31 U.S.C. § 1517

Prohibited obligations and expenditures

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 31 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) An officer or employee of the United States Government or of the District of Columbia government may not make or authorize an expenditure or obligation exceeding—(1) an apportionment; or(2) the amount permitted by regulations prescribed under section 1514(a) of this title.(b) If an officer or employee of an executive agency or of the District of Columbia government violates subsection (a) of this section, the head of the executive agency or the Mayor of the District of Columbia, as the case may be, shall report immediately to the President and Congress all relevant facts and a statement of actions taken. A copy of each report shall also be transmitted to the Comptroller General on the same date the report is transmitted to the President and Congress.(Pub. L. 97–258, Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 932; Pub. L. 108–447, div. G, title I, § 1401(b), Dec. 8, 2004, 118 Stat. 3192.)

Historical and Revision Notes
Revised Section	Source (U.S. Code)	Source (Statutes at Large)
1517(a)	31:665(h).	R.S. § 3679(h), (i)(2)(related to (h)); Mar. 3, 1905, ch. 1484, § 4(1st par.), 33 Stat. 1257; Feb. 27, 1906, ch. 510, § 3, 34 Stat. 48; restated Sept. 6, 1950, ch. 896, § 1211, 64 Stat. 768.
1517(b)	31:665(i)(2)(related to (h)).

In subsection (a), before clause (1), the words “District of Columbia government” are added because of section 9 of the Act of June 26, 1912 (ch. 182, 37 Stat. 184). In clause (1), the word “apportionment” is substituted for “apportionment or reapportionment” because of section 1512(a)(last sentence) of the revised title.

In subsection (b), the word “Mayor” is used because of Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1967 (eff. Aug. 11, 1967, 81 Stat. 948) and sections 421, 422, and 771 of the District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act (Pub. L. 93–198, 87 Stat. 789, 818). The word “President” is substituted for “President, through the Director of the Office of Management and Budget” because sections 101 and 102(a) of Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1970 (eff. July 1, 1970, 84 Stat. 2085) designated the Bureau of the Budget as the Office of Management and Budget and transferred all functions of the Bureau to the President.

Editorial NotesAmendments

2004—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 108–447 inserted at end “A copy of each report shall also be transmitted to the Comptroller General on the same date the report is transmitted to the President and Congress.”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1983–2023 · leading case: The Cessna Aircraft Co. v. John H. Dalton, Sec'y of Navy, 126 F.3d 1442 (Fed. Cir. 1998).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

The Cessna Aircraft Co. v. John H. Dalton, Sec'y of Navy, 126 F.3d 1442 (Fed. Cir. 1998). “§ 1512 , which requires that appropriated funds be apportioned, 12 and 31 U.S.C. § 1517 , which prohibits government officials or employees from authorizing obligations that exceed apportionment, 13 prevent the obligation of funds, even if appropriated, before they have been…”

Beta Sys., Div. of Velcon Filters, Inc. v. United States, 16 Cl. Ct. 219 (Ct. Cl. 1989). “Any action by the contracting officer to purchase materials prior to the certified availability of funds would violate, defendant contends, the so-called Anti-Deficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. § 1517 (1982). See also 31 U.S.”

Obligating Carryover Funds in Violation of OMB Zero-Dollar Apportionment Rule (OLC 2016). · cites it 5× “As a re- sult, in such circumstances, 31 U.S.C. § 1517 would prohibit an agency from expend- ing or obligating funds exceeding that apportionment of zero.”

Amatea/Grimberg JV (A.S.B.C.A. 2023). “§§ 1341-1342 and 31 U.S.C. § 1517 . Here, AGJV fails to identify any statutory authority that would permit the Navy to accept non-appropriated funds from AGJV to cover federal overtime pay.”

Applicability of the Antideficiency Act ApportionmentRequirements to the Nonadministrative Funds of the Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp. (OLC 1983). “31 U.S.C. § 1517 (b). Because the General Counsel of the FHLBB believes that FSLIC nonadministrative ex penses are not subject to apportionment under the Antideficiency Act, how ever, the FHLBB informed OMB that no report of the transaction would be submitted.”

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.