C.F.R. » Title 28 » CHAPTER I—DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE › PART 0—ORGANIZATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE › Subpart Y—Authority To Compromise and Close Civil Claims and Responsibility for Judgments, Fines, Penalties, and Forfeitures

28 C.F.R. § 0.160

Offers that may be accepted by Assistant Attorneys General

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Subject to the limitations set forth in paragraph (d) of this section, Assistant Attorneys General are authorized, with respect to matters assigned to their respective divisions, to:

(1) Accept offers in compromise of claims asserted by the United States in all cases in which the difference between the gross amount of the original claim and the proposed settlement does not exceed $10,000,000 or 15 percent of the original claim, whichever is greater;

(2) Accept offers in compromise of claims asserted by the United States in all cases in which a qualified financial expert has determined that the offer in compromise is likely the maximum that the offeror has the ability to pay;

(3) Accept offers in compromise of, or settle administratively, claims against the United States in all cases in which the principal amount of the proposed settlement does not exceed $4,000,000; and

(4) Accept offers in compromise in all nonmonetary cases.

(b) Subject to the limitations set forth in paragraph (d) of this section, the Assistant Attorney General, Civil Division, is further authorized to accept offers in compromise of, or settle administratively, claims against the United States, regardless of the amount of the proposed settlement, in all cases in which the Joint Committee on Taxation has indicated that it has no adverse criticism of the proposed settlement.

(c) Subject to the limitations set forth in paragraph (d) of this section, the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, is further authorized to approve settlements under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq., regardless of the amount of the proposed settlement, with:

(1) Parties whose contribution to contamination at a hazardous waste site is de minimis within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. 9622(g); or

(2) Parties whose responsibility can be equitably allocated and are paying at least the allocated amount.

(d) Any proposed settlement, regardless of amount or circumstances, must be referred to the Deputy Attorney General or the Associate Attorney General, as appropriate:

(1) When, for any reason, the compromise of a particular claim would, as a practical matter, control or adversely influence the disposition of other claims and the compromise of all the claims taken together would exceed the authority delegated by paragraph (a) of this section;

(2) When the Assistant Attorney General concerned is of the opinion that because of a question of law or policy presented, or because of opposition to the proposed settlement by a department or agency involved, or for any other reason, the proposed settlement should receive the personal attention of the Deputy Attorney General or the Associate Attorney General, as appropriate;

(3) When the proposed settlement converts into a mandatory duty the otherwise discretionary authority of a department or agency to promulgate, revise, or rescind regulations;

(4) When the proposed settlement commits a department or agency to expend funds that Congress has not appropriated and that have not been budgeted for the action in question, or commits a department or agency to seek particular appropriation or budget authorization; or

(5) When the proposed settlement otherwise limits the discretion of a department or agency to make policy or managerial decisions committed to the department or agency by Congress or by the Constitution.

[Order No. 1958-95, 60 FR 15674, Mar. 27, 1995, as amended by Order No. 3001-2008, 73 FR 54947, Sept. 24, 2008; AG Order No. 3532-2015, 80 FR 30618, May 29, 2015; AG Order No. 4926-2020, 85 FR 84230, Dec. 28, 2020; AG Order No. 5536-2022, 87 FR 12403, Mar. 4, 2022; Order No. 6508-2025, 90 FR 57140, Dec. 10, 2025]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 33 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1977–2022 · leading case: United States v. United States Dist. Court for N. Mariana Islands, 694 F.3d 1051 (9th Cir. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. United States Dist. Court for N. Mariana Islands, 694 F.3d 1051 (9th Cir. 2012). · cites it 3× “4 See 28 C.F.R. §§ 0.160 -.0162; see also Rules and *1055 Regulations, 76 Fed.”
G. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 871 F.2d 648 (7th Cir. 1989). “28 C.F.R. §§ 0.160 (a)(2), 0.161. An attorney for the government, like Fitzpatrick, lacks the authority to commit his client but may negotiate and recommend.”
United States of Am. v. Colin C. McInnes & Cross-Appellants (Two Cases), 556 F.2d 436 (9th Cir. 1977). · cites it 2× “We find clear authorization in 28 CFR § 0.160 2 for the Assistant Attorney General to compromise and settle the appellees’ claims against the United States.”
Scott Ex Rel. Scott v. United States, 552 F. Supp. 2d 917 (D. Minnesota 2008). “See 28 C.F.R. § 0.160 (a). Accordingly, on February 29, 2008, the Magistrate Judge issued a follow-up Settlement Conference Notice requiring an Assistant Attorney General from the Department of Justice to appear by telephone at a follow-up settlement conference on May 13, 2008.”
In re Stone, 986 F.2d 898 (5th Cir. 1993). · cites it 2× “See 28 C.F.R. §§ 0.160 - *901 0.172 (1991); see also directives reprinted at 28 C.”
A.P. Ex Rel. Phinesee v. United States, 556 F. App'x 132 (3rd Cir. 2014). · cites it 2× “§ 2677 ; 28 C.F.R. §§ 0.160 (a)(2), 0.168. The day after the conference, Phinisee informed Spencer by telephone that she had decided to retract her acceptance because she had discovered that the settlement proceeds, which were to be placed in a special needs trust for the…”
Gary v. United States, 67 Fed. Cl. 202 (Fed. Cl. 2005). “The authority to make contracts for the payment of money, other than formal agreements to settle civil claims against the United States, see 28 C.F.R. §§ 0.160 , 0.161, and 0.168, however, is not an integral part of those duties.”
Menasha Corp. v. United States Dep't of Just., 707 F.3d 846 (7th Cir. 2013). “28 C.F.R. §§ 0.160 (a)(2), 0.161. He was the one ultimately to approve the proposed decree that would acknowledge federal liability of $4.”
United States v. Baldwin, 541 F. Supp. 2d 1184 (D.N.M. 2008). “170; (ii) accepting or rejecting settlement offers in many civil cases, see 28 C.F.R. §§ 0.160 to 0.Í66; USAM § 5-7.620; (iii) initiating a grand jury investigation limited to tax violations, see USAM § 6^4.”
Houck ex rel. United States v. Folding Carton Admin. Comm., 881 F.2d 494 (7th Cir. 1989). · cites it 2× “Whatever the actual amount may have been, those ranges far exceeded the settlement authority given by 28 C.F.R. § 0.160 (a)(2), not only to a United States Attorney, but even to the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division in the Department of Justice under whose…”
Vill. of Kaktovik v. Watt, 689 F.2d 222 (D.C. Cir. 1982). · cites it 2× “Indeed, the Department of Justice’s own regulations authorize the Assistant Attorney General in charge of each division to accept offers in compromise of $750,000 or less even when the agency involved is opposed to the proposed compromise.”
United States v. David B. Lacroix, Jr., Gwendolyn A. Lacroix, & North Milwaukee State Bank, 166 F.3d 921 (7th Cir. 1999). “§ 519 ; 28 C.F.R. §§ 0.160 , 0.168(d)(2). The position of hud (at least of an unidentified employee of hud) may be opaque; the position of the Department of Justice is clear.”
Show all 33 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.