[toomuchtodo]

> But I always got paid via check, which went into my bank account. I think the thing that would make the most sense is to be able to setup a separate account with your own bank, so you can still direct deposit without worrying about ATM fees or what have you, and still be able to keep painless1099 in the loop of money by giving them access. Anything else introduces friction / fees that would deter usage; and i really really hate fees. (a reason i dont do paypal, for example)

Sounds like they could make some referral cash off of referring people to checking accounts.

[clabasky]

Check out https://www.track.tax

It works exactly as you described- money goes into your account first, then taxes are calculated and moved to your tax savings account. You can get paid via check, zero friction.

[acallwood]

Connecting two existing personal accounts is something we've considered, but we've found that this doesn't necessarily help saving from a user perspective. The majority of our users love that they now have an account that is out of sight and out of mind. We haven't ruled out other options, but the current setup has been pretty well received by our current our user base.

[meesterdude]

FWIW, the second account WOULD be out of sight out of mind. you would just deposit into it, and then money would flow from it into your actual bank account via the service. Obviously, if you can get direct deposit, it works a lot better and you don't need such a setup.

But the very nature of 1099 means you could be working with a variety of clients, and are more likely to receive payment via check or other one-time method, versus direct deposit which is more common for W2 employees. I can't tell you how many one-off gigs i've had, or on/off where they just want to send me a check and thats the last i hear from them for months or ever; i'd get laughed at if i asked for direct deposit. (and did by a long term client: they like writing out checks)

If you want to actually solve this for 1099ers, your going to have to do more than just what works for a subset of users; and supporting checks absolutely needs to be on your roadmap at some point, at minimum. Otherwise... I don't think you really have any sympathy or understanding of the very field that you're trying to solve a problem for.

[deuce42x]

> If you want to actually solve this for 1099ers, your going to have to do more than just what works for a subset of users; and supporting checks absolutely needs to be on your roadmap at some point, at minimum. Otherwise... I don't think you really have any sympathy or understanding of the very field that you're trying to solve a problem for.

Totally agree here. We're working on getting some folks running on the current build & making sure it's stable, but we've already identified a couple options for remote check capture to be included when we get to building out native mobile. It's definitely key to serving a large portion of the total market.