Separate bank account how to withdraw money from there. How to use a separate bank account

…Violations prevented by banks amounted to 10% to 20% of the total order amount.
The biggest inconsistencies were identified during the construction of the new stage of the Mariinsky Theatre.
The most common violations are sending money to objects not provided for by contracts
and overspending on Consumables.
State-owned banks earned several million rubles on the new service ...

We were aware that this would not end well, but curiosity won out.
We understood that some kind of poop was waiting for us, and so that it would not be so insulting, we decided to limit ourselves to a one-time delivery,
so to speak, "see what will happen" and with a 100% margin.

Providence has repeatedly tried to warn us.
The false start occurred at the very first stage.
We spent several times less time on agreeing on the specification and quality of delivery than the procedure for opening an account lasted.

Firstly, Sberbank immediately opened an ordinary account for us.
We learned about this after the first attempt of the customer to make a payment using the new details.
The customer struggled for three days, demanding delivery from us after providing us with a payment order.

The money did not reach us all, and we held back the onslaught, expecting any trick.

(Looking ahead, I want to focus your attention on the waiting period. IN THREE DAYS!
A regular payment after signing at the client bank is credited to the recipient's account on the same day, or at least the next day.
But this is not the case for a separate account. The minimum time period for any transaction with separate account was at least three days.
All this time, in the client bank, the status of the operation being performed was “IN PROCESSING”!
Moreover, the bank had a separate, specially dedicated specialist attached to our operations on the account.
Why he was attached, we did not understand. Probably so that it would not be so boring to while away the time, waiting for the completion of the operation.
She gave lengthy answers to all our questions, which boiled down to one thing - IT IS NECESSARY TO TRY.
As a result, when we were already completely related to her, we found out that although she was a specialist in separate accounts, our attempts were for her
With the same debut, many employees of the bank followed and cheered us.
They got sick, made bets.)

After three days, it turned out that the payment did not go through for the reason that we were not opened a SEPARATE ACCOUNT, but a regular one.
…

And the customer, meanwhile, needed a delivery, because of which the construction practically stopped.

It took a couple of days to find out who is to blame and what to do.
Mamedovna once again cursed us and completely refused to participate in the ungodly event.

It took a couple more days to clear up the misunderstanding. At the same time, it turned out that to work with a separate account, it is required
a special client bank that did not want to launch for a long time. While technical delays were being eliminated, by joint efforts
with the attached employee of the savings bank and the financial director of the customer, we studied the instructions for working with payments,
frantically assured and submitted to the bank all contracts and specifications for future payments.

Finally, all the delays were eliminated and the second three-day round of waiting began.
This time, after the third day, the funds arrived on our current account and, to the cries of jubilation, the first batch of goods went
to the construction site. After a short scandal accompanying the acceptance of the goods, the customer wanted to take full revenge
us for the shame they endured in the form of an advance payment for the delivery of the FIRST TIME FOR THEIR PRACTICE. We exchanged primary documents and it even seemed to us that
which is not so terrible at all, this isolated account. The customer has already placed a new order with us, production and purchasing have received orders for
processing and procurement of raw materials, suppliers received invoicing requests for payment, funds in the segregated account were planned,
filled with payment orders, which were signed for payment in the bank-client system.

It remained to wait three days.
We were not quite used to this sticking of the bank at that moment. The customer was hysterical, demanding the goods, suppliers, having received a payment order from us,
but not seeing the arrival of money in their current account, they were nervous.

Three days have passed.
The status in the client's bank changed from the status IN PROCESSING to REFUSED.
Something vile and sticky weighed heavily on my heart.
Our friend from Sberbank did not answer the phone for a day.

