Bugs

What is the issue? Users with more than 1000 transactions are encountering the error 99999-OFX-UNSUCCESSFUL when attempting to import their CoinTracker data into H&R Block. Who is affected? Users with more than 1,000 transactions importing their data to H&R Block Online. What is the workaround? This is a transaction limitation on H&R Block's side, and we are working with them to increase the limit. In the meantime, users can follow the steps in our help article to enter their crypto tax data in H&R Block. Keywords: H&R Block import error, CoinTracker tax data, 99999-OFX-UNSUCCESSFUL, OFX error

What is the issue? Some Solana transactions that interact with DeFi protocols like Kamino Finance are categorized in a transaction labeled as "Multiple". In the "multiple" transactions are a group of individual transactions such as trades, add/remove liquidity, staking, etc. However, the order of operations may be miscalculated resulting in a negative balance. Example: "Multiple" transaction that contains a borrow and lending deposit may have the asset show the lending deposit first before the borrow. As a user, what should I do? You can upvote this forum post to indicate you are experiencing this behavior. The post status will be changed to Complete once a fix is rolled out to all users. Up-voters will be notified of the status change. Is there a workaround? As a workaround, users can ignore the "multiple" transactions that are affected by this issue and instead recreate the individual transactions manually. For the outflow (send) transaction, users can create it a second after the inflow (receive) transaction to ensure the order of operations is correct. Example: -"Multiple" transaction containing a borrow and lending deposit. -Recreate the Borrow (inflow) transaction first with the same date and time as the original "multiple transaction. -Recreate the Lending Deposit (outflow) transaction with the same date but the time being a second after the Borrow transaction. Note that when the team addresses the issue, these manual edits could result in duplicate transactions. I need additional assistance, who can I contact? For further assistance, please contact our support team directly. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation as we work to enhance your CoinTracker experience! Keywords: Solana DeFi, review suggested error, transaction classification, swap issue, liquidity pool, borrow, lending

What is the issue? Solana rent fees (refundable), are causing discrepancies in DeFi transaction tracking such as Liquidity Pools, Minting, etc. The fees are being included in the wrong fields, such as in the Add Liquidity field. (see screenshot below) As a user, what should I do? You can upvote this forum post to indicate you are experiencing this behavior. The post status will be changed to Complete once a fix is rolled out to all users. Up-voters will be notified of the status change. Is there a workaround? As a workaround, users can manually recreate the DeFi transaction, but include the refundable (rent) fees as part of the Send portion instead of the Add Liqudity, Staking, etc. After the transaction is recreated, they can ignore the original transaction to avoid duplicates. Keep in mind that when the team addresses the issue, these manual edits could result in duplicate transactions. I need additional assistance, who can I contact? For further assistance, please contact our support team directly. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation as we work to enhance your CoinTracker experience! Keywords: Solana rent fees, DeFi transactions, refundable fees, Solana transaction errors

What is the issue? The Robinhood API sync completes without error, but returns 0 balance and 0 transactions, even though the account has activity. What is the workaround? Users can manually import their Robinhood transaction history using a CSV. Instructions are available in the Help Center . Keywords: Robinhood API, zero balance, missing transactions, sync issue

Users may experience: Users report that the cost basis per coin value is not accurate When calculating the average cost basis via the transactions CSV the value calculated does not match the value displayed on the performance page Expected behavior: Users expect to see consistent values across CoinTracker, if users see the average cost per coin on their performance page, they should have full confidence that the value is accurate and matches their transaction history. As a user, what should I do? If a user sees inflated or deflated cost basis values, we recommend first verifying if and transactions for their asset have a cost basis of zero, alternatively they may want to check if there cost basis is abnormally high within the transactions page. Users can also hang tight! Our team is investigating this behavior. How can users provide feedback? You can upvote this forum post to indicate you are experiencing this behavior. The post status will be changed to Complete once a fix is rolled out to all users. Up-voters will be notified of the status change. I need additional assistance, who can I contact? For further assistance, please contact our support team directly. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation as we work to enhance your CoinTracker experience! Keyword: performance, cost basis, cost basis per coin, wrong numbers

