18 U.S.C. § 209

Salary of Government officials and employees payable only by United States

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Whoever receives any salary, or any contribution to or supplementation of salary, as compensation for his services as an officer or employee of the executive branch of the United States Government, of any independent agency of the United States, or of the District of Columbia, from any source other than the Government of the United States, except as may be contributed out of the treasury of any State, county, or municipality; or

Whoever, whether an individual, partnership, association, corporation, or other organization pays, makes any contribution to, or in any way supplements, the salary of any such officer or employee under circumstances which would make its receipt a violation of this subsection—

Shall be subject to the penalties set forth in section 216 of this title.

(b) Nothing herein prevents an officer or employee of the executive branch of the United States Government, or of any independent agency of the United States, or of the District of Columbia, from continuing to participate in a bona fide pension, retirement, group life, health or accident insurance, profit-sharing, stock bonus, or other employee welfare or benefit plan maintained by a former employer.(c) This section does not apply to a special Government employee or to an officer or employee of the Government serving without compensation, whether or not he is a special Government employee, or to any person paying, contributing to, or supplementing his salary as such.(d) This section does not prohibit payment or acceptance of contributions, awards, or other expenses under the terms of chapter 41 of title 5.(e) This section does not prohibit the payment of actual relocation expenses incident to participation, or the acceptance of same by a participant in an executive exchange or fellowship program in an executive agency: Provided, That such program has been established by statute or Executive order of the President, offers appointments not to exceed three hundred and sixty-five days, and permits no extensions in excess of ninety additional days or, in the case of participants in overseas assignments, in excess of three hundred and sixty-five days.(f) This section does not prohibit acceptance or receipt, by any officer or employee injured during the commission of an offense described in section 351 or 1751 of this title, of contributions or payments from an organization which is described in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and which is exempt from taxation under section 501(a) of such Code.(g)(1) This section does not prohibit an employee of a private sector organization, while assigned to an agency under chapter 37 of title 5, from continuing to receive pay and benefits from such organization in accordance with such chapter.(2) For purposes of this subsection, the term “agency” means an agency (as defined by section 3701 of title 5) and the Office of the Chief Technology Officer of the District of Columbia.(h) This section does not prohibit a member of the reserve components of the armed forces, or a member of the Space Force, on active duty pursuant to a call or order to active duty under a provision of law referred to in section 101(a)(13) of title 10 from receiving from any person that employed such member before the call or order to active duty any payment of any part of the salary or wages that such person would have paid the member if the member’s employment had not been interrupted by such call or order to active duty.(Added Pub. L. 87–849, § 1(a), Oct. 23, 1962, 76 Stat. 1125; amended Pub. L. 96–174, Dec. 29, 1979, 93 Stat. 1288; Pub. L. 97–171, Apr. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 67; Pub. L. 99–514, § 2, Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2095; Pub. L. 99–646, § 70, Nov. 10, 1986, 100 Stat. 3617; Pub. L. 101–194, title IV, § 406, Nov. 30, 1989, 103 Stat. 1753; Pub. L. 101–647, title XXXV, § 3510, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4922; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330008(7), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2143; Pub. L. 107–273, div. A, title III, § 302(3), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1781; Pub. L. 107–347, title II, § 209(g)(2), Dec. 17, 2002, 116 Stat. 2932; Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title VI, § 663, Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 1974; Pub. L. 118–159, div. A, title V, § 568(b), Dec. 23, 2024, 138 Stat. 1906.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, referred to in subsec. (f), is classified to section 501 of Title 26, Internal Revenue Code.

Prior Provisions

A prior section 209, act June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 693, related to an offer of a bribe to a witness, prior to the general amendment of this chapter by Pub. L. 87–849 and is substantially covered by section 201.

Provisions similar to those comprising this section were contained in section 1914 of this title prior to the repeal of such section and the general amendment of this chapter by Pub. L. 87–849.

Amendments

2024—Subsec. (h). Pub. L. 118–159 inserted “, or a member of the Space Force,” after “a member of the reserve components of the armed forces”.

2004—Subsec. (h). Pub. L. 108–375 added subsec. (h).

2002—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 107–273, in second par., substituted “makes” for “or makes” and “supplements, the salary of any” for “supplements the salary of, any”.

Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 107–347 added subsec. (g).

1994—Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 103–322 struck out “the” before “chapter 41”.

1990—Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 101–647 substituted “chapter 41 of title 5” for “Government Employees Training Act (Public Law 85–507, 72 Stat. 327; 5 U.S.C. 2301–2319, July 7, 1958)”.

1989—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 101–194 substituted at end “Shall be subject to the penalties set forth in section 216 of this title.” for “Shall be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”

1986—Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 99–646 inserted “or, in the case of participants in overseas assignments, in excess of three hundred and sixty-five days”.

Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 99–514 substituted “Internal Revenue Code of 1986” for “Internal Revenue Code of 1954”.

1982—Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 97–171 added subsec. (f).

1979—Subsec. (e). Pub. L. 96–174 added subsec. (e).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2002 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 107–347 effective 120 days after Dec. 17, 2002, see section 402(a) of Pub. L. 107–347, set out as an Effective Date note under section 3601 of Title 44, Public Printing and Documents.

