• Mission & Governance
• Services Overview
• How to Get Involved
• Standing Committees
• NCSL Foundation

• Issue Areas: A-Z
• State-Federal Relations
• NCSL Standing Committees
• News from D.C. and the States

• About State Legislatures
• Elections, Campaigns & Redistricting
• NCSL's StateConnect Directory
• Web Sites

• Online Guide to NCSL Services
• Staff Sections and Networks
• Meetings & Professional Development
• Staff Directories

• Meetings Calendar
• Online Registration
• Meetings Home Page
• Legislative Summit

• Bookstore
• State Legislatures Magazine
• NCSL's StateConnect Directory

Transfer of Appropriations: Power of the Executive Branch and Role of the Legislature

Legislative Budget Procedures: Post-Enactment Budget Revisions and Supplemental Appropriations

Legislative Budget Procedures Executive Summary

Transfer of Appropriations: Power of the Executive Branch and Role of the Legislature

Source: National Conference of State Legislatures, December 1997.

Key:
-- = Not available
N/ A = Not applicable
N/R = No response

*Notes:

Alabama--Generally, the Legislature must amend the appropriations act for interdepartmental transfers; however, the governor may transfer any funds appropriated from the state general fund that are deemed to be a surplus to any agency that receives funding from the state general fund when the latter agency has insufficient funding to pay salaries. This provision is in the text of the general appropriations act each year; such transfers are rare.

Arkansas--Appropriations may not be transferred between agencies within a department, but program funds within an agency may be transferred. No transfers are allowed unless specific authority is granted in the appropriations act.

California--If transfers within a department constitute a new program or increased level of services or it they exceed $100,000, the executive branch must notify the Joint Legislative Budget Committee and wait 30 days for review before approval of the transfer.

Colorado--General Assembly vs. Lamm, 1985 (cite: 700 p.2D 508).

Connecticut--Appropriations transfers between departments are allowed if a legislative act transfers duties (Sec. 4-39), or if it is necessary to take advantage of federal funds (SA 97-21, Sec. 22). Although an amendment to the appropriations act would be required to move surplus money from one agency to another, this is seldom done. A supplemental or deficiency appropriation is provided and unspent funds are allowed to lapse.

Delaware--No funds may be transferred into appropriations for "salaries and wages" from appropriations for nonsalary items (Delaware Statutes, Sec. 29-6528 (d)). Permanent statute may be superseded by provisions in the annual budget act.

Florida--The head of each department, when deemed necessary, may transfer funds 1) between categories of appropriations within a budget entity, if no category of appropriation is increased or decreased by more than 5 percent of the original approved budget, or 2) between budget entities within identical categories of appropriations, if no category of appropriation is increased or decreased by more than 5 percent.

Georgia--The executive can transfer an entire program between departments and can transfer between programs within a department.

Hawaii--Interdepartmental transfers are not allowed, although some agencies have circumvented this prohibition by spending significant amounts of their appropriation to benefit another agency. This has occurred especially in the areas of technology and computers. The executive's authority to transfer appropriations between program classes is unlimited; however, the Legislature has been conducting more reviews of past practices.

Idaho--No appropriation made for expenses (other than personal services) shall be expended for personal services to the particular office for which it is appropriated. Also, all money appropriated for capital outlay must be used for that purpose (Idaho Statutes, 67-3511).

Illinois--Some agencies (such as Medicaid) may transfer among certain non-operations line items.

Kansas--Some transfers between departments may be allowed, with special legislative permission. Any state agency may, with the approval of the state finance council, transfer all or part of one of its items of appropriation to another of its items of appropriation.

Louisiana--Health and human resources can transfer funds--which in the aggregate do not exceed 25 percent of the total budget unit--and positions between organizational units within the department.

Maryland--Interdepartmental transfers are allowed only if specifically authorized by the budget, part of a reorganization, federally required or due to a declared emergency.

