Transfer money from Budget to "other"

[aebrown]

The whole premise of the opening post is that the bishop "wrote the check" out of the "other account" (which didn't have any money in it yet, but was going to get money as camp funds came in) instead of the "budget account" (which apparently did have the money to cover the expense.) If you have the money in the budget account, don't you have the money?

No. The "Other" account truly is a separate account, and you need to treat it as such, because the Church does.

If I have $1000 in my checking account and owe $300 to a credit card company, I can't just say "I've got a total $700 positive balance, so it's all good." I have to pay my credit card bill. Even if that credit card is issued by the same bank where I have my checking account, I still have to pay my credit card bill, or bad things will start to happen.

The same is true for a deficit in the "Other" account. This is not just theory. I know for certain that the Church sends out notices when "Other" has a negative balance, because priesthood leaders have passed on those communications to me (I don't know precisely how quickly or which amounts draw their attention, but it does happen). It matters not one whit how much money is available in the Budget account. The letters are kind, not threatening, but they are quite firm that action must be taken promptly to correct the deficit.

So, it seems to me that by moving money back and forth from "budgets" and "others" accounts, it sort of defeats the purpose of even having "other" accounts.

Not so. A specific subcategory of "Other" is used to account for all money that comes in for a specific purpose. That same category is also used to track all expenses for that specific purpose. This is very useful accounting.

Now it's very clear in all the documentation for the "Other" account that there is no requirement or even expectation that the money contributed for that specific purpose will completely cover the cost of the event. So it is common and completely correct to spend all of the money available in the "Other" account that was paid for the specific purpose, and the remainder of the cost comes from Budget.

When the event is over, and all funds have been accounted for, the end result should be that the "Other" subcategory is at zero, and the Budget has been charged for the costs not covered by that subcategory. Along the way, it's possible that some adjustments had to be made to cover (or better yet, avoid) temporary deficits in the "Other" subcategory. But those are just steps towards that end state of the accounts, and in no way defeat the purpose of the "Other" account.

[TinMan]

I learned something new today. Thank you.

[TinMan]

When the event is over, and all funds have been accounted for, the end result should be that the "Other" subcategory is at zero, and the Budget has been charged for the costs not covered by that subcategory. Along the way, it's possible that some adjustments had to be made to cover (or better yet, avoid) temporary deficits in the "Other" subcategory. But those are just steps towards that end state of the accounts, and in no way defeat the purpose of the "Other" account.

Does it work in reverse? IOW: if at the end of the year, I have $300.00 in the "funeral other account" can I just move it to "budget?" Even though the people who donated the money targeted it for funerals?

[aebrown]

Does it work in reverse? IOW: if at the end of the year, I have $300.00 in the "funeral other account" can I just move it to "budget?" Even though the people who donated the money targeted it for funerals?

No. Remember that the fundamental premise of the "Other" account is that funds are paid for a specific purpose, and spent for that specific purpose.

The instructions for the "Other" account state that if the funds paid into a particular subcategory of "Other" exceed the amount needed, the excess is to be returned to the member. If for some reason that can't be done, the funds are to be designated as surplus and returned to the Church.

[TinMan]

Good thing hams freeze.



Thanks again for your patience with me.

[ggllbb]

I might be seeing this wrong, but the previous comments talk about "moving" funds between accounts. That is not what is happening. No funds are "moving", rather the change is only to which account the funds come from. In other words, the $1000 originally came only from the Other account. The change was to have $500 come from each of budget and other. No funds are "moved" from budget to other.

[aebrown]

I might be seeing this wrong, but the previous comments talk about "moving" funds between accounts. That is not what is happening. No funds are "moving", rather the change is only to which account the funds come from. In other words, the $1000 originally came only from the Other account. The change was to have $500 come from each of budget and other. No funds are "moved" from budget to other.

Well, if you originally had $1000 come from Other, and now you have $500 from each of Budget and Other, somehow $500 has to move from Budget to Other. If you examine closely what happens in MLS and in CUBS when you make such a change, you'll see that a transfer is created. You didn't explicitly create a transfer, but a transfer was created nonetheless. So funds really do move.

[ggllbb]

Thanks for the clarification. Bottom line is, though, that the funds did ultimately come from the Budget, even though they go through Other. It's all accounting.

It's been a few years since I was clerk, but as a councilor in the branch presidency, I try to keep up with how things work. We have only one overworked clerk/executive secretary.

[dannykos]

I've just been told by GSC that the only way for Stake to recoup funds from the wards spent on Deacons / Beehives camp is to transfer from Ward-Other to Stake-Other. Then I'm supposed to recategorise all related stake expenses for the camp from Budget to Other?! Does that sound right to everyone else?

We're on CUBS, incase that makes any difference.

[Gary_Miller]

I've just been told by GSC that the only way for Stake to recoup funds from the wards spent on Deacons / Beehives camp is to transfer from Ward-Other to Stake-Other. Then I'm supposed to recategorise all related stake expenses for the camp from Budget to Other?! Does that sound right to everyone else?

Does not sound right to me. Since a Deacons/Beehive camp would be considered a Youth Conference all expenses would come from the Budget allowance not the other account. If the wards are paying part of the costs then the correct way would be for the wards to write a check , from the budget allowance, to the stake and the stake deposit the check into the Stake Budget.