A day later, she herself got in touch and happily informed us that we were denied payment.
We politely asked why the fuck?
The lady explained that she did not immediately pay attention, but it could not be otherwise.
After all, judging by the invoice and the purpose of the payment, we are going to pay for a different product than the one specified in the customer's specification for which we received the funds!
…

Excuse me, we were taken aback, but why the hell does it matter to the bank what we want to spend our hard-earned money on? By no means did not agree
with us is a lady, in the case of a separate account, she, a bank employee, is entrusted with control powers over all operations on the account. To make sure everything is clear!
Well, we did not reconcile ourselves, let's go in order.
The customer wanted a product from us, which at that time was not only ALREADY purchased by us, but also meticulously selected by the customer. Immediately after
as soon as the payment was made, the customer received the goods and was quite happy, he has no complaints against us, as evidenced by the signed invoices.
That's how it is, but according to the rules for working with a separate account, it is necessary to submit a special application form to the bank, which describes in detail:
how much, where and for what you want to pay funds; then obtain permission from the customer by obtaining his visa.
…

The financial director of the customer was not much surprised, saying that he expected something like this.
It took a couple of days to draw up and approve the paperwork, then another three days of waiting came.
…

REFUSAL.
Our censor was the first to get in touch, briefly summarizing: “Didn’t work,” adding that, according to the logic of the procedure conceived in the bowels of the Ministry of Economic Development
some scientific rabbit, there is no option when the goods are already ready for shipment even before the funds are received.
Say, according to the logic of the procedure, everything is sharpened for a certain competition / project, in which the customer first sets out his wishes, and the contractor agrees with him the estimate,
which takes into account all the nuances, for design, survey work, production, purchase of raw materials and even wages and taxes; after receiving funds,
begins to act, coordinating all expenses according to the signed plan, estimates and specifications with the customer. And the customer is watching
whether his money is being spent on business. And since there is no particular hope for the customer, just in case, in order to avoid collusion and theft, he monitors all this
responsible manager of the authorized bank.
In general, she said, you can only pay for what is specified in the specification.
…

Hmm...
At first, of course, we demanded that the customer return the delivered pipes to us.

(I forgot to mention, we specialize in the dismantling, processing and restoration of pipes of various diameters used for oil transit,
gas for recycling.
These pipes are widely used in civil and infrastructure construction.
From piles for foundations and communications to complex metal structures. A striking example of such an application is the Crimean bridge.)

The customer, swallowing nervously, refused to return the pipe, referring to the fact that it had long been sunk into the ground and filled with concrete, and a building was already standing in this place ...

We pulled ourselves together, smoked and decided that since the normal logic in our question does not work, then in order to defeat the system, you just need to
conform to its formal logic.
Should I buy what is in the specification? Shitty question, we ask the supplier to indicate in the invoice what we need, we reconcile all the plates with the customer,
we hand over everything to the bank and after a couple of days a new payment order with the status “IN PROCESSING” is activated in the system.
The move in our chess game has been made and we have three whole days to work on other issues.

Three more days passed.
The status in the client bank from the status “IN PROCESSING” was still changed to “REJECTED”.
The intrigue grew and it became even interesting to us, this time why?
The Sberbank censor got ahead of us and went on the attack first.
- Are you out of your mind? Have you delivered a BU pipe to the customer?
- Well, yes, what the customer wished, then they put it, does it matter whether a new or used pipe is buried in the ground? You may not be aware, but these are the latest trends
decades in construction - to use recycled raw materials for secondary use. And besides the price, two times less, used pipe after restoration
nothing different from the new one. And in the contract, and in the application, and in the specification of the customer, there is clearly a “BU pipe” !!!
- I don’t know how it is in the whole world, but I won’t let you build from shit! Let the customer provide me with project documentation, which indicates that it is permissible to build buildings out of shit! In a word, do what you want, but so that I don’t see this BU of yours!
…

We transferred our conversation to the customer, asking if there were options to come up with something with project documentation, and at the same time asking if it was still possible
dig our pipe out of the foundation? The customer twisted his finger at his temple, let us explain that this nonsense will not even be conveyed to the designers, because
no idiot will prescribe any nonsense in the documentation for various madmen.
We were ready for such an answer and we already had a more working version ready. We have redone all the contracts, invoices, applications and specifications, blacking out the combination
letters BU, wherever she met. True, in two days this time we did not meet.
The manager who was responsible for these shipments had to wander around all the construction sites where we put the pipe, re-sign all the technical specifications and acts with foremen and supply managers. And just a week later, all the renegotiated shit was handed over to the bank, and another payment order was activated in the client's bank
with the status "IN PROCESSING".
…

