The IRS will now accept scanned
copies of receipts as longs as there is reasonable assurance that they have
not been tampered with. The makers of Neatreceipts toute compliance to this
policy.) Quicken has this feature now and though I don't really like their
interface, I'm considering a switch. In addition, I'd like to see Money add
the ability to track both the transaction date and posting date. The reason
for this is that it allows my register to line up with my statement (for
easier resolution of balancing issues) AND allows me to gather my yearly
sales tax expenditures for my Schedule A. Without this feature, I have to
choose one or the other. If I choose the transaction date, then balancing
can be a problem. If I choose the post date, then I have to be very careful
with pulling my tax reports on the fridges (i.e. December-January
transactions).

So, in summary I believe that Microsoft is undervaluing this solution. I
understand that scanning in each receipt will take time so I'd propose the
following features to make this a viable option:
1) Allow Microsoft Money to continue to function whilst scanning (i.e. Money
shouldn't hang until scanning is completed) - this way I can keep working in
MS while scanning
2) Incorporate some OCR ability for Microsoft to automatically populate new
transactions (or downloaded transactions) based on the information from the
receipt. I.e. Sales Tax, Total, Gratuity (if possible), company, etc.
3) Automatically manage an image file library (not part of the MS file).

Thoughts? Note that there is no guarrantee that the IRS will continue to
allow deductions of sales tax, but if they do this is a really important
feature for me.

"Dick Watson" wrote:

- quote -

So pick a folder to keep them in and store the filename in Memo. If they
included this feature in Money and didn't store the images in the existing
data file, you'd still have the entire same problem of managing the separate
files.

"tzphotos.com" <tzphotoscom[at]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:B95C0AAE-8741-47C8-A235-5B88ED393A5C[at]microsoft.com...
- quote -

I hear what you are saying about the file containing extra data. I am sure
the size of storing all that info will also slow down the whole process of
using the Money program.

It just would be nice to at least have a shortcut to the files connected to
the corresponding transactions.

Tom


"Dick Watson" wrote:


- quote -

I do scan in rebate material, but have never felt any need to lump it in
Money. That file is already large enough.

For the time spent scanning in receipts, storing them in boxes seems easier.
Granted if this were integrated and easier--fewer steps--I might change my
tune. I might also change my tune when the stack of copy paper boxes--two to
three years fit in one box--gets much larger. I've actually been thinking of
setting some upper bound--say a decade--and starting to deaccession the
older stuff.

I print the PDFs of online receipts--for some things, not, say ISP and
hosting invoices--and file them with the credit card statements that pay for
them.

I can see why this feature sounds attractive to some people. I just fall on
the side that there are so many more important things that have been on my
list for more than a decade that aren't in Money yet. Besides, they'd
probably do Essential Scanning and mess it up at that. It'd also make a
CRITICAL data file that is already large for purposes of backup and
protection unwieldy really quickly, assuming they just stored them in the
..MNY database as BLOBs. OTOH, if I understand correctly what Q does, just
storing them in some special folder somewhere with some cryptic name known
only to the application/separate data file seems even worse to me. Now I
have to maintain the integrity of that entire system of files. Yikes.

"tzphotos.com" <tzphotoscom[at]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:0D2EF137-CE11-4E8A-95E1-CBB12A699784[at]microsoft.com...
- quote -

I wouldn't call it a deal-breaker, but I have thought of many reasons to use
it.

I could scan in Rebates and attach them to the original trans.
Scan receipts and shred, much less to store in boxes.
PDFs of online purchase receipts could be attached.
Serial numbers of purchased/downloaded softwre could be attached(ok this
could be the memo)

I am saying I just hope MS puts this feature in or someone developes a 3rd
party way to do it.


"Dick Watson" wrote:

- quote -

This one feature is a deal-breaker for you? Wow.

"tzphotos.com" <tzphotoscom[at]discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:18F13680-F2C1-4E26-8AE5-3735B2CEC003[at]microsoft.com...
- quote -

This is the only thing holding me back from MS Money. I wish Microsoft or a
third party would develope this in the MS Money. I am don't really want to
switch to Quicken for this feature. Quicken 2007 doesn't appear to be stable
yet.


"cliffordjf" wrote:

- quote -