4 ms·
> We do this by monitoring their purchases for tax deductible expenses -- like phone expenses, insurance payments, and home office expenses -- using a team of a
by koolba 8y ago
> We do this by monitoring their purchases for tax deductible expenses -- like phone expenses, insurance payments, and home office expenses -- using a team of accountants aided by fancy computer stuff.
Are you storing or otherwise processing the transaction records for any other purposes or data mining? Alternatively, do your terms allow that in the future?
Knowing every purchase a person makes is going to be a tantalizing data set.
> We’re currently piloting the service with +100 paying users. We charge $10 per month because it’s simple, but eventually want to move to a model where we charge a small percent of the tax write offs we find for you. Aligned incentives :)
Maybe not totally aligned though as it’d be in your interests to be as aggressive as possible with write off claims while the customer would presumably be on the hook for any rejections or audits.
- dkang009 8y agoThanks for your initial thoughts! We do need to store purchase history to improve our predictions, but we have no plans at the moment to do anything else with the data. @pricing - we haven't really figured out our pricing model yet - that's why we're sticking to a low flat fee for now!
- soared 8y ago> we have no plans at the moment to do anything else with the data. If I had a nickel..
- fhbdukfrh 8y agoAnd yet to a different concern about granting access to digital data the response is"what concerns do you have with sharing purchasing data?" Naivety or purposely deflecting from the very real concerns many have and everyone should?
- kelnos 8y ago> we have no plans at the moment to do anything else with the data. I'm not you're target market (I'm a W-2 employee), but I would not share something as sensitive and personal as my full purchase history with a company that didn't explicitly state that they would never mine or sell that data. Especially for a service that I'd be paying for.
- RhysU 8y ago> the customer would presumably be on the hook for any rejections or audits And penalties.
- pkoullick92 8y agoTo some extent, yes - the customer is always going to be on the hook for telling the truth. For example, we can ask: did you go out to that dinner with a client or coworker? The customer could lie and say yes, in order to claim more write offs. There's not much we can do about that. We support users if they get audited in the sense that we'd give them all of their data recorded with Keeper and help answer any questions. Ultimately, we base all of our suggestions on information the user has told us, but we can't guarantee that the answers were truthful.
- JoshTriplett 8y ago> Maybe not totally aligned though as it’d be in your interests to be as aggressive as possible with write off claims while the customer would presumably be on the hook for any rejections or audits. It'd be refreshing to have a model of "we have specialized liability insurance, if you're honest with us and we make a mistake in your filing, we'll cover it, including any penalties".
- pkoullick92 8y agoI Love it! That's great. Even better :)