>So if I understand you correctly, you would duplicate the "worker" SP and remove the trans from within it and then this "caller" SP would completely control the trans?

Not exactly. You could just leave transaction management to the first procedure that starts a transaction.

--------------------------
-- WORKER SP (inner SP being called)
--------------------------
DECLARE @useLocalTran int
IF @@TRANCOUNT = 0
 SET @useLocalTran = 1
ELSE
 SET @useLocalTran = 0

IF @useLocalTran = 1 BEGIN TRANSACTION

INSERT INTO dbo.trans (account_id, description, amount, ccnumber, type, pproved) VALUES (@intAccountID, @strDescription, @strAmount, @strCCNumber, strType, @strApproved)
 SET @intError = @@ERROR
 BEGIN
   IF @intError != 0
    BEGIN
      IF @useLocalTran = 1 AND @@TRANCOUNT > 0 ROLLBACK TRANSACTION
      EXEC dbo._Errors_Insert @@ERROR, '_Trans_Insert'
    END
   ELSE
    BEGIN
     IF @useLocalTran = 1 AND @@TRANCOUNT > 0 COMMIT TRANSACTION
    END
 END

RETURN CASE WHEN @intError = 0 THEN 0 ELSE -1 END

Notice that I've changed your proc to only manage transactions if no transaction has been started.

This is just one possibility. There's nothing wrong with each proc managing its own transactions as long as you remember that the first rollback will rollback all of the transactions.

There is no rule or best practice unless you're running under COM+. If you are, it's my preference to let COM+ manage the transaction.

Also, you don't really need to use SET XACT_ABORT.

-Mike