Could you please help me with financial terms?
In my practice, I have encountered the 2 following terms while translating e-mails of the American origin:
1. Allocate funds
2. Obligate funds
The authors seemed to mean the same thing - provide funds for this or that purpose. Could anyone explain in some detail what is the difference in the above terms?
There is also "de-obligate funds from". I'm totally confused...
Thanks in advance.
I am not Almighty God to say you what exist and what doesn’t exist . I would advise you to begin with the ground notion as allocation and obligation.
allocation = 1. the setting aside of money for a particular purpose: the sum of money to set aside
2. the dividing up of total cost into the separate kinds of costs of which it is made up, and then the charging of these separate coasts(called allocated costs) to particular accounts.
Allocate funds = Use the money available so that the most important or urgent jobs get the most or the earliest funds and so on, down to the least important or least urgent jobs which should get the least or the latest money.
obligation = 1. any duty, promise or agreement that is morally or legally binding
2. the relation between debtor and creditor
Here are a few words concerning the term obligate funds as well as the “non-existing” term “de-obligate”
The purpose of this modification is to obligate funds provided under FPR No. 08-20
D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority):
Unilateral Modification in accordance with DEAR 970.5232-4 entitled "Obligation of Funds."
Funds Obligated Through Modification A1 16 (08- 19) $3,080,404,355.53
Amount Obligated by Modification A1 18 (08-20) $ 19,966,137.09
Total Funds Obligated: $3,100,370,492.62
SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICESICOSTS
Clause B. 5, Obligation of Funds is revised to read as follows:
The amount presently obligated under this Contract is as follow
Funds Obligated by Contract Award $
Funds Obligated by Modification No. A001 (05-01) $
Funds Obligated by Modification No. A003 (05-02) $
Funds Obligated by Modification No. A004 (05-03) $
Award Multiple Contracts for Natural Gas Refueling Station Infrastructure, De-Obligate Prior Funding Commitments and Reissue RFP…..
Nine proposals were received by October 1, 2004 (the closing date of the solicitation) totaling over $1.2 million in requested funding. Eight of the nine proposals were deemed technically qualified for a total of $980,618 in funds, exceeding the available level of funding. Staff is recommending that the eight proposals be funded at this time. Staff also recommends that unspent funds from prior Board awards for natural gas infrastructure be de-obligated to assist in the funding of the eight proposals. Should the Board approve this request to de-obligate funds, staff recommends setting aside $254,572 from the reverted funds to fully fund the eight eligible projects. In addition, staff recommends that additional de-obligated funds be used in the re-issuance of the natural gas infrastructure RFP.
Deobligation. (1) HUD may deobligate all or parts of grants for acquisition, rehabilitation, acquisition and rehabilitation, or new construction: (i) If the actual total cost of acquisition, rehabilitation, acquisition and rehabilitation, or new construction is less than the total cost anticipated in the application; or (ii) If proposed activities for which funding was approved are not begun within three months or residents do not begin to occupy the facility within nine months after grant execution.
Read more: http://cfr.vlex.com/vid/583-410-obligation-deobligation-funds-19928404#ixzz0xncXi935
"English" and the "language that the United States Government uses" are close, but not the same thing.
It is not common or normal for "obligate" to be used in this manner, or for "de-obligate" to exist as a word.
Thanks to everyone. It is quite informative! I especially enjoyed the statement by SoothingDave that '"English" and the "language that the United States Government uses" are close, but not the same thing'. On my side, I would say that the situation seems to be the same in Russia in many respects, and not only in the lingustic or semantic aspects, well with account of the fact that we speak Russian here, rather than English.
Anyway, here is a citation taken from a letter I translated:
Do you with XYZ want to de-obligate funds from the XYZ-ABC General Order Agreement to pay for an (*) equipment setup?
The XYZ and ABC are in fact the company names that I replaced. (*) is the type of equipment.
So, "de-obligate" not only exists but has to be translated in some way. LOL
Last edited by Jack8rkin; 01-Sep-2010 at 13:08.