# Bookkeeping review: categorising bank transactions > Bookkeeping review: categorising bank transactions: Account and tax code for each line Checked: vetoed by code. Produces categorised ledger, questions for the client. Source: https://www.sumarity.ai/library/bookkeeping-review-categorising-bank-transactions/ Accounting, tax and Treuhand firms # Bookkeeping review: categorising bank transactions Reads bank transactions, the chart of accounts, the client's documents. Produces categorised ledger, questions for the client. Code works out every figure, the Judgement Engine answers the narrow questions, and whatever stays uncertain goes to a person. Vetoed by codeClose and accounting Start from this workflowMore for accounting firms What it decides ## Narrow questions, each with a check behind it. Account and tax code for each line Vetoed by code: amounts, supplier history. Code can't prove the answer right, but it can prove it wrong: an amount out of range, an impossible date, a name not on the document. Many settle; the rest go to a person. Cross-checked: documents. A second source has to agree: a register, a contract, a list. When it does the judgement settles; when it doesn't, a person decides. | Reads | Bank transactions, the chart of accounts, the client's documents | Produces | Categorised ledger, questions for the client | Who signs | A person on your team, with every figure traced to its document and every call on record | Process | Close and accounting | Industry | Accounting, tax and Treuhand firms See it run ## Every line, decided where it's safest. An example run. Each stage lights up as a line is decided there; pick a stage to see its lines. ReadsBank transactions, the chart of accounts, the client's documentsCodeReads, matches, ties out and works out every figure.JudgementAccount and tax code for each line. Settles only when it clears the cutoff and no check in code rules it out.A personGets whatever stays uncertain, with the evidence. Their ruling tunes the next run.ProducesCategorised ledger, questions for the client Bookkeeping review: categorising bank transactions · example run Example run | Ref | Item | Value | Decided by | 02.09 | AMAZON MKTP 4471Office supplies, matches last month's coding · 0.94 | −86.40 | Engine · checked | 03.09 | SALARY SEPTPayroll run, same amount as the payslips | −12,400.00 | Code · matched | 04.09 | TWINT 0791234No document: what was it? | −240.00 | To a person | 05.09 | SWISSCOMTelephone, recurring supplier · 0.97 | −89.00 | Engine · checked | 08.09 | INVOICE 2207 KELLERCustomer receipt, invoice open | 4,820.00 | Code · matched | Settled 4 To a person 1 Settled wrong 0 Illustrative lines. Amber rows are the Judgement Engine's calls; each settles only above its cutoff and when its check agrees. What it could save ## Your volumes in. Your hours out. In our tests, between 24% and 42% of items still went to a person after tuning. Set your own share; a pilot measures it on your data. Items per run Runs per month Minutes per item by hand Cost per hour Share of items that still need a person: 30% By hand today80 ha month With Sumarity24 ha month, for the items people decide Saved56 hCHF 53,760 a year Related ## Start from what's closest. ### Close and accounting in other work Finance ### Balance sheet account reconciliation and certification What explains each balance; whether support is enough Proven by codeFinance ### Manual journal entry review Whether an entry is supported, authorised, unusual Cross-checkedFinance ### Accruals review Whether an accrual is needed and its size is supported Checked by the outcome ### More for accounting firms ### UK VAT return for a small business (pub VAT) Each document's VAT treatment; what's missing Proven by codeTested ### Swiss VAT (MWST) return Rate and method per line; input tax recoverable Proven by code ### German VAT advance return (USt-Voranmeldung) Treatment per line, reverse charge Proven by code Questions ## What buyers ask What happens when Sumarity isn't sure? Nothing settles below the cutoff, or when the check disagrees. The item goes to a person in the inbox with what the engine saw, its best answer and the runner-up. The person's ruling is kept and tunes the next run. How are its judgements checked? Code can't prove the answer right, but it can prove it wrong: an amount out of range, an impossible date, a name not on the document. Many settle; the rest go to a person. Can we change it to fit how we work? Yes. Start from this workflow and describe your differences in plain words. The design assistant revises it, the validator checks it, your expert reviews it on the canvas, and your admin publishes it. Does it read our files as they are? Yes: spreadsheets and CSV in any layout, PDFs, bank formats and e-mail attachments. Sumarity suggests how each column maps, proves the mapping on a sample and remembers it once a person confirms it. Where does our data go? Sumarity runs in Zurich. Your data, backups and logs are stored in Switzerland. How does it get better? Your team's rulings become an answer key. Better questions and cutoffs are proposed, tested on data they haven't seen, and published only when your admin approves. It improves itself, with permission. ## Start from this workflow. Run it on your data. A pilot runs alongside your own process for a few weeks, at our cost, and ends in a line-by-line comparison. Talk to usBack to the library