Intuit Will Sell Off Quicken

http://venturebeat.com/2015/08/20/intuit-will-sell-off-quicken-its-once-core-30-year-old-personal-finance-software/

by doppp • 11 years ago

73 78 11 years ago

sschueller• 11 years ago

Looks like they are not worried about taxes ever becoming simpler. Intuit has spent about $11.5 million on federal lobbying in the past few years to kill bills that would have simplified taxes. [1]

[1] http://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-maker-of-turbotax-...

tptacek9• 11 years ago

If $2.3MM/yr over 5 years is enough to reshape the trajectory of fundamental laws in this country, why aren't people just Kickstarter-ing cannabis decriminalization, marriage equality, and copyright law changes?

My point is: that's not a lot of money. Not that I think you can get important changes done for $2.3MM.

There is real conservative opposition to return-free filing. For instance, conservatives in general think the tax code is both too complex and too onerous. In a return-free system, citizens are given a summarized bill and encouraged not to consider the line items. The concern is that the bill is unfair, and the less citizens have it shoved in their face, the less likely we are to get a fairer tax code.

(I think this is silly and that we are probably under-taxed, but I understand the logic.)

x5n12• 11 years ago

Mostly because no one has done it yet, and congressmen are much more open to corporate lobbying and serving elite and business interests than they are interested in serving the people, mostly because the government wants taxes. Taxes come from business, and business often comes from making things that should be easier harder. In a world of perfect competition everything would cost next to nothing and profits would be non-existing. The world would be at equilibrium. Lots of business is about making sure the world never gets to that state so the game can go on.

michaelt• 11 years ago

  why aren't people just Kickstarter-ing cannabis
  decriminalization, marriage equality, and
  copyright law changes?

I would imagine it's a lot cheaper to bribe a politician when:

1. The bribe doesn't get any publicity/press coverage/cause any embarrassment. Campaign donations from big corporations are "business as usual" and the politicians don't look corrupt in the press - but do the same way in a public, attention-grabbing way and the guy looks bad if he accepts.

2. The vote you want to affect is low key and doesn't contradict the politician's public position on major issues. Changing a politician's opinion on the Concrete Masonry Products Research Education and Promotion Act of 2015 would be much cheaper than changing their opinion on overturning Roe vs Wade

3. You want to maintain the status quo. Creating new legislation and getting it through the system is a bunch of work - compared to turning up on the vote day and saying 'no'.

4. There are future votes and future bribes to look forward to. If I give a politician $200,000 to vote a certain way, he might take the donation then vote a different way - and if I ask him to vote that way and promise him the money afterwards, I might refuse to pay after he votes. But if there are 10 votes and I donate $20,000 before each one if he voted how I wanted in the last vote? Then neither of us can screw the other over too badly because we know we'll be making the same deal next year.

5. There's aren't other well-funded lobbyists bidding against you. Because if there are you'll need to get into a bidding war and they might have a lot of money to throw around. If people who vote against copyright extension get $20,000 from me but people who vote for it get $50,000 from Disney I'm going to need to up my game - and Disney probably has pretty deep pockets.

TLDR: I'd expect cannabis decriminalisation or copyright law reform to cost a lot more than blocking tax code simplification.

With that said, if someone would like to organise an attempt I certainly think it would be interesting to see if a kickstarter-like approach would work.

patio11• 11 years ago

If I can elaborate on that concern a bit: if government is allowed to be loud about transfer payments and quiet about taxes then it can successfully bribe the middle class with their own money.

It is entirely possible to run a tax system without W-2 employees having to do a return at all. Many nations do it. American conservatives strongly prefer a government which is not sized like the government of those nations.

crdoconnor• 11 years ago

If $2.3MM/yr over 5 years is enough to reshape the trajectory of fundamental laws in this country, why aren't people just Kickstarter-ing cannabis decriminalization, marriage equality, and copyright law changes?

Not all political battles are equal.

1) There are lobbies dedicated to keeping cannabis illegal and marriage unequal. There aren't any lobbies dedicated to keeping taxes simple.

2) It's easier to kill proposed legislation than it is to propose new legislation and get it passed.

protomyth5• 11 years ago

There is real conservative opposition to return-free filing. For instance, conservatives in general think the tax code is both too complex and too onerous. In a return-free system, citizens are given a summarized bill and encouraged not to consider the line items. The concern is that the bill is unfair, and the less citizens have it shoved in their face, the less likely we are to get a fairer tax code.

