Help · Wages.software
Start with the decision you need to explain.
This reference helps a reader frame a synthetic case and interpret a named calculation boundary. There is no self-serve Wages account to troubleshoot and no payroll operation to complete on this page.
Prepare a case
Use synthetic values and bring the governing source.
Choose one calculation whose expected result is already understood. Replace names, account numbers, government identifiers, and addresses with synthetic values. Preserve only the facts that affect the decision: pay period, earning categories, deduction treatment, filing attributes, authority, effective date, and expected cents. Bring the official worksheet or rule artifact used for the known answer. A screenshot of another payroll product is not a source rule.
State what you are trying to verify. A taxable-basis question is different from a withholding-table question, and both differ from a reconciliation mismatch. Narrow scope lets the relevant engine expose its inputs and reasons without implying that the whole payroll lifecycle has been reproduced.
Read a refusal
A refusal identifies the boundary that needs evidence; it is not a generic error.
An unsigned federal table lacks the required sign-off and returns zero with needs_sme_unsigned_table; it does not establish the correct withholding amount. An ambiguous or overlapping effective window means the registry cannot choose safely. A missing tenant or finance role means the caller lacks the context needed to see or run the decision. An over-deduction flag remains visible even though the computed net is floored at zero. A reconciliation mismatch means related totals disagree and no balancing entry was invented.
Resolve the named cause rather than editing the output. Supply the signed source, correct the effective window, restore authorized context, revisit the input obligation, or investigate the differing artifact. Keep the original refusal alongside the corrected attempt so the review shows what changed.
Early-access support
One address, a scoped answer, and no promise of a live payroll console.
Email [email protected] with the decision category, jurisdiction, period, synthetic input shape, expected outcome, and the source that supports it. Do not attach employee or bank data. Ask for a distinction between a built module, a registered caller, missing rules or operating work, and duties outside the product. This is an enquiry, not a promised reply or a provisioned evaluation.
There is no password reset, subscription portal, uptime dashboard, emergency payroll line, or filing-status lookup because Wages.software does not provide those services. If a current payroll is blocked, use the operational support channel of the system and people responsible for that payroll. This site cannot release money or meet a filing deadline.
Turn a vague wrong-number report into a bounded question.
Imagine a fictional evaluator, Morgan, checking an invented statement on paper. They write expected basis 58,000 cents, observed basis 60,000 cents, gross 60,000 cents and deduction 2,000 cents. That is more useful than the sentence the tax is wrong. It identifies a disagreement before any rate has been applied. Morgan also states which hypothetical authority the example concerns and whether the supplied mask includes the deduction for that authority. The paper values describe a question; no calculator or support case runs on this page.
Next, Morgan checks whether expected and observed use the same unit and scope. Cents and dollars are different units. One authority's basis and the combined statement total are different quantities. A current-period amount and a year-to-date amount are different windows. Correcting a label may resolve the misunderstanding without changing arithmetic. If the difference remains, the next enquiry can name the precise inputs and relation that failed. It should not claim that the website changed a result or that the employer's underlying record is corrected.
Handle a held zero before comparing it with an expected amount.
In a separate fictional review, Morgan finds zero withholding next to needs_sme_unsigned_table. The first step is to keep that reason attached. Zero is the specified unsigned-table output, not an answer to the question of what the worker legally owes. Comparing it with a known payroll amount as if both were complete calculations would create a misleading discrepancy report. The useful help question asks why the required signature evidence is absent in the supplied table, with no real employee information needed to explain the condition.
An empty registry requires a similarly limited interpretation. The Wages reference says no statutory tables are shipped. A missing applicable source cannot be repaired by choosing a plausible percentage, asking an AI assistant to invent a rate or reusing an unrelated period. This guide offers none of those actions. The evaluator should identify the held decision and the governing-source question separately. If the operational deadline belongs to an existing payroll process, its responsible people and support channel remain in charge of that deadline.
Resolve status confusion before attempting the same action again.
Another common question is why a validated change does not appear as a saved employee instruction. The published distinction is that the relevant module computes and returns its result without persistence. Repeating a hypothetical request does not demonstrate that a stored instruction exists. A help note should quote the returned decision and ask which action it represents. It should not infer a completed bank change, append-only audit history or employer approval from a masked value. Those claims require effects beyond the return described on this site.
The structural bank preview has a different stopping point. It can describe checks while withholding the raw file. A missing download in that context is not evidence that the marketing page lost an attachment. The public product does not transmit a batch or confirm a deposit. Ask about the named structural result if that is the issue. If someone needs the status of an actual transfer, direct the question to the operational process that owns the transfer; no Wages page provides that lookup.
Leave a clear open question for the next human reader.
Morgan's final manual note has four parts: the page being read, the invented inputs, the narrow expected relationship and the exact unresolved condition. For the basis example, the note can say that the treatment of the 2,000-cent deduction remains the question. For the held-zero example, it can say that no signed table was supplied. These are separate issues and should stay separate. A short note with one reproducible disagreement is easier to assess than a collection of unrelated screenshots and copied payroll records.
A reader may ask whether following this guide opens a support ticket. It does not. There is no case form, account, promised response time or live payroll console here. A mailto link opens the reader's email application, and sending a message remains their action. Keep real worker and bank data out of that enquiry. The result this help page can support is a more precise explanation of the problem and its boundary, including a clear statement that an answer is still missing.
This is written guidance, not an AI diagnostic service. There is no checkout, subscription action or disbursement control here. A support question cannot change the published honest-off payment status. Keep the interpretation of a returned calculation separate from any actual payment problem, which remains with the people and system responsible for it.
Where to go next
The rest of this site.
Every page here is its own argument rather than a restatement of the home page. If you would rather ask a person, the address below reaches one.