Effective Date

Section effective 90 days after Oct. 23, 1962, see section 4 of Pub. L. 87–849, set out as a note under section 201 of this title.

Exemptions

Exemptions from former section 1914 of this title deemed to be exemptions from this section, see section 2 of Pub. L. 87–849, set out as a note under section 203 of this title.

Executive DocumentsPromulgation of Regulations

Responsibility of Office of Government Ethics for promulgating regulations and interpreting this section, see section 201(c) of Ex. Ord. No. 12674, Apr. 12, 1989, 54 F.R. 15159, as amended, set out as a note under section 7301 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 85 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1952–2026 · leading case: Crandon v. United States, 494 U.S. 152 (1990).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Crandon v. United States, 494 U.S. 152 (1990). · cites it 12× “In 1986 the United States filed a civil complaint alleging that the payments had been made "to supplement each individual defendant's compensation as a federal employee" and that they "created a conflict of interest situation which induced the breach of the fiduciary duty of…”

United States v. Proj. on Gov't Oversight, 616 F.3d 544 (D.C. Cir. 2010). · cites it 26× “The government responded by charging both the organization and the economist with violating 18 U.S.C. § 209 (a), which prohibits giving or receiving any contribution to or supplementation of salary "as compensation for [an individual's] services as an officer or employee of the…”

United States of Am. v. the Proj. on Gov't Oversight, 839 F. Supp. 2d 330 (D.D.C. 2012). · cites it 9× “On February 11, 2008, a jury found that defendants Robert Berman and the Project on Government Oversight (“POGO”) had violated *333 18 U.S.C. § 209 , which prohibits making “any contribution to or supplementation of salary” to a federal employee “as compensation for his services…”

United States v. Proj. on Gov't Oversight, 454 F.3d 306 (D.C. Cir. 2006). · cites it 6× “The Project on Government Oversight (POGO), a non-profit organization, appeals from the district court’s grant of summary judgment holding it liable for violating 18 U.S.C. § 209 (a). That statute prohibits a private party from making a contribution to the salary of an executive…”

United States v. Jackson, 850 F. Supp. 1481 (D. Kan. 1994). · cites it 6× “Pursuant to Rule 12(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, the defendants move to dismiss some or all of the counts on the following grounds: (1) The charge of supplementing a government employees’ salary, 18 U.S.C. § 209 , is a lesser included offense of bribing a…”

United States v. Charles T. Muntain, A/K/A \Red Muntain\"", 610 F.2d 964 (D.C. Cir. 1979). · cites it 4× “Under Count 3 of the indictment Muntain was further convicted of having received an illegal contribution to his salary from a source other than the United States Government, in violation 18 U.S.C. § 209 . Count 1 charged defendant with violating 18 U.”

Berman v. Dep't of the Interior, 447 F. App'x 186 (Fed. Cir. 2011). · cites it 8× “On January 21, 2003, the Justice Department filed a civil complaint alleging, inter alia, that Berman and POGO violated 18 U.S.C. § 209 (a) in connection with the $383,600 payment.”

United States v. Mark Alfisi, 308 F.3d 144 (2d Cir. 2002). · cites it 2× “6 *153 Alfisi argues, alternatively, that the district court should have permitted the jury to consider also as a lesser offense the misdemeanor of supplementing the salary of an official of the United States under 18 U.S.C. § 209 . We disagree. Under Section 209, the illegal…”

United States v. Proj. on Gov't Oversight, 525 F. Supp. 2d 161 (D.D.C. 2007). · cites it 4× “Sensing impropriety, the United States filed suit against both POGO and Berman, claiming that they had violated 18 U.S.C. § 209 (a), which prohibits private parties from making, and government employees from receiving, payments that compensate civil servants for their government…”

United States v. Michael J. Oberhardt, 887 F.2d 790 (7th Cir. 1989). · cites it 4× “§ 641 and supplementing a governmental employee’s salary in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 209 (a). The central question before us is whether the $200 price that the appellant paid for the document in the “thieves’ market” — as opposed to its legitimate purchase price of $45.”

United States v. Proj. on Gov't Oversight, 484 F. Supp. 2d 56 (D.D.C. 2007). · cites it 6× “See 18 U.S.C. § 209 (a); United States v. Project on Gov’t Oversight, 454 F.”

United States v. Moore, 765 F. Supp. 1251 (E.D. Va. 1991). · cites it 5× “On December 29, 1987, defendant pled guilty to a criminal information charging him with violating 18 U.S.C. § 209 (a) by knowingly receiving a supplement to his federal salary.”

Show all 85 citing cases →

— 18 U.S.C. § 209(a) — 1 case

Applicability of 18 U.S.C. § 209 to Acceptance by FBI Employees of Benefits Under the \Make a Dream Come True\" Prog." (OLC 1997).

— 18 U.S.C. § 209(e) — 1 case

Payment of Legal Fees in Connection With a Cabinet Member's Confirmation Hearings (OLC 1981).

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.