I'm a conservative, and I do believe the tax code is complex and onerous. Its made that way by lobbyists trying to get their special deals, and politicians using a revenue generation mechanism to push behavior.

The thought that its is only Intuit's 2.3MM/yr keeping the tax code complex is a bit bogus. There are many industries that rely on the current tax code's deductions and complexities to survive. The amount of money by companies, unions, and NGOs is staggering. They are backed by the helpful idiots in the media that continually preach that any tax code change is an assault on the poor. Even showing no understanding of basic math when deduction + flat rate taxes are suggested.

And yes, since I barely trust government accounting, having been the victim of a $1,000+ mistake which took a long time to resolve and hurt quite a bit and growing up under Indian Health Service, I don't believe in a return-free system. The thought anyone would take "trust us" from the IRS (or any government agency) is so foreign to my thinking, I just don't understand how it would work.

I believe in a flat rate tax with a larger base deductible with no social, moral, or lobbyist driven deductions. The IRS should have no political or social ties. It is there to raise revenue, nothing else.

EGreg• 11 years ago

Corporate lobbying against change always costs less.

seiji• 11 years ago

My point is: that's not a lot of money.

It's called the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tullock_paradox — "the low costs of rent-seeking relative to the gains from rent-seeking."

Influencing individuals is relatively cheap. You just have to overwhelm them. Our laws are made by a limited group of individuals. Ergo, influencing laws is relatively cheap once you've got a few million dollars to burn and can gain billions off the results.

jerrac7• 11 years ago

Yes, from [1], I would never support return free filing. The tax code is far too complicated, and the IRS far too inept for me to trust that they would not screw my taxes up.

That said, if we went to a flat tax, or a national sales tax, or something else that drastically simplifies the tax code, then the issue would be moot. And most of those simplifications would be supported by Conservatives. (Note, I mean real Conservatives, many of the politicians who say they are conservative really aren't.)

[1]http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/improve/return-...

bitwarrior• 11 years ago

Dan Carlin in his Common Sense podcast aired the episode [Kickstarting the Revolution](http://www.dancarlin.com/product/common-sense-282-kickstarti...) where he suggests that, being that the game is what it is (regarding campaign financing, lobbying and other such means of influencing political outcomes and the use of money), while we may not agree with the game, we should at least, as citizens, play the game.

If people have donated over $65 million to get Star Citizen developed, one would imagine the public could easily finance...broader causes. And considering $2.3 million over 5 years is enough to influence lawmakers to continually reject tax code reform, it seems getting something passed would be less costly and a one-time affair.

I almost like to imagine a political party or super pac with public causes (you name it) itemized its willing to support, with a donation page for each, taking that money and doing the very same thing corporations do, but effectively on behalf of citizens.

rayiner3• 11 years ago

Let's say hypothetically that Crate and Barrel spent a few million lobbying on behalf of gay marriage, on the theory that the uptick in marriages would be good for business. anything wrong with that?

This isn't an obscure issue where a small amount of lobbying is going to push legislation in favor of a small interest group. It's literally one of the most scrutinized and contentious issues on the political table.

NB: the conservative opposition to tax free filing exists and isn't illogical. I for one do my own taxes each year, and the rage induced by thinking about the mortgage interest deduction is sufficient to keep me from voting for another cycle.

femto113• 11 years ago

Doesn't say in the article but I assume they are keeping Mint? Desktop apps like Quicken (and the similar Microsoft Money) were dead to me the minute that came on the scene (almost 9 years ago at this point).

weinzierl• 11 years ago

I'm a happy user of many web-based services, but why would anyone give all their personal financial data to single company? Ok, the success of Mint proves me wrong, I just don't get it.

It's not only that they can use your data to build and sell a profile, there is a realistic chance that the data gets leaked.

beagle3• 11 years ago

wesabe[0] can supposedly by run on your own server; not sure if there are any forks that are useful/updated, and have never tried it myself.

I'm with you. Can't figure out how millions of people just give away every piece of information about themselves with hardly a second thought (financial data -> mint; phonebook -> whatsapp=facebook; mail -> gmail=google; etc.)

[0] https://github.com/wesabe

digitalzombie• 11 years ago

Ok, the success of Mint proves me wrong, I just don't get it.

Well for one thing people are lazy and Mint devs actually take care of handling logins for all of those banks, credit cards companies, and credit unions.

