28 U.S.C. § 2406
Section 2406 · Credits in actions by United States; prior disallowance
Amended 2 times on record
Applied in 28 court decisions — leading case National City Bank of New York v. Republic of China (1955)
Most recently applied in 881 F. Supp. 1432 - United States v. Iron Mountain Mines, Inc. (March 1995)
How often courts cite this section
Court decisions citing this, by year.Markers show enactment, consequential amendments, and circuit splits over this section — watch for a citation surge after a change or a disagreement. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.
In an action by the United States against an individual, evidence supporting the defendant's claim for a credit shall not be admitted unless he first proves that such claim has been disallowed, in whole or in part, by the Government Accountability Office, or that he has, at the time of the trial, obtained possession of vouchers not previously procurable and has been prevented from presenting such claim to the Government Accountability Office by absence from the United States or unavoidable accident.
Editorial notes U.S. Code · Office of the Law Revision Counsel
Historical and Revision Notes
Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §774 (R.S., §§236, 951; June 10, 1921, ch. 18, §§304, 305, 42 Stat. 24).
Word “action” was substituted for “suits”, in view of Rule 2 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Section 774 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., provided that “no claim for a credit shall be admitted, upon trial”, etc. This was changed to “evidence supporting the defendant's claim for a credit shall not be admitted”, to clarify the meaning of the section. The case of U.S. v. Heard, D.C.Va. 1940, 32 F.Supp. 39, reviews the conflicting decisions on the question whether compliance with the section must be pleaded, and offers persuasive argument that it need not be, and that the section was designed as a rule of evidence. The wording of the remainder of the section also supports this conclusion, as pointed out by Judge Learned Hand in U.S. v. Standard Aircraft Corp., D.C.N.Y. 1926, 16 F.2d 307, followed in the Heard case.
Changes in phraseology were made.
Amendments
2004—Pub. L. 108–271 substituted “Government Accountability Office” for “General Accounting Office” in two places.