Three more days passed.
…

Refusal…
From, bitch, KAZ!
This time our curator of the bank was positive.
She agreed that the idea of ​​blotting out BU wherever possible is awesome, and everything would have passed, but ...
… but the payment is blocked due to a violation of the procedure for working with segregated accounts.
And the violation is that money transferred from one separate account can only be transferred to another separate account,
and in the same bank.
…

Only, bitch, on the other, bitch, SEPARATE ACCOUNT!
We asked where and for what we can transfer funds other than a separate account?
- Only in the budget, - answered the curator, - you can pay taxes or wages, within the agreed specification with the customer, if he does not mind.
We asked, what if the supplier does not have a separate account?
- It does not matter, - she answered, - let him open it.
We asked why the supplier should open a separate account and accept money from us, if further he will also be able to pay from it only to a separate account?
And to be even more precise, we asked who, according to the diabolical plan of the creator of separate accounts, is meant as the final, final recipient Money passed through segregated accounts?
- Actually, the curator answered thoughtfully, - it's not clear yet. It’s a new thing, we ourselves are interested in how it all should end, but so far
precedents other than the return of money to BUDGET NO.
…

Carl, this is GREAT!
I want to meet this person who came up with this system named after the postman Pechkin. This is a closed eco-system of budget financing.
All allocated virtual budgetary funds enter the system and do not leave it anywhere, jumping inside one pocket, from one current account to another, in the end, they either return to the budget or get stuck, essentially being in the budget. And not to steal, they are generally impossible to use.
It's just some KIN-DZA-DZA!

…
We smoked in complete prostration, comprehending what had been created with our own hands.
Being in a constant cash gap, feeding suppliers and partners with promises and payment orders from a separate account for a whole quarter,
that they are about to come to you, to freeze money so mediocre and hopelessly.
Mechanically, I figured out how many years ahead we could pay taxes from this money, weighed the reasonableness of the discovery salary project in the savings bank
in order to speed up the rescue of his own, he went through the options in his head what to say to the suppliers.

The financial director of the customer brought us out of the stupor. He called to ask how we were doing and whether we would soon be ready to take on a separate account
another tranche for goods.
…
We had something to answer him ...

After listening to our story, the customer's finder summarized that they had not slipped through, and gave us hope.
In secret, he said that he was actively communicating with a circle of the same poor fellows who got into a story with a separate account. According to him, while people like us
yet a little, and everything, sorting through various options, share with each other information on new attempts. So, he said in a whisper, there are rumors
that there is a hole in the system and formally it is possible to transfer money from a separate account to a simple one in the amount of no more than 500,000 rubles, but once.
It’s not yet clear, he added, once in a while or once a year, since this garbage has just been introduced ...

We got so good at reframing contracts and specifications that the very next day a package of documents was in Sberbank, and the first, test payment
the errand flickered with hope status “IN PROCESSING”…

This time the status did not change for five days.
Something was clearly not going according to the standard scenario.
We did not call the curator and tried not to discuss it among ourselves. The whole office waited with anxiety and hope for news from behind the door of the accounting department.
Everyone was afraid to frighten off luck ...

- FUCKED!
This cry, which was heard from Mamedovna's body, was interpreted unambiguously by everyone ...
- Andrey Abramych, Andrey Albertych, colleagues, fucked up!!! God is still with us!

We hugged and kissed, congratulating each other in a frenzy.
Some were crying, some were laughing hysterically.

The curator of Sberbank was very surprised.
- I don't know how you did it, but the system missed the payment. But I want to warn you that you still have to do something with the price.
For the price, it is still clear that the pipe is BU. - She warned, not missing the opportunity to spit in the direction of our holiday.
- Do not worry, we will buy it much more expensive than we sold it, so that the system does not have any more questions.
…

Not immediately, but we still scratched our funds out of the bank. The curator gave us a nightmare a couple more times, refusing a couple of trenches, citing
that, by indirect signs, she did not like the recipient, but we have already built a pontoon crossing, since there were enough suppliers.

Subsequently, we refused to pay the customer for deliveries to a separate account. The customer was not very upset, saying that he would still find fools,
and continued to place orders with us with payment to a normal account.
We closed the isolated account itself, although not immediately. It turned out that there is no explicit procedure for closing a separate account
in the standard contract, but we also solved this problem.