Michigan--Transfers of appropriations within any department to adjust for current cost and price variations or to adjust federal sources of financing are allowed after 30 days' notice to House and Senate appropriations committees. Transfers may be disapproved. Legislative approval is waived if the transfer is to pay employee fringe benefits and is not more than 3 percent or $30,000, whichever is greater. The maximum allowed under this provision is $50,000 (Michigan, Public Acts 1976, No. 120, Sec. 17.6 (2), Michigan Compiled Laws). For transfers for other than cost and price variations, approval of House and Senate appropriations committees is required to become effective.

Mississippi--Exclusive of equipment, salaries, fringe benefits, etc.

Montana--The executive has authority to transfer appropriations between departments only if the funds will be used for the same purpose. For transfers between program classes within a department and objects within a department, any changes of 25 percent of the appropriation and $25,000, or $1 million must be reviewed by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) before enactment, unless it is of a time sensitive nature. These amounts were chosen as an indicator of a policy change, which must be reviewed by the LFC.

Nevada--Limited by appropriations act and requires Interim Finance Committee approval. Transfers exceeding $50,000 or 10 percent of expenditure category must be approved by Interim Finance Committee.

New Hampshire--Transfers are limited to operating expenses and exclude personal services, employee benefits and out-of-state travel expenses.

New Mexico--There was a transfer limitation across divisions not to exceed 7.5 percent cumulative, vertical transfers by exception; however, the governor has vetoed this provision in the last three years.

New York--Up to 5 percent of an appropriation or less than or equal to $5 million; up to 4 percent of an appropriation of $5 million to $10 million; up to 3 percent of an appropriation greater than or equal to $10 million.

Northern Mariana Islands--Fund transfer or reprogramming is allowed of up to 25 percent of an accumulated total, generally under PL 3-68, subject to restrictions provided by the Annual Appropriation Acts. Capital Improvement Project accounts may not be reprogrammed unless completed and certified to as such by the expenditure authority.

Ohio--Some small boards and statewide elected officials receive a lump sum operating expenses appropriation that includes funds for personal service, maintenance and equipment. How these funds are actually expended after they are appropriated is up to each of these agencies. These object of expense appropriations also are occasionally mixed when an agency receives a lump sum appropriation for a particular program, such as arthritis education.

Pennsylvania--Transfers of funds that will be used for original intent can occur via 1) subcontracts or 2) reorganization plan (that requires legislative oversight). The reorganization plan would move the entity receiving the appropriation to another department. If the money is to be used for the same purpose, it can be moved on a contractual basis. If the intent is to use the money for a different purpose, the transfer is not allowed. Transfer of funds between departments for purposes of using funds for other than the intended purpose is not allowed.

South Carolina--Transfers from certain departments or programs may be prohibited specifically by proviso in the appropriations act. Proviso in the annual appropriations act gives the Budget and Control Board transfer authority within certain limitations.

Utah--The executive is allowed to transfer between programs as long as the transfer is within the same item (appropriation category). Although Utah does not appropriate by object of expenditure, appropriations intended for objects of expenditure may be transferred as long as the transfer is within the same appropriation category.

Virginia--The governor may transfer up to 15 percent of an agency's appropriation between "closely and definitely related" items or programs, provided that the affected agency directors agree that such transfers are consistent with legislative intent.

Washington--The executive cannot transfer funds from one appropriation to another unless explicitly authorized. Most departments have a single appropriation. Departments may transfer funds within the agency unless prohibited by law.

West Virginia--Effective July 1, 1992, executive authority provides that no more than 10 percent (previously 25 percent) of the funds appropriated to any one agency or board may be transferred to other agencies or boards within the department. The statutory authority to transfer expired on June 30, 1989, but has been continued in the annual budget bill.

Wyoming--Reviewed every two years.

Published March 1998; posted January 2004.
The publication to which this table belongs, Legislative Budget Procedures: A Guide to Appropriations and Budget Processes in the States, Commonwealths and Territories, is available wholly and solely online.
Email mailto:statebudget-info@ncsl.org?subject=Legislative Budget Procedures: Transfer of Appropriations: Power of the Executive Branch and Role of the Legislature for more information.
Visitor counts for this page.