12 U.S.C. § 1833a

Civil penalties

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 12 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) In general

Whoever violates any provision of law to which this section is made applicable by subsection (c) shall be subject to a civil penalty in an amount assessed by the court in a civil action under this section.

(b) Maximum amount of penalty(1) Generally

The amount of the civil penalty shall not exceed $1,000,000.

(2) Special rule for continuing violations

In the case of a continuing violation, the amount of the civil penalty may exceed the amount described in paragraph (1) but may not exceed the lesser of $1,000,000 per day or $5,000,000.

(3) Special rule for violations creating gain or loss(A) If any person derives pecuniary gain from the violation, or if the violation results in pecuniary loss to a person other than the violator, the amount of the civil penalty may exceed the amounts described in paragraphs (1) and (2) but may not exceed the amount of such gain or loss.(B) As used in this paragraph, the term “person” includes the Bank Insurance Fund, the Savings Association Insurance Fund, and after the merger of such funds, the Deposit Insurance Fund, and the National Credit Union Share Insurance Fund.(c) Violations to which penalty is applicableThis section applies to a violation of, or a conspiracy to violate—(1) section 215, 656, 657, 1005, 1006, 1007, 1014, or 1344 of title 18;(2) section 287, 1001, 1032,11 See 1990 Amendment note below. 1341 or 1343 of title 18 affecting a federally insured financial institution; or(3)section 645(a) of title 15.(d) Effective date

This section shall apply to violations occurring on or after August 10, 1984.

(e) Attorney General to bring action

A civil action to recover a civil penalty under this section shall be commenced by the Attorney General.

(f) Burden of proof

In a civil action to recover a civil penalty under this section, the Attorney General must establish the right to recovery by a preponderance of the evidence.

(g) Administrative subpoenas(1) In generalFor the purpose of conducting a civil investigation in contemplation of a civil proceeding under this section, the Attorney General may—(A) administer oaths and affirmations;(B) take evidence; and(C) by subpoena, summon witnesses and require the production of any books, papers, correspondence, memoranda, or other records which the Attorney General deems relevant or material to the inquiry. Such subpoena may require the attendance of witnesses and the production of any such records from any place in the United States at any place in the United States designated by the Attorney General.(2) Procedures applicable

The same procedures and limitations as are provided with respect to civil investigative demands in subsections (g), (h), and (j) of section 1968 of title 18 apply with respect to a subpoena issued under this subsection. Process required by such subsections to be served upon the custodian shall be served on the Attorney General. Failure to comply with an order of the court to enforce such subpoena shall be punishable as contempt.

(3) Limitation

In the case of a subpoena for which the return date is less than 5 days after the date of service, no person shall be found in contempt for failure to comply by the return date if such person files a petition under paragraph (2) not later than 5 days after the date of service.

(h) Statute of limitations

A civil action under this section may not be commenced later than 10 years after the cause of action accrues.

(Pub. L. 101–73, title IX, § 951, Aug. 9, 1989, 103 Stat. 498; Pub. L. 101–647, title XXV, §§ 2533, 2596(d), Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4882, 4908; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330003(g), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2141; Pub. L. 104–208, div. A, title II, § 2704(d)(15)(A), Sept. 30, 1996, 110 Stat. 3009–494; Pub. L. 107–100, § 4(b), Dec. 21, 2001, 115 Stat. 966; Pub. L. 109–171, title II, § 2102(b), Feb. 8, 2006, 120 Stat. 9; Pub. L. 109–173, § 9(g)(1), Feb. 15, 2006, 119 Stat. 3618.)Editorial NotesCodification

Section was enacted as part of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, and not as part of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act which comprises this chapter.

Amendments

2006—Subsec. (b)(3)(B). Pub. L. 109–173 inserted “and after the merger of such funds, the Deposit Insurance Fund,” after “the Savings Association Insurance Fund,”.

Pub. L. 109–171 repealed Pub. L. 104–208, § 2704(d)(15)(A). See 1996 Amendment note below.

2001—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 107–100, § 4(b)(2)(D), designated concluding provisions as (d) and inserted heading.

Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 107–100, § 4(b)(2)(B)(i), which directed the substitution of “1341” for “1341;”, could not be executed because par. (2) does not contain a semicolon after “1341”.

Subsec. (c)(3). Pub. L. 107–100, § 4(b)(2)(A), (B)(ii), (C), added par. (3).

Subsecs. (d) to (h). Pub. L. 107–100, § 4(b)(1), (2)(D), designated concluding provisions of subsec. (c) as (d), inserted heading, and redesignated former subsecs. (d) to (g) as (e) to (h), respectively.