The results of the experiment were assessed by the Ministry of Economic Development as satisfactory.
The Ministry of Economic Development proposes to impose on agent banks the obligation to monitor whether the minimum rate of attraction is met
to the execution of all government contracts of small businesses: they must get at least 15% of the total amount of purchases of the state customer.
Although the participation of state-owned banks in the experiment was originally supposed to be free of charge, they did not work in vain.
In fact, the agency fees of Sberbank and VTB Bank for maintaining a segregated account ranged from 0.04 to 0.2% of the amount,
passed through a separate account.
Sberbank earned 81 million rubles on the experiment.
Moscow. February 27. 2013 FINMARKET.RU

On June 8, Forbes wrote that the contractor for the construction of the Kerch bridge - Arkady Rotenberg's Stroygazmontazh - is testing
problems with financing the project due to the transfer of the state contract from banking to treasury support. In particular, the publication refers
to a letter from SGM Director General Andrey Kirilenko to First Deputy Minister of Transport Yevgeny Ditrikh and Head of Rosavtodor Roman Starovoit,
where he points to the delay in amending the government decree on the Kerch bridge and the inability to continue work
project in the absence of funding.

Problems with financing the construction of the Kerch bridge are excluded, TASS was told in the press service of the Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation.
MOSCOW, June 8, 2016. TASS.

The government will connect banks to control over the state order. They will be able to block suspicious transactions with budget money.

Banking control over the execution of government contracts is provided for by the law on the federal contract system (FCS). From 2014, it will replace the current law on public procurement. The government had to develop the control mechanism separately. On Tuesday, the Ministry of Finance published a draft of the relevant government decree on a single information disclosure portal.

For government contracts for construction (more than 39% of all government orders, according to zakupki.gov.ru) or if the price of the contract is not fixed, the government customer has the right to prescribe a requirement for bank control in the contract with the contractor, follows from the project. The contractor and his subcontractor will be required to open separate bank accounts under the state contract. Banks will be able to freeze these accounts and block transactions with them if they suspect misappropriation of funds, and will also be required to provide a quarterly report to the customer on the movement of funds, follows from the draft resolution.

This is not an innovation, business and state corporations use such control of counterparties, says Andrey Chernogorov, CEO of the Electronic Trading Platform of Gazprombank. Sberbank tried to engage in banking support for projects, the press service of the state bank reported. But the service is not in great demand, Chernogorov notes: business does not work with advance payments, but only pays for the actual execution of the contract and control is not needed. In the state order, advance payments are common, the service will be in demand, predicts Chernogorov. However, it follows from the draft resolution that advances will be taken out of control. This is a controversial proposal of the Ministry of Finance, notes the director of the department of the Ministry of Economic Development Maxim Chemerisov. The suggestion that the contractor will be able to choose the bank for control is also debatable, Chemerisov believes. The bank should be selected by the customer from a certain pool, he believes. In his opinion, for complex expensive government contracts involving a large number of subcontractors, banking control should be mandatory, and not at the discretion of the customer.

It is not difficult to control the spending of funds, notes a former employee of Vnesheconombank: “It is a question of how the obligations are formulated in the contract, including in the loan. There are no restrictions on the depth, frequency and form of control in the legislation.” The measure is introduced to expand the circle of responsible persons, he concludes.

Cash flow control is a typical banking function, Andrey Leushev, deputy head of the corporate block of Promsvyazbank, confirms, it can also be used for the FCS. For the bank, this is a pleasant chore, says Chernogorov: “The bank still checks every payment, and now it will be able to provide the function of an independent arbitrator and make money on it.”

For banks, participation in such a process is interesting, says Leushev, it makes it possible to implement useful services for customers and better manage risks. The project is also interesting for Sberbank, its representative said.

If the bank appoints a state customer, this is fraught with risks for the contractor, Ekaterina Lezina, chairman of the non-profit partnership Expert Community of Government Order Professionals, worries: “In the event of a dispute, the bank will rather make a decision that is beneficial to officials, for example, it will block the movement of funds on the account until a court decision.

Officials found new way combating theft at state-owned construction sites. The spending of money should be monitored by state-owned banks, which have already coped with financial control over the construction of the new building of the Mariinsky Theater and the buildings of the Far Eastern University

Moscow. February 27. FINMARKET.RU - The Ministry of Economic Development has summed up the results of a three-year experiment, in which the financial support of large state contracts for capital construction was entrusted to authorized banks with state participation. The results, according to Finmarket, satisfied officials, who now intend to significantly expand this practice.

