Member Reimbursement: Fill & Download for Free

What you are asking for is to add other signatures to your account.This means that others can sign checks.What you do is arrange a meeting with your bank and all those who you want to add to your checking account.You will get best and most accurate answer if you call or visit your nearest Bank of America. Each bank will have specific policies regarding multiple signatories with your account.This is something that banks provide for clubs and companies so that no one person has to be present to sign checks. This is also important step to take in the event one of the signatories dies or leaves the organization. Bills have to be paid and members reimbursed for their organization related expenses. (My club lost our Treasurer a year ago.

Directly, none, but that doesn’t really tell the whole story.Your federal income taxes go into the general fund that the federal government uses. Part of the expenditures is payments on federal debt. A large portion of those payments goes to the Federal Reserve.In 2014, $64 billion was paid by the federal government to the federal reserve. See the Fed’s accounting statement:Federal Reserve BanksBut wait, there’s more!After the Fed pays its expenses, board member reimbursements, interest on deposits held at the Fed, etc, it gives its “profit” back to the US Treasury.In 2014 (latest report available), the Fed remitted $96 billion back to the Treasury.The remittance back to the Treasury is higher than the interest income from the Treasury because the Fed also had income of about $53 billion from mortgages and mortgage-backed securities that the Fed has acquired over the last several years.So some portion of your income taxes goes to payments on debt that the Fed owns and some portion goes to federally-backed defaulted loans that the Fed owns. The Fed spends about 10% of that total and then gives the rest back to the Treasury.

I was an “executive-level” individual contributor at a Fortune 50 company, working in the IT field. My job required me to be accessible 24 hours a day, and to have conference calls with extended team members spread all over the world on a regular basis. Many days, I would be on a conference call at 4 AM with someone on the far side of the globe, spend a full day at work, and then be on yet another international call at 9 PM. This was an almost-daily occurrence. I was required to be on all these calls, and could not possibly take them all in my office, so my manager (and our VP) went through a laborious “exception” process to get the company to reimburse me for my cell phone usage, so I could make those calls from wherever I was at the time. My cell phone bill at the time averaged about $100 a month.This went very well for 2–3 years, and then a new CFO arrived. She saw my expense sheet, and called me to determine why I was charging the company for my personal cell phone. I explained the rationale, and the exception process used to obtain approval through our VP. She did not like this at all, and said so in our conversation. So about a month later, a new T&E policy addendum came out: Effective immediately, company reimbursement for cell phones was to be prorated based on the percentage of the expense that was business-related (versus personal). A spreadsheet was provided, and anyone seeking reimbursement for business use of their personal cell phone was now required to complete and submit the spreadsheet with each month’s reimbursement form.Completing this spreadsheet required us to go through the monthly phone bill, enter the total number of calls and total minutes for those calls. We then had to transcribe the data for each and every business call, documenting who was called (or who called you) and the business reason for the call. The spreadsheet then totalled up the number of minutes for each business call, divided that by the total minutes used that month. That ratio was used to determine the “business-to-personal” ratio, which determined our percentage of reimbursement. When I talked to the CFO about this form, she actually admitted that her purpose in creating it was to make the process so odious that employees would prefer to bypass reimbursement, rather than spending the time and effort to seek reimbursement.That just didn’t sit right with me, so as a matter of principle, I would dutifully complete the form each month, spending the 2–3 hours required to transcribe the data from paper to spreadsheet to document that my cell phone usage was 98% business. Every month. Without fail. The average “savings” to the company for the 2–3 hours I spent completing the reimbursement form was under $2. Up to that point in time, there were only 15–16 people who were approved for cell phone reimbursement. All of us stood our ground, based on principle, and continued to file for reimbursement.The average company savings from this new policy: Well under $50 per month - world wide. Of course, those 15–16 people collectively lost about one week of productivity in time wasted completing the new forms. The CFO, of course, saw it as a “2% reduction in cell phone expenses” and loudly proclaimed the program a cost-reduction success. But not so fast…The first “unintended consequence” of the new policy was a wave of increased cell phone expense reimbursement, as EVERY SINGLE EMPLOYEE who had a cell phone began submitting for reimbursement of their prorated business use. Apparently, thousands of employees had been using their cell phones for business use for years with no avenue for reimbursement… But the new T&E policy had purposely dropped the “exception approval” requirement in an effort to “regain control over expenses...”At first, the CFO was shocked and chagrined at the huge increase in cell phone expense, but a company survey (coincidentally conducted shortly after the new policy took effect) showed this new policy was a major morale booster, since it allowed workers to have better “work / life balance” than before. Once the survey results were in, the CFO claimed that had been her “secondary” motivation for the new policy, and declared “victory” yet again.The funny thing is that her bragging about the success of this “morale boosting initiative” was to create even more awareness of the reimbursement program, which in turn led to the second unintended consequence: Very quickly, the employees began using their cell phones almost exclusively, rather than the “land lines” installed at their desks. These were intelligent people, and they quickly realized that having more business calls meant larger reimbursements, so they began using their cell phones as much as possible to drive up the business use percentage… It became common for an employee to use their cell phone to call a co-worker’s cell phone – even when both were sitting at their desks right next to their office phone. Doing so meant that their “Business-to-Personal” ratio was higher, and they would receive larger reimbursements at the end of the month.There were nearly 10,000 white-collar workers affected by this policy, and almost all of them had a cell phone by this time. Anyone who did not have a cell phone soon obtained one, because the company was basically paying for it, and they didn’t want to be the only “non-cool” person on their team… Over a six-month period after the new policy went into effect, corporate reimbursement for personal cell phone use increased from around $1,500 per month (pre-CFO) to well over $1 million/month.Add to that the productivity hit from those same 10,000 employees spending 2–3 hours each month completing the stupid spreadsheet (on company time, of course) instead of doing their real jobs. With a stated corporate average salary of $107,000 per year for those white-collar employees, that new T&E policy cost the company at least $1.3 million a year in reduced productivity.So because the CFO didn’t like the fact that a few key employees were “getting over” on the system, and with a claimed justification of potentially saving the company $18,000/year, a new policy was implemented that directly cost the company at least $12 million/year, and negatively impacted productivity to the tune of another $1.3 million/year.As Bugs Bunny would say “What a maroon…”