The topic of the TaxTech roundtable on the evening of 24 February was: What level of technical expertise do users expect from software? The participants were Philip Hellmig (kanzlei.land), Paul Liese (hsp), Benjamin Panke (kontool) and Jan Moritz Wagner (getmyinvoices).

The discussion began with the question of whether software manufacturers can be held liable for errors and how they prevent them. At getmyinvoices, for example, the completeness of documents is ensured by upstream systems that notify the user when documents are received, thereby guaranteeing a quality check. A data sheet also explains to users how to maintain the portals. Whilst there is no 100 per cent guarantee, there are numerous alerts for the user if a workflow is interrupted and they need to intervene.

kontool also checks the logic to prevent errors. However, the outcome also depends on the data that is uploaded and the users’ planning: the programme cannot check for or compensate for incorrect entries. The software acts as a guide and source of suggestions for users, but cannot provide legal certainty. The situation is similar with kanzlei.land: the templates provided do not claim to offer legal certainty.

The situation is similar with the hsp: errors and their potential consequences depend on the entries made by users and various factors within the process, and are always decided on a case-by-case basis. Whilst the taxonomies of the hsp tool provide a structure for the Procedural documentation However, the consultant and the user must record any specific details relating to the clients themselves.

Support versus personal responsibility

This creates a dilemma: on the one hand, there is the expectation that the tool should guide users through the process as simply as possible. On the other hand, there is the desire to allow as much subject-matter expertise as possible. Particularly when it comes to process documentation, there are no formal requirements, only recommendations. Whether it is ultimately accepted during a tax audit is entirely at the discretion of the auditor. For this reason, templates and best practices regarding the level of detail always depend on the individual company. Paul Liese has found that the more subject-matter control the software offers, the more complex it is to develop, enhance and maintain.

One view expressed during the roundtable was that professional expertise stems from the firms and the advice they provide, whilst software is more of a tool for putting this into practice. Firms are able to assess the content themselves and should project greater self-confidence. Overall, this expertise is still developing, particularly as increased automation is eliminating traditional tax adviser tasks such as bookkeeping.

Ensuring good usability

One challenge with hsp lies in the diversity of its users: some know the tool inside out, understand its capabilities and complexity, and make full use of the freedom it offers. New users and occasional users, on the other hand, find the complexity overwhelming because they do not know exactly which components they actually need at any given time. That is why hsp intends to provide two user interfaces in future: a simplified mode featuring the most important elements, and the full-featured version.

getmyinvoices also features a standard workflow with guidelines to help users navigate the system, as well as an expert mode where users can customise settings themselves. The aim is to cater to all users. kanzlei.land can also confirm just how important a clean interface is for good usability.

Criticism from users

At this point, a critical voice spoke up in the ‘User Perspective’ Clubhouse room. According to this view, one challenge lies in the roll-out of the tools and in getting clients and staff on board. In this case, the aim was to digitise law firms using kanzlei.land and kontool – the guidance document had to be developed in-house, the communication strategy formulated, and interfaces, systems and scanners set up, all of which is perceived as very labour-intensive and time-consuming.

In this context, software providers found ready-made processes, in the form of templates, to be helpful. For example, hsp offers a client a process tree for drawing up procedural documentation, which maps out the workflows in full. Training videos were regarded as unsuitable by the user. He preferred seminars because group training has a greater impact: guidance rather than self-study.

It is not always easy for software providers to determine where the boundaries of specialist expertise lie and what the law firm itself is capable of doing. In order to cater for all users, therefore, a combination of specialist guidance and process guidelines would need to be offered.

The distinctive features of DATEV

In the case of DATEV, the software must also provide specialist expertise to compensate for any gaps in knowledge within law firms. The programme makes suggestions for the next steps in a case or offers advice on legal research. This saves the user time, as they would otherwise have to carry out the research themselves in order to understand the facts of a case.

The software providers took the view that the DATEV programme for experts does indeed require a certain level of prior knowledge, and that law firms should be familiar with the ins and outs of the software and know how to use it effectively. Users, on the other hand, criticised the lack of intuitive operation and the fact that it was no fun to use. In practice, even some professionals use very simple programmes that are actually aimed at non-experts, as such software solutions offer a much more intuitive user experience.

Procedural documentation and training options

The topic of process documentation became particularly interesting in 2018, when the Cash register inspection was introduced. hsp observed that, whilst theoretical knowledge was in place, law firms were still asking questions such as: What exactly needs to be included, how, where and to what extent? Nothing has changed in this regard. hsp therefore provides training through e-learning modules and organises seminars at the client’s request. Live training sessions usually involve a use case with a client, during which hsp demonstrates how specific situations can be documented.

For hsp, the service offering for procedural documentation is a combination of consultancy and software. To get a feel for the subject matter, law firms draw up genuine documentation with hsp’s support. This enables them to engage with their clients. getmyinvoices and kontool also offer fee-based seminars as additional consultancy services.