Violations prevented by banks amounted to 10% to 20% of the total amount of the order. The biggest inconsistencies were identified during the construction of the new stage of the Mariinsky Theatre.

The most common violations are the direction of money for objects not provided for by contracts and overspending on consumables. State-owned banks earned several million rubles from the new service.

State banks are at the forefront of the fight against corruption

A Finmarket source in the Ministry of Economic Development spoke about the results of the experiment. The corresponding report has already been sent to the government.

The experiment began in 2009, three state-owned banks took part in it: Sberbank, VTB Bank and Gazprombank, which was supposed to build residential buildings in Balashikha. Banks were instructed to:

• Control intended use funds under government contracts;
• Monitor the scheme of interaction between contract executors (general contractor - contractor - subcontractors of the first and second levels);
• Check the compliance of the cost of the main works, materials and equipment with those stipulated in the contract;
• Monitor compliance with the deadlines for the implementation of work, for their compliance with the terms of the contract;
• Monitor compliance with contract terms of payment.
• Monthly reports on the movement of funds on the accounts of the general contractor, contractors and subcontractors were sent to the state customer. Sberbank, in addition to this, quarterly photographic recording of the actually completed work was carried out.

A fifth of the acts were rejected at the Mariinsky Theater

The largest violations were identified during the construction of the building of the second stage of the Mariinsky Theater in St. Petersburg. Of the 23.4 billion rubles that passed through the segregated accounts of Sberbank, payments for 4.2 billion rubles, or 18.1%, were not agreed. Violations were committed almost equally by the general contractor (by 2.0 billion rubles) and contractors with subcontractors (by 2.2 billion rubles).

The main reasons for non-coordination of documents, bank employees called:

• Failure to submit documents that are the basis for making payments;
• Attempts to use funds for other purposes;
• Making payments in violation of the conditions stipulated in the contract;
• Non-compliance of payment documents with the requirements of the Bank of Russia and the terms of separate bank account agreements (that is, the conditions of the experiment).

With the help of segregated accounts, it was possible to identify an undisclosed amount of advance payments, the obligations for which were never fulfilled. Sberbank told officials that the segregated payment mechanism used helped initiate procedures for the return of this money: 456.5 million rubles. already returned to the account of the general contractor.

APEC tithe

• During the construction of the building of the Far East federal university and a conference center on Russky Island out of the total amount of transfers of 23.2 billion rubles. "Sberbank rejected payments in the amount of 1.4 billion rubles (6%).
• A third of them tried to send to the construction of facilities not covered by the contract.
• During the reconstruction of the M-4 Don highway, Sberbank revealed a discrepancy between the volumes of work actually performed and those reflected in the act, in the amount of 154.8 million rubles. or 10.5% of the volume of payments through a segregated account. Of these, almost 96 million rubles. tried to get behind actually not made bypass roads.
• Payments for another 16 million rubles. were rejected by the bank due to misuse of funds, non-compliance with the terms and scope of work specified in the contract.

VTB came and fixed everything

VTB Bank participated in the experiment, accompanying contracts for the reconstruction of the main building of the Bolshoi Theater and the M-5 Ural highway, and checked the intended use of funds only according to the documents. The Bank also found facts of excess of advance payments over actual costs incurred by contractors and subcontractors, revealed untimely amendments to subcontracts in terms of amounts and names of work.

At the same time, the bank did not report the scale of violations, since all the shortcomings were eliminated by VTB when working with the state customer and with the contract executors.

Assistance from state banks will be legalized

The results of the experiment were assessed by the Ministry of Economic Development as satisfactory. They were also satisfied with the Ministry of Transport.

• The Ministry of Economic Development proposes to impose on agent banks the obligation to monitor whether the minimum requirement for attracting small businesses to the execution of all state contracts is met: they should get at least 15% of the total amount of purchases of the state customer.
• Although the participation of state-owned banks in the experiment was originally supposed to be free of charge, they did not work in vain. In fact, the agency fees of Sberbank and VTB Bank for maintaining a segregated account ranged from 0.04 to 0.2% of the amount passed through the segregated account.
• During the experiment, VTB received at least 9.5 million rubles in the form of agency commissions from general contractors.
• Sberbank earned 81 million rubles on the experiment.

