31 U.S.C. § 3129

Appropriation to pay expenses

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

(a) Amounts to pay necessary expenses (including rent) for an issue of obligations authorized under this chapter are appropriated to the Secretary of the Treasury. However, the amount appropriated under this section may not be more than—(1) .2 percent of the amount of bonds and notes authorized under this chapter;(2) .1 percent of the amount of certificates of indebtedness authorized under section 3104 of this title; and(3) .1 percent of the amount of certificates of indebtedness authorized under the First Liberty Bond Act.(b) An appropriation under this section is available for obligation only through the end of the fiscal year after the fiscal year in which the issue was made. During a period for which an appropriation for a specified amount is made for expenses for which this section makes an appropriation for an unspecified amount, only the appropriation for the specified amount is available for obligation.(Pub. L. 97–258, Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 947.)

Historical and Revision Notes
Revised Section	Source (U.S. Code)	Source (Statutes at Large)
3129	31:753(d)(last sentence less related to 31:771).	Sept. 24, 1917, ch. 56, 40 Stat. 288, § 18(d)(last sentence less related to § 8); added Mar. 3, 1919, ch. 100, § 1, 40 Stat. 1310.
	31:757c(e).	Sept. 24, 1917, ch. 56, 40 Stat. 288, § 22(e); added Feb. 4, 1935, ch. 5, § 6, 49 Stat. 21; restated Feb. 19, 1941, ch. 7, § 3, 55 Stat. 8.
	31:759.	Apr. 24, 1917, ch. 4, § 8, 40 Stat. 37; May 29, 1928, ch. 901, § 1(20)(related to 40 Stat. 37), 45 Stat. 987.
	31:760.	Sept. 24, 1917, ch. 56, § 10, 40 Stat. 292; May 29, 1928, ch. 901, § 1(20)(related to 40 Stat. 292), 45 Stat. 987; June 1, 1955, ch. 119, § 3, 69 Stat. 82.
	31:761.	June 16, 1921, ch. 23, § 1(last par. last sentence under heading “Office of the Secretary”), 42 Stat. 36.

In subsection (a), before clause (1), the words “an issue of obligations authorized under this chapter” are substituted for 31:761(less proviso) to reflect consolidation of the authority for issues of obligations in the revised chapter and for consistency. The text of 31:757c(e) is omitted as unnecessary and superseded by 39:410. The words “out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated” in 31:760 are omitted as unnecessary and for consistency. The words “to be expended as the Secretary of the Treasury may direct” in 31:760 are omitted as surplus. In clause (1), the .2 percent limitation on expenses of bonds referred to in 31:760 is made applicable to a “note” because of the definition of bond in 31:753(d)(last sentence). The words “sections 735 to 738, . . . 765, . . . 773 of this title and section 84 of title 12” in 31:753(d)(last sentence) are omitted because they refer to sections previously repealed (31:735–738, 765) or obsolete (31:773, which was superseded by 39:410) and because 12:84 was amended to express the result required by the source provisions by section 10 of the Act of February 25, 1927 (ch. 191, 44 Stat. 1229).

In subsection (b), the words “appropriation for the specified amount” are substituted for “definite appropriation”, and the words “appropriation for an unspecified amount” are substituted for “indefinite appropriation”, as being more precise. The word “only” is substituted for “and the indefinite appropriation shall not be available for obligation” to eliminate unnecessary words.

Editorial NotesReferences in Text

The First Liberty Bond Act, referred to in subsec. (a)(3), is act Apr. 24, 1917, ch. 4, 40 Stat. 35, which enacted sections 746, 755, 755a, 759, 764, 774, and 804 of former Title 31 and section 462a of Title 12, Banks and Banking, and amended sections 745 and 768 of former Title 31, and was repealed by Pub. L. 97–258, § 5(b), Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 1072.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1996–2023 · leading case: Miller v. Holzmann

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Miller v. Holzmann (2008) dcd · cites it 3× “at 844 ; 31 U.S.C. § 3129 (a)(1) (2008). During the plea colloquy, both defendants had “admitted, as part of the factual basis of their guilty pleas, that they intended for the cost reports [they had] submitted to Medicare to contain illegitimate costs for the construction of…”

Foundation for Fair Contracting, Ltd. v. G & M EASTERN CONTRACTING & DOUBLE E, LLC (2003) njd “31 U.S.C. § 3129 (a)(l)-(3). 7 . Those employees are: Ed Bonczek, Jose Figueroa, Jose Parades, Charles Potter, Wilson Zambrano, and Ed Zimmer.”

United States ex rel. Minge v. Hawker Beechcraft Corp. (In re Hawker Beechcraft Inc.) (2013) nysb · cites it 2× “Debts Resulting from Violations of 31 U.S.C. § 3129 (a) are Owed to the United States In concluding that the relator in a qui tam lawsuit had standing to prosecute the FCA claim, the Supreme Court explained in Vermont Agency of Natural Resources, the relator has “an interest in…”

United States Ex Rel. Phillips v. Pediatric Services of America, Inc. (2001) ncwd “PROCEDURAL HISTORY Plaintiff brought this action in 1997 alleging violations of the federal False Claims Act, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3129 , et seq., which prohibits the submission of false claims to the United States Government for payment.”

Tighe v. Career Systems Development Corp. (1996) mad “In Neal , the Court determined that the statute protects employees who investigate and supply information concerning fraudulent practices of their employers to appropriate internal personnel or the government, regardless of whether or not the employee or government ultimately…”

Castenson v. City of Harcourt (2000) iand “” 31 U.S.C. § 3129 (a)(2). Although “government” as used in the FCA means the federal government, see, e.”

Sharma v. Cole (2023) mad “Specifically, FERA amended and enlarged portions of the False Claims Act (“FCA”), 31 U.S.C. § 3129 et seq. Additionally, FERA included amendments to several criminal statutes, see FERA § 2 (amending the false statements in mortgage applications statute ( 18 U.”

United States of America and the State of New York ex rel. J. Doe v. Community Living Corporation (2020) nysd “Plaintiff Has Failed to Allege Violations of 31 U.S.C. § 3129 or N.Y. State Fin. Law § 189 a.”

United States of America,ex rel Bud Conyers v. Halliburton Company (2021) txsd “31 U.S.C. § 3129 (a)(3) (2006). V. ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION Each subcontract at issue in this case is the subject of multiple theories of liability alleged by the Government.”

USA ex rel Mark Christopher Tracy v. Emigration Improvement District (2021) utd “” (citing 31 U.S.C. § 3129 (a)(1)(A))) (emphasis added).”

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.