Lacerte REP Billing Methods

[rltco123]

Billing issue and REP Access:

After analyzing the situation and comparing the online billing information to our client's Lacerte file, it is clear they are pre-billing us by using premature "billing triggers" such as filing for an extension, printing 2023 1040ES forms and most anything that requires the tax preparer to go to the "forms" tab.

An example: If say a client had not filed for say 5 years. As we prepare the delinquent tax returns, we want to have the client make estimated tax payments to prevent tax penalties and interest on the current year tax return. This triggers a billing charge, yet, other than this we had not touched the program for this client, However, the 1040ES triggers a charge, because once you go to forms to print the 1040ES you are charged a fee for a tax return you may not prepare for many months.

Lacerte customer service does not deal with this issue fairly and they try to strong-arm you: because they can cut you off. They have gone as far as discontinuing our service and flashing our private payment information on the screens of all our PCs running Lacerte for our employees to see, which is unlawful.

What have you experienced?

[pamdory]

At the point I access a form I am utilizing Lacerte's product to calculate and populate a form.  At that point I acknowledge they've provided me a service and I expect to pay for it.  If they don't charge at that point what would stop a user from using their product to calculate and then use a cheaper and inferior product to actually file my clients' returns?

They're abiding by the terms I agreed to when I signed on with them and I'm okay with that.

[rltco123]

I respect your right of choice, but I don’t agree with your statements:

“If they don't charge at that point what would stop a user from using their product to calculate and then use a cheaper and inferior product to actually file my clients' returns?

“They're abiding by the terms I agreed to when I signed on with them and I'm okay with that.”

 My reply to your first statement is this is a very poor example, because realistically, what would stop the user is that few users would ever choose to use such a moronic solution.

My reply to your second statement is I seriously doubt that this subject appears in Lacerte’s terms and conditions, which are broadly written, nor do I believe they are published anywhere else. What I do believe is that Lacerte is either still searching for an answer to this rather awkward REP Access billing issue, or my choice they simply do not care.