The involvement of agent banks to support government contracts is provided for by the draft law "On the federal contract system", which is currently being prepared in the State Duma for adoption in the second reading. It is assumed that the procedure for banking support of contracts will be established by the government.

The interlocutor of "Finmarket" in the Ministry of Economic Development said that the department would recommend to the government to legalize this practice and start large-scale involvement of state-owned banks to work with large government contracts.

Olga Anchishkina, Head of the Public Procurement Audit Inspectorate of the Accounts Chamber

“Perhaps, the idea of ​​separate bank accounts for funds under government contracts will be reflected in the law “On the Federal Tax Service” in order to separate funds that go under a government contract so that they do not mix with the contractor in a common boiler. Then this would allow us to see the validity of attributing certain costs contractor for this contract, although, in my opinion, this is not a question of the legislative level of regulation.

The segregated account mechanism makes it possible, for example, to move from our fixed contract price to a more flexible price for long-term contracts in accordance with actual costs incurred. With this approach, you can always see whether it is objective to attribute these costs to this contract or not. Whether the contractor solved production tasks for the execution of a government contract, or decorated his own office. Now this approach is a dangerous trap for us. But really, that's enough simple thing if you see the full value of the contract. Such approaches are already being used in the state defense order.

Connecting the bank to control over the execution of the state contract allows you to see the flow of money not only from the contractor, but also throughout the entire chain of cooperation, to what extent the costs were justified at all levels of subcontractors. Now this is not. The state customer does not understand what is happening with his money until the date of execution of the work or their stage arrives. The state does not see this either. And when the money is spent, try to get it back.

The discussed mechanism, in particular, allows us to see the share of intermediaries who launder money from the state order. For some types of contracts, up to 80-90% of the money goes to intermediaries who do not perform any work, but take administrative rent for being close to the customer.

There are big pluses here, and there are questions. A bank is a financial institution. And the work that we want to assign to him under government contracts is engineering services: the quality of construction, the road substrate. And if a bank starts hiring engineering firms, then it has the right to demand a percentage for these services, which puts an additional burden on government orders.

As always in Russia, the question is whether it will be voluntary or obligatory. If voluntarily, then not only government customers, but also all floors of contractors should move their accounts to one bank. If it is necessary, then the additional burden will fall on both the state and the contractors of the entire chain."

Irina Kuznetsova, Director of the HSE Institute for Purchasing and Sales Management

“It is not at all clear what kind of violations we are talking about. These are technical errors that have been corrected and the money is gone, or these were attempts at theft.

The mechanism of separate accounts in the new law "On the FCC" has not yet been spelled out.

Of course it is blue dream officials - to push the entire state order through authorized banks. Whether this will be an effective mechanism to counteract violations, or whether it will become another gasket on the way of money from the customer to the contractor, is not yet known.

Why banks need it is obvious. In fact, all the money from the state order (and this is about 5-7 trillion rubles a year) will go through them. And if they achieve this, then it will never be possible to escape from banking captivity. Who will give the income just like that. And if they also get paid for it!.. This is generally a gold mine. The real benefit that is acquired by banks is already much higher than the cost of services that will be included in the form of any agency commission.

Obligatory connection of banks to the state order is a very serious thing. This issue should be discussed in high offices with bills in hand."

Evgeniy Krasavin, Head of Public Procurement at the consulting company MCFER

"We have several state bodies that control the spending of budget funds, for example, the Treasury.

But most importantly, there is a specific government customer, the general contractor responsible for each contract. He has specialists specially trained for this. The general contractor signs the act of acceptance and delivery. If the inspectors come, he can correctly explain why this or that order was placed.

And how competent are specialists in banks to decide on the quality of execution of an order? Banks are not responsible for the speed and quality of execution of the state contract. They can put spokes in the wheels. An additional corruption component may appear.

In addition, if banks also follow government contracts, this will increase the costs of the state.”

Sergey Gabestro, Chairman of the Board of Directors of the trade portal Fabrikant.ru

"Transaction control is an absolutely effective mechanism that is becoming more and more widespread throughout the world. It does not even work to reveal, but to prevent various frauds with public money.

