Unauthorised Expenditure
Unauthorised Overspending by Vote
Unauthorised overspending by vote ranks where spending exceeded its appropriation, attributing each breach to the budget owner responsible.
Why Overspending by Vote Matters
Spending beyond an approved appropriation is unauthorised expenditure — a direct breach of the appropriation that Parliament or council granted, and one of the disclosure items AGSA scrutinises most closely. Under the MFMA and PFMA, overspending a vote is unlawful regardless of intent, and it must be disclosed, investigated and, where applicable, authorised after the fact or recovered. AuditPro Core ranks unauthorised overspending by vote so the breaches are attributed to a budget owner, not buried in a global total.
The Numbers
AuditPro Core renders this view from your tenant's live, tamper-evident records. The figures below are illustrative sample data.
Unauthorised total
R6.7 bn
▲ 3%
Votes overspent
19
of 84
Largest single vote
R1.4 bn
Pending authorisation
R5.1 bn
Overspending by vote (R m)
Overspending detail
| Vote | Budget (R bn) | Over (R m) | % over |
|---|---|---|---|
| Health | 58.2 | 1420 | 2.4 |
| Education | 71.4 | 1180 | 1.7 |
| Human Settlements | 19.6 | 860 | 4.4 |
| Transport | 32.1 | 640 | 2 |
Figures shown are illustrative sample data for demonstration. AuditPro Core renders these views from your own tenant's live, tamper-evident records.
Unauthorised Expenditure
Unauthorised expenditure is spending not in accordance with the approved budget, including overspending a vote or main division. It is unlawful even when the underlying purpose was legitimate.
The Vote as Limit
The appropriation per vote is a legal ceiling, not a guideline. Crossing it requires prior approval or a properly approved virement; doing so without either creates unauthorised expenditure.
Virement Limits
Funds may be shifted between line items only within defined virement rules. Overspending dressed up as virement beyond those limits remains unauthorised.
Authorisation and Recovery
After the fact, unauthorised expenditure may be authorised by the relevant authority or must be recovered. Either way it must be disclosed and investigated, not silently absorbed.
How AuditPro Core Bridges the Gap
- Vote-level reconciliation: AuditPro Core compares actual spend to the appropriation per vote so breaches are attributed precisely.
- Continuous monitoring: votes trending toward their ceiling are flagged before they overspend.
- Exception workflow: confirmed overspending routes into the disclosure, investigation and authorisation process.
- Audit-ready output: the unauthorised-expenditure schedule exports straight into the disclosure note.
Key Takeaways
- Overspending a vote is unlawful regardless of the purpose served.
- The appropriation is a legal ceiling, not a target.
- Virement beyond the rules does not cure unauthorised spend.
- Catch votes trending over before year-end, not after.
See This on Your Own Data
AuditPro Core renders this dashboard from your tenant's live, tamper-evident records — every figure traceable to source.