Users may experience: Odd behavior with assets NFT on the user account. The transaction shows a value of the amount of the NFT without further details to identify the asset. (It does not always impact all transactions involving the same NFT) Expected behavior: The transaction should display the metadata (image and name) consistently for all supported assets. As a user, what should I do? Users impacted can utilize custom currencies to represent the impacted NFTs. Please ensure that all transactions with the same NFT utilize the same custom currency to avoid cost basis issues. Additional Information Please upvote this post to indicate that you are experiencing this behavior. We have information on bug reports and what the status means in our help center . For further assistance or inquiries regarding this bug you can contact the support team . Thank you for your understanding and cooperation as we work to enhance your CoinTracker experience! Keywords: NFT, assets, transaction discrepancy

Users may experience: Users cannot edit transactions that have truncated asset flows. These transactions will be displayed as "+ x additional flows." Users cannot edit the cost basis of assets that are truncated in the transaction view. Expected behavior: Users should be able to access all assets in a transaction, including those currently truncated, to edit their cost basis and update transaction details. Keywords: transaction truncation, cost basis, asset editing, inaccessible assets, editing transactions, multiple asset flows, truncated view, blank transaction page, NFT, nft edit

Users may experience: Users report some transfer transactions are not transfer matching on the Solana blockchain. Users will see a separate Send and Receive transaction representing the two sides of the transfer (Image 1) Note: The Send transaction will contain a small SOL entry, representing a fee. Expected behavior: While the Transfer transaction is the intended activity, CoinTracker currently transfer matches 1:1 transactions meaning that the Send side of the transaction needs to match the Receive side of the transaction. In this case, there is a small SOL entry that represents a non-gas, causing the transfer match to fail The small SOL entry is expected as per the blockchain, there are non-gas fees in various SOL transactions. As a user, what should I do? For now, users will need to manually update their SOL transactions to properly reflect the transfers. 1️⃣ Manually ignore the non-gas fee entry send of SOL—this will allow the transfer to autodetect correctly. 2️⃣ Recreate the non-gas fee entry send of SOL as a manual transaction, ensuring it is recorded as a single-entry Send transaction. In the example below, once the non-gas fee entry send of SOL is ignored, the CHONKY transfer should correctly autodetect with CHONKY appearing on both the Send and Receive side of the transaction. The only manual action needed beyond ignoring the sent SOL asset is creating a separate single-entry Send transaction for the non-gas fee entry of SOL. This ensures the transfer is properly matched while accurately representing the fee. How can users provide feedback? You can upvote this forum post to indicate you are experiencing this behavior. The post status will be changed to Complete once a fix is rolled out to all users. Up-voters will be notified of the status change. I need additional assistance, who can I contact? For further assistance, please contact our support team directly. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation as we work to enhance your CoinTracker experience! Keyword: transfer, SOL, solana, transfer match, fee

Users may experience: As a user, when I import the blockchain.com ZIP to CoinTracker I expect all of the transactions within the CSV to be imported correctly. Users report Send transactions are incorrectly double counting fees on the outgoing asset and the fee column. As a user, what should I do? As a workaround, users can manually edit the outgoing amount to reflect the correct outgoing amount without the fee. How can users provide feedback? You can upvote this forum post to indicate you are experiencing this behavior. The post status will be changed to Complete once a fix is rolled out to all users. Up-voters will be notified of the status change. I need additional assistance, who can I contact? For further assistance, please contact our support team directly . Thank you for your understanding and cooperation as we work to enhance your CoinTracker experience! Keywords: ZIP, imported wallet, blockchain.com , blockchain.com fees, fees incorrect, double fees

Users may experience: Users will see an erroneous negative balance in the outgoing wallet during a transfer where both the outgoing and incoming wallets have associated fees. The outgoing wallet is reflecting both the outgoing and incoming fees, creating an insufficient balance. Expected behavior: Only the outgoing fee should be deducted from the outgoing wallet, and the incoming fee should be deducted from the incoming wallet. As a user, what should I do? Users with fees on both the incoming and outgoing side of the transaction should deduct the amount of the fee from the receiving/incoming side of the transaction and ignore the second fee so there's no double fee on transfer. Additional Information Please upvote this post to indicate that you are experiencing this behavior. We have information on bug reports and what the status means in our help center . For further assistance or inquiries regarding this bug you can contact the support team . Keywords: transfer fee, insufficient balance, negative balance