Money has one very important property: it always leaves a mark. Until they cashed out.

Another question is how much the analysis of transactions is developed in our country. So far, these are only rudimentary experiments. But this toolkit will definitely develop.

In our state order, the main control is now based on compliance with the procedure. Only the investigating authorities involved in the commission of criminal offenses are engaged in the analysis of transactions."

In the section on the question, what is the difference between a personal and current bank account given by the author Marina Shorokhova the best answer is Personal account - an account for keeping records of settlements with individuals and legal entities, which reflects all financial and credit transactions with a specific client.
Personal accounts are documents of analytical accounting.
Personal accounts are maintained not only in financial and insurance organizations, but also in tax inspectorates, public utilities, as well as in public authorities (for example, in the Federal Treasury).
Settlement account (current account, demand account) - an account used by a bank or other settlement institution to record clients' money transactions. The current state of the current account, as a rule, corresponds to the amount of funds owned by the client.
Typically, these accounts are not used for income (interest) or savings purposes. The main purpose of using a current account is a reliable and quick access to funds on demand through a variety of channels for transmitting orders. Often, balances do not accrue interest or accrue at a minimum amount. In this case, the client can deposit or withdraw any amount of funds at any time. Because money is available on demand, these accounts are sometimes referred to as demand accounts or checking accounts.

A successful company once thinks about expanding its business - opening additional divisions in other regions of the country. The main disadvantage is the increase in the burden on the accounting department, which is forced to control the accounts of the main institution and its "branches". Accounting often requires separate bank account. What are its features? How is the opening of such a structure organized?

Separate attention deserves the question of whether it is possible for a separate division to work without a current account, and how this happens in practice. Let's consider these nuances in detail.

How to open?

To open a separate division, you need:

• Make sure that we are talking about creating just such a structure, and not a classic department (branch). This is due to a different approach to management.

• Check that the prepared place is stationary and will work for a long period. If an employee can perform tasks remotely, there is no need to draw up an additional structure and open a settlement account for a separate division.

• Within a month after registration, it is worth notifying the Federal Tax Service at the place where the company is registered (in this case, the approved form is used under the number C-09-3-1).

• Within the same period, it is necessary to register with the funds (if you have your own balance). This is relevant if you plan to open a current account with subsequent payments to individuals.

Read also -

• Notify the Federal Tax Service of the movement of a separate subdivision to another address using the form already mentioned above.

Settlement account of a separate division: what you need to know?

The concept of a current account implies the registration of an account in the financial credit institution. The basis is an agreement between the bank and the client. After opening a settlement account, a certain amount is credited to it, which can be used to conduct business activities (execution of non-cash payments, cash withdrawals, replenishment and other tasks).

Settlement account of a separate division - a special account, which is issued for limited transactions (negotiated at the stage of signing the agreement). Thus, the main office can use the service of opening a special settlement account only for spending transactions (including salary payments).

To apply for a service, you need to contact a credit institution and present the required package of papers that would confirm the authority of certain persons (those indicated on the card). As a result, with the help of a separate r / s, the management of the new structure can carry out operations.

Theoretically, opening a current account is possible for the receipt of money from different directions:

• From the main office.
• From clients (buyers).

The money is spent on the following needs:

• Payment for various goods required for work.
• Subdivision content.
• Payroll and others.

This type of account implies the maintenance of separate accounting, which implies the opening of a separate balance sheet (even in the absence of such a command from the center).

Is it possible to work without r / s?

In practice, it is possible to operate a separate subdivision without a current account. This scheme allows you to work without allocating a cash account to a separate balance sheet. The algorithm in this case is:

• Upon receipt of an extract from a credit institution, the unit sends it to the main office.
• The main accounting department takes into account the funds on the current account and directly manages them.

It turns out that the unit plays the role of a "courier", which sends documents to a credit institution with subsequent receipt of statements and their direction to the main office for reporting.

What is the result?

Is it worth it to open a current account in a separate division , if it is able to work according to a simpler scheme? Here the decision is made by the manager, taking into account the tasks assigned to the new structure, the number of employees and the volume of operations. In the case of opening a special account, accounting can be kept both in the main institution and in a separate subdivision.