The related-party register

The one input the books cannot supply. A ledger does not know that Mehta Enterprises belongs to a director's brother, and no amount of reading vouchers will discover it.

So you say, once. The register belongs to the client, not to the run, and every later year reuses it.

Until it has a name in it

The related-party test reports that it did not run, and says why. It does not report that nothing was found. Those two look identical on a screen and mean opposite things, and a scrutiny that cannot tell them apart is not worth much.

Link a ledger where you can

A linked ledger

The strongest match there is. It survives the ledger being renamed and it cannot catch a stranger who happens to share a surname.

A name

Matched the way the duplicate test matches parties: case, punctuation, the company suffix and whether "and" is written as an ampersand are all ignored. It goes no further than that deliberately — a wrongly merged party is much harder to notice than a missed match.

What you get back

One finding per party, not one per voucher: what you disclose is the dealing with a person, and the vouchers are its detail. Nothing is marked as wrong. Related-party dealing is lawful and ordinary, and what the law wants is disclosure.

A party you recorded with no transactions at all is reported too, because that is a fact worth knowing. If you linked a ledger and nothing matched it, check the link.

Suggest from the statements

If this client has financial statements, the directors and partners typed on Basic Info can be proposed with one button. Nothing is saved until you press Add against a name, and anything already in the register is left out of the list. Your wording and your description of the relationship always win.