I think you've completely missed the point of this discussion.  Special allocations are a fact of life when preparing 1065's, but there is absolutely no reason for the 754 depreciation to be specially allocated through the K-1 worksheet.  Each 754 asset entry worksheet applies to one and only one partner, so it could be linked to that partner and the entire process be automated.  And, yes, of course, checking the Sec 754 box on the asset entry worksheet causes the Sec 754 depreciation to flow to the 1065 which can then be specially allocated among partners through the K-1 worksheet.  That's obvious, but it would not be necessary if they simply link the asset entry worksheet to its respective partner.

Furthermore, that same 754 depreciation, which flows to each individual partner's K-1, needs to also show up on their QBI Statement A on the Other Deductions Line, in order for the taxpayer to properly compute QBI.  And, the unadjusted basis number for each partner on their Statement A needs to be increased by the partner's respective share of the 754 basis.  Neither of these two items is being handled by the program, at all!  The easiest way for the developers to fix this would be to link each 754 asset entry worksheet to its respective partner, which could then do all the calculations for you, namely, allocate 754 depreciation expense automatically rather than manually through the K-1 worksheet PLUS provide correct values on the other deductions and unadjusted basis lines of Statement A. Intuit has simply gotten away for years with making you manually specially allocate 754 depreciation rather than automating the process by linking the asset entry worksheet to its respective partner.  That's silly, and it's gotten even worse now, because of the additional complications associated with the QBI data which needs to properly flow to the K-1 Statement A's.

I haven't looked yet at the 1120S or 1041 programs yet, but I would guess that they may exhibit similar problems with QBI reporting as the 1065 program.  As it is right now, the only way to get a 1065 prepared correctly is to do several separate manual steps.  First, as you have stated, manually use the special allocation feature of the K-1 worksheet to allocate the 754 depreciation.  But additionally, for each applicable K-1, a second step is to manually change the Statement A Other Deductions Line to include each respective partner's 754 depreciation expense, effectively duplicating your effort.  Third, manually change the Statement A UBIA line to include each respective partner's unadjusted basis attributable to their 754 basis step-up.  And fourth, manually update the 199A Statement A Summary to adjust the Other Deduction line and UBIA line at the partnership level for the foregoing aggregate manual adjustments to all individual partner Statement A's.  Fortunately, the program allows you to override these fields, so it can be done, it's just not the way I think that a professional's tax software should work. 

As I said, I'm new to the program this year and I'm not impressed with a situation that requires me to jump through so many hoops to get the return right, simply because the developers haven't done their jobs.  There is no good reason for the 754 asset entry worksheet to have not been linked to the  respective partner many years ago.  The QBI issues simply exacerbate that silly omission, crying for them to finally get it right by identifying on the asset entry worksheet the partner to whom it pertains.  Fixing this should be easy, if only someone at Intuit understands the issue and is inclined to fix it.  But, in light of the fact that the problem has persisted for years and you and I seem to be the only two individuals talking about this issue, it's likely that it will never be fixed.  That's a shame, because I was hoping that this was a higher quality product than what I'm seeing.  I hope that someone at Intuit realizes that their omission years ago, while not a big deal until Sec 199A came along, is now a very big deal and they have hundreds (thousands?) of preparers who are improperly preparing K-1's.  I think the backlash that may result from the enormous calculation errors of the 1040 QBI deductions will likely end up with a lot of finger pointing and attempts to recover damages from any deep pockets identifiable, most notably Intuit and their tax preparation customers.  Let's hope this thing gets fixed quickly, because based on the lack of discussion of the issue in this venue, it seems there are very few Intuit customers who are aware of the product's deficiencies.