26 U.S.C. § 6304

Fair tax collection practices

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 26 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Communication with the taxpayerWithout the prior consent of the taxpayer given directly to the Secretary or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, the Secretary may not communicate with a taxpayer in connection with the collection of any unpaid tax—(1) at any unusual time or place or a time or place known or which should be known to be inconvenient to the taxpayer;(2) if the Secretary knows the taxpayer is represented by any person authorized to practice before the Internal Revenue Service with respect to such unpaid tax and has knowledge of, or can readily ascertain, such person’s name and address, unless such person fails to respond within a reasonable period of time to a communication from the Secretary or unless such person consents to direct communication with the taxpayer; or(3) at the taxpayer’s place of employment if the Secretary knows or has reason to know that the taxpayer’s employer prohibits the taxpayer from receiving such communication.In the absence of knowledge of circumstances to the contrary, the Secretary shall assume that the convenient time for communicating with a taxpayer is after 8 a.m. and before 9 p.m., local time at the taxpayer’s location.(b) Prohibition of harassment and abuseThe Secretary may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of any unpaid tax. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this subsection:(1) The use or threat of use of violence or other criminal means to harm the physical person, reputation, or property of any person.(2) The use of obscene or profane language or language the natural consequence of which is to abuse the hearer or reader.(3) Causing a telephone to ring or engaging any person in telephone conversation repeatedly or continuously with intent to annoy, abuse, or harass any person at the called number.(4) Except as provided under rules similar to the rules in section 804 of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 U.S.C. 1692b), the placement of telephone calls without meaningful disclosure of the caller’s identity.(c) Civil action for violations of section

For civil action for violations of this section, see section 7433.

(Added Pub. L. 105–206, title III, § 3466(a), July 22, 1998, 112 Stat. 768.)Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

A prior section 6304, act Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 776, related to a cross reference to sections 4504 and 4601 for collection under the Tariff Act of 1930, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, § 1906(a)(18), (d)(1), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1825, 1835, effective on first day of first month which begins more than 90 days after Oct. 4, 1976.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Pub. L. 105–206, title III, § 3466(c), July 22, 1998, 112 Stat. 769, provided that: “The amendments made by this section [enacting this section] shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act [July 22, 1998].”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 24 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 2003–2025 · leading case: Morrow v. United States, 723 F. Supp. 2d 71 (D.D.C. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Morrow v. United States, 723 F. Supp. 2d 71 (D.D.C. 2010). · cites it 2× “§ 6303 , by failing to give notice to the plaintiff within sixty days after making an assessment of the taxes owed (Count 20); • 26 U.S.C. § 6304 , by engaging in conduct that has the natural consequence to harass, oppress, or abuse the plaintiff in connection with the…”

Kim v. United States, 840 F. Supp. 2d 180 (D.D.C. 2012). · cites it 2× “In other words, by the Kims’ own account, the essential thrust of the June 12, 2007 letter was the IRS’s refusal to respond further to the Kims’ own correspondence. The Kims have tendered no factual allegations that would suggest that the IRS’s reactive letter was part of its…”

Spahr v. United States, 501 F. Supp. 2d 92 (D.D.C. 2007). · cites it 2× “Count 19, which states that defendant “engaged in ‘conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of any unpaid tax,’ ” does no more than parrot the language of 26 U.S.C. § 6304 (b). (Am. Compl. at 11…”

Wesselman v. United States, 501 F. Supp. 2d 98 (D.D.C. 2007). · cites it 2× “at 14 (quoting 26 U.S.C. § 6304 (b))), parrots statutory language but includes no factual bases from which the Court can infer that employees of the IRS engaged in conduct that could be characterized as harassing, oppressive, or abusive.”

Ross v. United States, 460 F. Supp. 2d 139 (D.D.C. 2006). “parts 53 and 70 (Counts 28, 29); —engaged in “conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of any unpaid tax” by disregard of 26 U.S.C. § 6304 (regarding fair tax collection practices) (Count 30); —failed…”

Scott v. United States, 608 F. Supp. 2d 73 (D.D.C. 2009). · cites it 2× “§ 6303 , by failing to give notice of the amount of unpaid taxes owed and the need for payment (Count 20); • 26 U.S.C. § 6304 , by harassing plaintiffs in connection with collection activities (Count 21); • 26 U.”

Jaeger v. United States Gov't, 524 F. Supp. 2d 60 (D.D.C. 2007). “at 4 with 26 U.S.C. § 6304 ("The Secretaiy may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of any unpaid tax.”

Kim v. United States, 618 F. Supp. 2d 31 (D.D.C. 2009). “Count 21 alleges harassment, oppression, and abuse by IRS agents in connection with the collection of unpaid taxes, pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 6304 . Plaintiffs filed their Complaint on September 25, 2008, requesting damages in an amount to be determined by the Court.”

Bryant v. United States Gov't, 527 F. Supp. 2d 137 (D.D.C. 2007). “at 19-20 with 26 U.S.C. § 6304 ("The Secretary may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of any unpaid tax.”

Stewart v. United States, 578 F. Supp. 2d 30 (D.D.C. 2008). “at 18 with 26 U.S.C. § 6304 ("The Secretary may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of any unpaid tax.”

Comcation, Inc. v. United States, 78 Fed. Cl. 61 (Fed. Cl. 2007). “A counterpart of the FDCPA, 26 U.S.C. § 6304 , governs communications from tax collectors to taxpayers.”

Grant v. United States, 289 F. Supp. 2d 1361 (S.D. Fla. 2003). · cites it 2× “The Grants argue that this communication violates 26 U.S.C. § 6304 , and that they are, therefore, entitled to maintain a claim on this basis pursuant to § 7433.”

Show all 24 citing cases →

— 26 U.S.C. § 6304(a) — 1 case

Bowen v. United States (W.D.N.Y. 2025).

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.