Budgetary comparison reporting shows how legally adopted financial plans changed and how actual resource flows compared with those plans. State and local governments use these comparisons within the annual comprehensive financial report to demonstrate accountability for raising and spending public resources.
The comparisons answer three connected questions:
- What resources and spending did the original budget anticipate?
- How did legally adopted amendments change that plan?
- How did actual results compare with the final spending authority and revenue estimates?
For local governments, a favorable spending variance means charges were below the specified budget, but does not establish that planned services were delivered efficiently.
The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) requires local governments to present budgetary comparisons as required supplementary information (RSI), information that supplies essential context for the basic financial statements. Budgetary RSI appears in the financial section, following the notes to the basic financial statements.
The revised reporting model applies to local governments for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2025, with early application permitted.
Common mistakes
- Forecast substituted for legal amendment. A manager's revised spending estimate cannot replace a legally effective final appropriation.
- Only one variance column. Under the revised model, reporting final-to-actual differences alone omits the required original-to-final comparison.
- Aggregate savings erase departmental excess. Cedar Bay's $2,000 favorable total leaves a $4,000 excess when departmental limits bind.
Bottom line
- Budgetary comparisons demonstrate accountability for the original plan, legal amendments and actual resource flows.
- The General Fund and each major special revenue fund require comparisons when they have legally adopted annual budgets.
- The revised model requires RSI presentation, both variance columns and explanations of significant variances in notes to RSI.
- Original budgets include qualifying automatic carryovers; final budgets include legally effective amendments applicable to the year.
Exam shortcut
The reporting-period and early-adoption assumptions establish the applicable model. An older example's basic-statement election does not establish a current presentation alternative. The fund type and “legally adopted annual budget” condition establish required coverage; the revised model then requires original, final, actual, both variance columns and explanations. A “favorable overall” stem requires identification of the binding appropriation level before a legal-budget compliance conclusion follows.
The full lesson (about 2,811 words, 19 min read) adds 3 worked examples, all 4 common mistakes, a self-check, free in the app.
Learning objectives
- III.A7
Browse all free CPA BAR lessons or jump into free CPA BAR practice questions.