1996—Subsec. (b)(3)(B). Pub. L. 104–208, § 2704(d)(15)(A), which directed substitution of “Deposit Insurance Fund” for “Bank Insurance Fund, the Savings Association Insurance Fund,”, was repealed by Pub. L. 109–171. See Effective Date of 1996 Amendment note below and 2006 Amendment note above.

1994—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 103–322 amended directory language of Pub. L. 101–647, § 2596(d). See 1990 Amendment note below.

1990—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 101–647, § 2596(d)(2), as amended by Pub. L. 103–322, inserted at end a flush sentence “This section shall apply to violations occurring on or after August 10, 1984.”

Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 101–647, § 2596(d)(1), as amended by Pub. L. 103–322, which directed insertion of “287, 1001, 1032,” before “1341;”, was executed by making the insertion before “1341 or 1343” to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 101–647, § 2533, added subsec. (g).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2006 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 109–173 effective Mar. 31, 2006, see section 9(j) of Pub. L. 109–173, set out as a note under section 24 of this title.

Amendment by Pub. L. 109–171 effective no later than the first day of the first calendar quarter that begins after the end of the 90-day period beginning Feb. 8, 2006, see section 2102(c) of Pub. L. 109–171, set out as a Merger of BIF and SAIF note under section 1821 of this title.

Effective Date of 1996 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 104–208 effective Jan. 1, 1999, if no insured depository institution is a savings association on that date, see section 2704(c) of Pub. L. 104–208, formerly set out as a note under section 1821 of this title.

Effective Date of 1994 Amendment

Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330003(g), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2141, provided that the amendment made by that section is effective retroactively to the date of enactment of Pub. L. 101–647, which was approved Nov. 29, 1990.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 41 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1976–2026 · leading case: United States Ex Rel. O'Donnell v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 822 F.3d 650 (2d Cir. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States Ex Rel. O'Donnell v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 822 F.3d 650 (2d Cir. 2016). · cites it 4× “(collectively, “Countrywide”); and Rebecca Mairone (together with Countrywide, “Defendants”) under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (“FIRREA”), 12 U.S.C. § 1833a. As the necessary predicate for these penalties, the Government alleged that…”

United States v. Robert S. Luce, 873 F.3d 999 (7th Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “, and the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (“FIRREA”), 12 U.S.C. § 1833a. It alleged that Mr. Luce had defrauded the Government by falsely asserting that he had no criminal history so that his company could participate in the FHA’s insurance program.”

United States v. Allied Home Mortg. Corp., 933 F.3d 468 (5th Cir. 2019). · cites it 2× “See 12 U.S.C. § 1833a(a), (c)(1). The district court denied the defendants' motions for judgment as a matter of law and for a new trial.”

Grogan v. Garner, 498 U.S. 279 (1991). “Unlike a large number, and perhaps the majority, of the States, Congress has chosen the preponderance standard when it has created substantive causes of action for fraud.”

United States v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 972 F. Supp. 2d 593 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). · cites it 3× “; the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (“FIR-REA”), 12 U.S.C. § 1833a; and New York common law.”

United States v. Bank of New York Mellon, 941 F. Supp. 2d 438 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). · cites it 4× “68 BNYM is alleged to be liable civilly under 12 U.S.C. § 1833a. Count Two of the SAC alleges that Nichols violated the mail and wire fraud statutes and is liable under Section 1833a with respect to (1), (2), (4), (6), and (8).”

United States ex rel. Wood v. Allergan, Inc., 246 F. Supp. 3d 772 (S.D.N.Y. 2017). “Moreover, although O’Donnell was initiated as a qui tarn FCA action, it was ultimately tried by the Government solely for claims under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (“FIRREA”), 12 U.S.C. § 1833a. Thus, the Second Circuit’s analysis in…”

Hicks v. Resolution Trust Corp., 767 F. Supp. 167 (N.D. Ill. 1991). · cites it 3× “12 U.S.C. § 1833a, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 , 1006 and 1008 Plaintiff also seeks damages in Count I of his fourth amended complaint pursuant to 12 U.”

Lance C. Winchester v. The United States Attorney for the S. Dist. of Texas, 68 F.3d 947 (5th Cir. 1996). · cites it 2× “FSLIC’s successor, the Resolution Trust Corporation, is now considering a civil money penalty action against Winchester under 12 U.S.C. § 1833a (West 1989 & Supp.1995).”

Ford v. SunTrust Mortg., 282 F. Supp. 3d 227 (D.C. Cir. 2017). · cites it 4× “§ 1001 (2012) ), in violation of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA), 12 U.S.C. § 1833a ; (2) Civil Penalties for False Statements to Financial Institutions ( 18 U.”

