31 U.S.C. § 3728

Setoff against judgment

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

(a) The Secretary of the Treasury shall withhold paying that part of a judgment against the United States Government presented to the Secretary that is equal to a debt the plaintiff owes the Government.(b) The Secretary shall—(1) discharge the debt if the plaintiff agrees to the setoff and discharges a part of the judgment equal to the debt; or(2)(A) withhold payment of an additional amount the Secretary decides will cover legal costs of bringing a civil action for the debt if the plaintiff denies the debt or does not agree to the setoff; and(B) have a civil action brought if one has not already been brought.(c) If the Government loses a civil action to recover a debt or recovers less than the amount the Secretary withholds under this section, the Secretary shall pay the plaintiff the balance and interest of 6 percent for the time the money is withheld.(Pub. L. 97–258, Sept. 13, 1982, 96 Stat. 977; Pub. L. 104–316, title II, § 202(p), Oct. 19, 1996, 110 Stat. 3844.)

Historical and Revision Notes
Revised Section	Source (U.S. Code)	Source (Statutes at Large)
3728(a)	31:227(1st sentence words before semicolon).	Mar. 3, 1875, ch. 149, 18 Stat. 481; restated Mar. 3, 1933, ch. 212, § 13, 47 Stat. 1516.
3728(b)	31:227(1st sentence words after semicolon, 2d, 3d sentences).
3728(c)	31:227(last sentence).

In the section, the words “of the United States” are omitted as unnecessary.

In subsection (a), the words “final . . . recovered . . . duly allowed by legal authority”, “for payment”, and “in any manner, whether as principal or surety” are omitted as surplus.

In subsection (b)(1), the words “due from the plaintiff to the United States” are omitted as surplus.

In subsection (b)(2)(A), the words “of such judgment”, “be sufficient to”, and “charges and” are omitted as surplus. The words “of bringing a civil action” are substituted for “in prosecuting the debt” for consistency in the revised title and with other titles of the United States Code. The words “of the United States to final judgment” and “to the United States” are omitted as surplus.

Subsection (b)(2)(B) is substituted for 31:227(3d sentence) for consistency and to eliminate unnecessary words.

In subsection (c), the words “for debt and costs”, “thereon”, and “from the plaintiff” are omitted as surplus.

Editorial NotesAmendments

1996—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 104–316, § 202(p)(1), (2), substituted “Secretary of the Treasury” for “Comptroller General” before “shall withhold” and “Secretary” for “Comptroller General” after “presented to the”.

Subsecs. (b), (c). Pub. L. 104–316, § 202(p)(2), substituted “Secretary” for “Comptroller General” wherever appearing.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 67 cases (25 in the last 5 years), 1986–2025 · leading case: Drg Funding Corp. v. Sec'y of Hous. & Urban Dev., 76 F.3d 1212 (D.C. Cir. 1996).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Drg Funding Corp. v. Sec'y of Hous. & Urban Dev., 76 F.3d 1212 (D.C. Cir. 1996). · cites it 8× “§ 227 , the predecessor of 31 U.S.C. § 3728 ). Because the statute is inapplicable, however, mandamus is unavailable.”

In Re Cascade Roads, Inc., Debtor. United States of Am. v. Peter H. Arkison, Tr., 34 F.3d 756 (9th Cir. 1994). · cites it 4× “” The United States argues that the Turnover Order is invalid because it contravenes 31 U.S.C. § 3728 (a), which requires “[t]he Comptroller General [to] withhold paying that part of a judgment against the United States Government presented to the Comptroller General that is…”

United States v. Bond, 762 F.3d 255 (2d Cir. 2014). · cites it 2× “Rather, the district court held that the government’s setoff rights could be asserted in a separate federal cause of action pursuant to the Judgment Setoff Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3728 . In this appeal, the Liquidating Trustee seeks a mandate directing affirmance of the April 29, 2011…”

Montavon v. United States, 864 F. Supp. 519 (E.D. Va. 1994). · cites it 9× “Given this, the IRS argues that, because Spectrum consented then and consents now to a setoff, a setoff therefore occurred under 31 U.S.C. § 3728 . 12 In particular, the IRS focuses on the phrase providing that “[t]he Comptroller General shall discharge the debt if the plaintiff…”

Dunn & Black, P.S. v. United States, 492 F.3d 1084 (9th Cir. 2007). · cites it 2× “Furthermore, the district court denied Dunn & Black’s motion for summary judgment and held that the government’s claim of setoff in the amount of $450,000 was appropriate pursuant to 31 U.S.C. § 3728 . Dunn & Black, 366 F.Supp.”

Dunn & Black, P.S. v. United States, 366 F. Supp. 2d 1008 (E.D. Wash. 2005). · cites it 17× “In its post-hearing briefing and presumably based on the conclusion of its civil action to reduce ERI’s tax assessments to judgment on November 24, 2004, the government’s argument shifted, in part, from common law right of setoff to that of a statutory setoff pursuant to 31…”

Michael Ikelionwu v. United States, 150 F.3d 233 (2d Cir. 1998). · cites it 2× “Under 31 U.S.C. § 3728 (a), “[t]he Secretary of the Treasury shall withhold paying that part of a judgment against the United States Government presented to the Comptroller General that is equal to a debt the plaintiff owes the Government.”

Hornbeck Offshore Operators, Inc. v. Ocean Line of Bermuda, Inc., 849 F. Supp. 434 (E.D. Va. 1994). · cites it 4× “federal setoff statute, 31 U.S.C. § 3728 6 and under the common law right to setoff.”

United States v. Fleet Bank of Massachusetts, 288 F.3d 22 (1st Cir. 2002). “The government also makes some passing references to the Judgment Setoff Act, 31 U.S.C. § 3728 (1994 & Supp. II 1996), but does not press the point; there is no judgment at stake in this case and so the Act by its terms does not apply.”

Stiles v. United States, 47 Fed. Cl. 1 (Fed. Cl. 2000). · cites it 2× “§ 6402 is relevant to the present matter, the court finds 31 U.S.C. § 3728 to be applicable. Section 3728 states: (a) The Secretary of the Treasury shall withhold paying that part of a judgment against the United States Government presented to the Comptroller General that is…”

Farms v. United States, 13 Cl. Ct. 48 (Ct. Cl. 1987). · cites it 2× “5 Here, plaintiffs seek mandamus against the Government: (1) directing the removal of plaintiffs from the Claims Control Record (also called the Federal Debt Register); (2) directing the release of all impounded funds withheld from plaintiffs, together with interest at six…”

Greene v. United States, 124 Fed. Cl. 636 (Fed. Cl. 2015). · cites it 2× “Finally, defendant contends that even if the government erred in its compliance with the statutory requirements that plaintiff identifies, because such purported errors were procedural in nature, a return of the offset funds is not the proper remedy — and even if a monetary…”

Show all 67 citing cases →

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.