I'm looking for a word or phrase to describe how someone in charge of a budget can rearrange funds and categories legally but deceitfully. For example, you know that "juggling the books" refers to an illegal deceit. But suppose the person is appealing for / applying for funds from a certain source and he or she PROMISES that source their money will be earmarked for a stated purpose and not used for another. They can even prove it later by tracking expenditures toward that purpose and not another. But what people don't realize (and where I lack the vocabulary) is when those new funds free up what would have been spent. Say, in past budget years there were funds which had to be spent in this same area, and now, with the new source of funds for this area, what used to be devoted to it can be applied elsewhere.
What is a term that expresses flexible budgeting that is legal but not necessarily ethical/moral?
Details:
Added 3+ months ago:
For example, pro-life people donating earmarked funds to United Way might see them increase a subdivided pool of non-earmarked funds that ultimately sends additional money to an abortion provider. Or tax payers voting on a busing tax increase proposal might be surprised to learn they have inadvertently freed funds that the government agency responsible for budgeting will devote toward developing a high-speed rail system. Earmarking funds for a purpose does not guarantee you won't also be supporting something else.
Responses
No responses have yet been posted. Add your response to this question.