United States v. Countrywide Fin. Corp., 961 F. Supp. 2d 598 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). · cites it 2× “§§ 3729 (a)(1)(A) & (B), and the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (“FIRREA”), 12 U.S.C. § 1833a(c)(2). The FIRREA violations, in turn, are predicated on civil violations of the mail fraud and wire fraud criminal statutes, 18 U.”

United States ex rel. O'Donnell v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 33 F. Supp. 3d 494 (S.D.N.Y. 2014). · cites it 3× “Mairone, civilly liable for fraud in violation of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (“FIRREA”), 12 U.S.C. § 1833a. See Jury’s Verdict, ECF No.”

Show all 41 citing cases →

— 12 U.S.C. § 1833a(a) — 5 cases

United States v. Allied Home Mortg. Corp., 933 F.3d 468 (5th Cir. 2019). “See 12 U.S.C. § 1833a(a), (c)(1). The district court denied the defendants' motions for judgment as a matter of law and for a new trial.”

United States Ex Rel. O'Donnell v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 822 F.3d 650 (2d Cir. 2016). “(collectively, “Countrywide”); and Rebecca Mairone (together with Countrywide, “Defendants”) under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (“FIRREA”), 12 U.S.C. § 1833a. As the necessary predicate for these penalties, the Government alleged that…”

United States v. Bank of New York Mellon, 941 F. Supp. 2d 438 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). “68 BNYM is alleged to be liable civilly under 12 U.S.C. § 1833a. Count Two of the SAC alleges that Nichols violated the mail and wire fraud statutes and is liable under Section 1833a with respect to (1), (2), (4), (6), and (8).”

United States ex rel. O'Donnell v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 33 F. Supp. 3d 494 (S.D.N.Y. 2014). “Mairone, civilly liable for fraud in violation of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (“FIRREA”), 12 U.S.C. § 1833a. See Jury’s Verdict, ECF No.”

United States v. Allied Home Mortg. Corp. (5th Cir. 2019).

— 12 U.S.C. § 1833a(b)(2) — 1 case

United States v. Luce (N.D. Ill. 2019).

— 12 U.S.C. § 1833a(b)(l) — 1 case

— 12 U.S.C. § 1833a(c) — 4 cases

United States v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 972 F. Supp. 2d 593 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). “; the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (“FIR-REA”), 12 U.S.C. § 1833a; and New York common law.”

United States v. Arthur G. Cohen, & Steven M. Terk Marvin B. Tepper Lawrence M. Goodman Ilyne R. Mendelson, 152 F.3d 321 (4th Cir. 1998).

United States v. Vanoosterhout, 898 F. Supp. 25 (D.D.C. 1995).

— 12 U.S.C. § 1833a(c)(2) — 4 cases

United States v. Countrywide Fin. Corp., 961 F. Supp. 2d 598 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). “§§ 3729 (a)(1)(A) & (B), and the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act (“FIRREA”), 12 U.S.C. § 1833a(c)(2). The FIRREA violations, in turn, are predicated on civil violations of the mail fraud and wire fraud criminal statutes, 18 U.”

United States v. Countrywide Fin. Corp., 996 F. Supp. 2d 247 (S.D.N.Y. 2014).

— 12 U.S.C. § 1833a(e) — 5 cases

Ford v. SunTrust Mortg., 282 F. Supp. 3d 227 (D.C. Cir. 2017). “§ 1001 (2012) ), in violation of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA), 12 U.S.C. § 1833a ; (2) Civil Penalties for False Statements to Financial Institutions ( 18 U.”

Better Markets, Inc. v. United States Dep't of Just., 83 F. Supp. 3d 250 (D.D.C. 2015).

Agarwal v. United States of Am. (D.D.C. 2019).

Coury (D. Ariz. 2026).

— 12 U.S.C. § 1833a(f)(1) — 2 cases

In Re Blunden, 896 F. Supp. 996 (C.D. Cal. 1995).

Winchester v. U.S. Attorney for S. Dist. of Texas (5th Cir. 1995).

— 12 U.S.C. § 1833a(f)(l) — 1 case

Lance C. Winchester v. The United States Attorney for the S. Dist. of Texas, 68 F.3d 947 (5th Cir. 1996). “FSLIC’s successor, the Resolution Trust Corporation, is now considering a civil money penalty action against Winchester under 12 U.S.C. § 1833a (West 1989 & Supp.1995).”

— 12 U.S.C. § 1833a(g)(1)(C) — 1 case

Amazon.com Servs. LLC v. United States Dep't of Just. (W.D. Wash. 2023).

— 12 U.S.C. § 1833a(g)(2) — 1 case

Amazon.com Servs. LLC v. United States Dep't of Just. (W.D. Wash. 2023).

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.