I'm not entirely sure if there's any other alternative non web base software that can do this. I would assume those apis are different between all those companies.

Sure I can input my stuff manually but then again I'm lazy.

monkeybad• 11 years ago

Because it's extremely convenient, and they provide a useful service? The trade-off between someone else doing work for you, so you can do something else you want to do, is never going away.

VLM• 11 years ago

The other response cover the WTF WRT specifically web based company, I propose the general response of people aspire to getting actionable analysis. Companies don't actually have to provide actionable measurable quantitative analysis results, they just have to promise it could happen.

My personal experience with Quicken and Mint is I never got any actionable measurable results from the effort. Yes I saw all the ads about how I'd get special offers to save $5 on my car insurance or it would make me save for retirement or whatever, but over many years of Quicken and a couple years of Mint it never amounted to anything valuable. Then it becomes an insurance and sunk cost game, well, I've tossed away all this time and effort to organize unnecessary data, I guess I need to keep going to "save" my sunk cost. Eventually I chucked them both. The minimal time to maintain adds up over time and cuts into actual analytical analysis (not to mention recreational time) and in return, as mentioned, I got nothing out of it. Not all aspirational products are worthless to all people, I'm sure there exists someone who got something measurably important out of their mint or quicken experience. Just not me or anyone I know.

It is kind of the diet industry is a good analogy to the personal budgeting industry. The dieting industry makes people feel they're doing something important when they pick up a book or try to live off nothing but grapefruit juice for three days; all that really happens in the end is the provider makes money.

euroclydon• 11 years ago

I still love Microsoft Money for personal finances. A large DB can get slow, but an SSD fixes that.

Plus, it's free:

http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/search/Results.aspx?q=microso...

akgoel• 11 years ago

I could not get money to install on windows 10

steverb• 11 years ago

Money doesn't work on Windows 10. Or at least, I couldn't get it to work for me.

brevacor• 11 years ago

FWIW, I was able to install on Windows 10 and create a new Money database. I didn't try any operations beyond that, but it seemed to install and work ok for me.

scholia• 11 years ago

Apparently it needs a small registry change:

https://social.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/479281b2-90f9-42ca...

Note: I don't use Money and I have not done it.

pgrote• 11 years ago

What is a good, active cloud based personal finance software service? The ones I have come across look ok, but aren't actively developed.

cddotdotslash• 11 years ago

Most of the suggestions I've seen are either Mint (another Intuit product), Personal Capital (more investing focused), Hello Wallet (a bit lacking on features, but it connects to bank accounts), and PocketSmith (a really expensive Mint on steroids).

cdcarter• 11 years ago

YNAB has dropbox synch and it's ideal.

jerrac7• 11 years ago

YNAB is definitely a good product. I use it, and got my brother and parents to use it as well.

My only complaint is that I'd rather not rely on a third party like dropbox for sync, and I'd like a Linux version.

raesene9• 11 years ago

Money Manager EX is what I use http://www.moneymanagerex.org/ . Free Cross-platform, works fine for what I need it for

zo1• 11 years ago

If you have the patience and willingness to learn some basic and not-so-basic acccounting principles: I'd suggest GNUCash (http://www.gnucash.org/)

kentnek• 11 years ago

I've been using Money Lover for a while now and it's actually really good! The UI is nice and intuitive, there're lots of features and it doesn't require bank connections to work.

rlvesco7• 11 years ago

It would be awesome if financial companies were required to provide free api's along with the full financial history. Currently companies like BOA charge you for automated access to your account and others actively limit Mint, for instance, from retrieving information on behalf of customers.

kumarm• 11 years ago

Demand Force one of the asset they are trying to sell was acquired just 3 years ago for 450 Million.

You would think executives making these decisions will have some consequences :).

e40• 11 years ago

I switched from Quicken to Moneydance some time ago. The export/import worked fine. I had been a Quicken customer a 10-15 years and I was just so infuriated with all the UI churn to justify the upgrades and their turning off online transactions after a few years, FOR NO REASON.

MD is written in Java, it's simple, it's supported, they come out with new versions, and you can upgrade if you want.

I am not at all affiliated with the company that makes Moneydance. Just a completely satisfied customer who didn't want to pay Intuit another penny, for the rest of my life.

bitcuration• 11 years ago

The tax law should be as simple as this: there is a BGI (basic guaranteed income) and every dollar above at a fix percentage regardless how wealthier you are.

Intuit Will Sell Off Quicken

Related Stories