26 U.S.C. § 7604

Enforcement of summons

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

(a) Jurisdiction of district court

If any person is summoned under the internal revenue laws to appear, to testify, or to produce books, papers, records, or other data, the United States district court for the district in which such person resides or is found shall have jurisdiction by appropriate process to compel such attendance, testimony, or production of books, papers, records, or other data.

(b) Enforcement

Whenever any person summoned under section 6420(e)(2), 6421(g)(2), 6427(j)(2), or 7602 neglects or refuses to obey such summons, or to produce books, papers, records, or other data, or to give testimony, as required, the Secretary may apply to the judge of the district court or to a United States magistrate judge for the district within which the person so summoned resides or is found for an attachment against him as for a contempt. It shall be the duty of the judge or magistrate judge to hear the application, and, if satisfactory proof is made, to issue an attachment, directed to some proper officer, for the arrest of such person, and upon his being brought before him to proceed to a hearing of the case; and upon such hearing the judge or the United States magistrate judge shall have power to make such order as he shall deem proper, not inconsistent with the law for the punishment of contempts, to enforce obedience to the requirements of the summons and to punish such person for his default or disobedience.

For authority of district courts generally to enforce the provisions of this title, see section 7402.

(2) Penalties

For penalties applicable to violation of section 6420(e)(2), 6421(g)(2), 6427(j)(2), or 7602, see section 7210.

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 902; Apr. 2, 1956, ch. 160, § 4(i), 70 Stat. 91; June 29, 1956, ch. 462, title II, § 208(d)(4), 70 Stat. 396; Pub. L. 89–44, title II, § 202(c)(4), June 21, 1965, 79 Stat. 139; Pub. L. 90–578, title IV, § 402(b)(2), Oct. 17, 1968, 82 Stat. 1118; Pub. L. 91–258, title II, § 207(d)(9), May 21, 1970, 84 Stat. 249; Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, § 1906(b)(13)(A), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1834; Pub. L. 94–530, § 1(c)(6), Oct. 17, 1976, 90 Stat. 2488; Pub. L. 95–599, title V, § 505(c)(5), (6), Nov. 6, 1978, 92 Stat. 2760; Pub. L. 96–223, title II, § 232(d)(4)(E), Apr. 2, 1980, 94 Stat. 278; Pub. L. 97–424, title V, § 515(b)(12), Jan. 6, 1983, 96 Stat. 2182; Pub. L. 98–369, div. A, title IX, § 911(d)(2)(G), July 18, 1984, 98 Stat. 1007; Pub. L. 99–514, title XVII, § 1703(e)(2)(G), Oct. 22, 1986, 100 Stat. 2778; Pub. L. 100–647, title I, § 1017(c)(9), (12), Nov. 10, 1988, 102 Stat. 3576, 3577; Pub. L. 101–650, title III, § 321, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5117.)Editorial NotesAmendments

1988—Subsecs. (b), (c)(2). Pub. L. 100–647, § 1017(c)(12), made technical correction to language of Pub. L. 99–514, § 1703(e)(2)(G), see 1986 Amendment note below.

Pub. L. 100–647, § 1017(c)(9), substituted “6421(g)(2)” for “6421(f)(2)”.

1986—Subsecs. (b), (c)(2). Pub. L. 99–514, as amended by Pub. L. 100–647, § 1017(c)(12), substituted “6427(j)(2)” for “6427(i)(2)”.

1984—Subsecs. (b), (c)(2). Pub. L. 98–369 substituted “6427(i)(2)” for “6427(h)(2)”.

1983—Subsecs. (b), (c)(2). Pub. L. 97–424 struck out “6424(d)(2),” after “6421(f)(2),”.

1980—Subsecs. (b), (c)(2). Pub. L. 96–223 substituted “6427(h)(2)” for “6427(g)(2)”.

1978—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 95–599, § 505(c)(5), substituted “6427(g)(2)” for “6427(f)(2)”.

Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 95–599, § 505(c)(6), substituted “6427(g)(2)” for “6427(e)(2)”.

1976—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 94–530 substituted “6427(f)(2)” for “6427(e)(2)”.

Pub. L. 94–455 struck out “or his delegate” after “Secretary”.

1970—Subsecs. (b), (c). Pub. L. 91–258 inserted references to section 6427(e)(2).

1965—Subsecs. (b), (c). Pub. L. 89–44 inserted references to section 6424(d)(2).

1956—Subsecs. (b), (c). Act Apr. 2, 1956, inserted references to section 6420(e)(2).

Act June 29, 1956, inserted references to section 6421(f)(2).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesChange of Name

“United States magistrate judge” and “magistrate judge” substituted for “United States magistrate” and “magistrate”, respectively, wherever appearing in subsec. (b) pursuant to section 321 of Pub. L. 101–650, set out as a note under section 631 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure. Previously, “United States magistrate” and “magistrate” substituted for “United States commissioner” and “commissioner”, respectively, pursuant to Pub. L. 90–578. See chapter 43 (§ 631 et seq.) of Title 28.

Effective Date of 1988 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 100–647 effective, except as otherwise provided, as if included in the provision of the Tax Reform Act of 1986, Pub. L. 99–514, to which such amendment relates, see section 1019(a) of Pub. L. 100–647, set out as a note under section 1 of this title.

Effective Date of 1986 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 99–514 applicable to gasoline removed (as defined in section 4082 of this title as amended by section 1703 of Pub. L. 99–514) after Dec. 31, 1987, see section 1703(h) of Pub. L. 99–514, set out as a note under section 4081 of this title.

Effective Date of 1984 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 98–369 effective Aug. 1, 1984, see section 911(e) of Pub. L. 98–369, set out as a note under section 6427 of this title.

Effective Date of 1983 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 97–424 applicable with respect to articles sold after Jan. 6, 1983, see section 515(c) of Pub. L. 97–424, set out as a note under section 34 of this title.

Effective Date of 1980 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 96–223 effective Jan. 1, 1979, see section 232(h)(2) of Pub. L. 96–223, set out as a note under section 6427 of this title.

Effective Date of 1978 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 95–599 effective Jan. 1, 1979, see section 505(d) of Pub. L. 95–599, set out as a note under section 6427 of this title.

Effective Date of 1976 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 94–530 effective Oct. 1, 1976, see section 1(d) of Pub. L. 94–530, set out as a note under section 4041 of this title.

Effective Date of 1970 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 91–258 effective July 1, 1970, see section 211(a) of Pub. L. 91–258, set out as a note under section 4041 of this title.

Effective Date of 1965 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 89–44 effective Jan. 1, 1966, see section 701(a)(1), (2), of Pub. L. 89–44, set out as a note under section 4161 of this title.

Effective Date of 1956 Amendment

Amendment by act June 29, 1956, effective June 29, 1956, see section 211 of act June 29, 1956, set out as a note under section 4041 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 270 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 1956–2025 · leading case: Robert L. Schulz v. Internal Revenue Serv. & Anthony Roundtree, 413 F.3d 297 (2d Cir. 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Robert L. Schulz v. Internal Revenue Serv. & Anthony Roundtree, 413 F.3d 297 (2d Cir. 2005). · cites it 7× “Having considered the arguments of the parties, we grant the petition to rehear for only the limited purpose and to the extent necessary to clarify our prior opinion and hold that: 1) absent an effort to seek enforcement through a federal court, IRS summonses “to appear, to…”

Garner v. United States, 424 U.S. 648 (1976). · cites it 2× “26 U. S. C. § 7604 . [6] Given Sullivan , it cannot fairly be said that taxpayers are "volunteers" when they file their tax returns.”

United States v. Arthur Young & Co., 465 U.S. 805 (1984). · cites it 2× “See 26 U. S. C. §7604 . 3 Amerada intervened, as permitted by 26 U.”

United States v. Textron Inc. & Subsidiaries, 577 F.3d 21 (1st Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “See 26 U.S.C. § 7604 (a) (2006). Textron challenged the summons as lacking legitimate purpose and also asserted, as bars to the demand, the attorney-client and tax practitioner privileges and the qualified privilege available for litigation materials under the work product…”

United States v. Euge, 444 U.S. 707 (1980). · cites it 2× “The United States commenced this action under 26 U. S. C. § 7604 (a). The District Court held that the summons should be enforced, ordering respondent to provide 10 handwriting exemplars of 8 different signatures.”

United States v. Bright, 596 F.3d 683 (9th Cir. 2010). · cites it 2× “JURISDICTION The United States brought its petition under 26 U.S.C. § 7604 (b), and the district court had jurisdiction under 26 U.”

United States v. Zolin, 491 U.S. 554 (1989). “The first is whether, when a district court enforces an IRS summons, see 26 U. S. C. §7604 , the court may condition its enforcement order by placing restrictions on the disclosure of the summoned information.”

Gelbard v. United States, 408 U.S. 41 (1972). · cites it 2× “§ 1124 , Merchant Marine Act, 1936; 26 U. S. C. § 7604 , Internal Revenue Code of 1954; 16 U.”

United States v. Richard W. (Dick) Rylander, Sr., 714 F.2d 996 (9th Cir. 1983). · cites it 2× “Thus, any criminal contempt charged as a result of disobedience to a section 7602 summons is a serious offense and carries with it the right to a jury trial.”

Standing Akimbo, LLC v. United States, 955 F.3d 1146 (10th Cir. 2020). “The government moved to dismiss the petition under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and to enforce the summonses under 26 U.S.C. §§ 7604 (a) and 7609(b)(2)(A), arguing that Agent Pringle’s appended declaration established that the summonses satisfied Powell’s…”

Hudson Valley Black Press v. Internal Revenue Serv., 409 F.3d 106 (2d Cir. 2005). · cites it 2× “See 26 U.S.C. § 7604 ; Judicial Watch, Inc. v.”

United States of Am. Charles L. Gresham, Revenue Officer of the Internal Revenue Serv. v. David O. Saunders & Sharon Saunders, 951 F.2d 1065 (9th Cir. 1991). · cites it 2× “26 U.S.C. § 7604 (b). In December 1990, the district court denied the Saunders’ motion to dismiss and issued an order enforcing the summonses.”

Show all 270 citing cases →

— 26 U.S.C. § 7604(a) — 1 case

United States v. Giordano, 301 F. Supp. 884 (E.D. Mo. 1969).

— 26 U.S.C. § 7604(b) — 3 cases

United States v. Bremicker, 365 F. Supp. 701 (D. Minnesota 1973).

United States v. Lafko, 520 F.2d 622 (3rd Cir. 1975).

United States Am. v. Crown (N.D. Ill. 2018).

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.