Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Historical examples of Antideficiency Act violations by federal agencies
Executive summary
Federal agencies routinely report Antideficiency Act (ADA) violations to the Government Accountability Office (GAO); GAO compiles annual summaries showing a range of examples from lease obligations to allotment overruns and mis‑applied funds [1] [2]. High‑profile instances cited in recent reporting include the Chemical Safety Board’s ten‑year lease that GAO found exceeded available appropriations at signing and several shutdown‑era actions (IRS tax refunds, National Park operations) that GAO later called unlawful [1] [3] [4].
1. How ADA violations show up in official records — routine reports, not one‑off scandals
The GAO serves as the repository for agency ADA reports and since FY2005 has published annual compilations summarizing the violations agencies themselves reported; these include descriptions of the violation and remedial steps the agency claimed to take [1] [2]. That means many documented examples are administrative failures — misallotments, exceeding an allotment, or entering obligations without appropriations — rather than only willful criminal acts [2] [5].
2. Lease and long‑term commitments: a recurrent, concrete example
GAO’s FY2024 compilation highlights the U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) entering a ten‑year real‑property lease without appropriations sufficient to cover the full multi‑year obligation at lease execution; GAO concluded the agency violated 31 U.S.C. §1341 because future years’ costs were not yet funded [1]. Long‑term contracts or leases are a recurring ADA trap because they can obligate funds beyond the year for which appropriations exist [1].
3. Allotments, recaptures and accounting errors — the common, technical violations
GAO’s FY2023 summaries include cases such as HUD exceeding an allotment in the Rental Assistance Payment account because of misallotted recaptured budget authority, and EPA finding violations traceable to inadequate procedures rather than knowing, willful actions [2]. Training, controls, and apportionment mistakes are frequent causes agencies report [2] [5].
4. Shutdown workarounds and high‑profile political flashpoints
Shutdown-era decisions often prompt ADA controversy. Reporting recalls the 2018–19 shutdown: the IRS issued tax refunds and the Trump administration kept parks open — actions GAO later said violated appropriations law [4] [3]. Recent 2025 coverage discusses administrations trying “workarounds” (e.g., using R&D or other accounts to keep pay flowing), which legal commentators and GAO view as risky or unlawful under the ADA [3] [6].
5. Enforcement reality: reporting and limited criminal follow‑through
The statute provides both administrative and penal sanctions, and agencies must report violations to the President, Congress, and the Comptroller General; GAO will notify Congress if an agency fails to report [7] [1]. However, enforcement in practice tends to be administrative or reputational: GAO issues findings and agencies document remedial actions, while criminal prosecution is rare and depends on “knowing and willful” conduct [7] [5].
6. Competing viewpoints and political context around “laws versus pragmatism”
Legal commentators and watchdogs stress that the ADA enforces congressional control of the purse and that creative spending during funding gaps risks violating the law [8] [3]. By contrast, some executive‑branch actors have argued that certain re‑allocations or timing choices are consistent with appropriations law — a tension that surfaces repeatedly during shutdowns or contested budget decisions [3] [6]. GAO’s role is to interpret and report; those interpretations can be contested in legal and political forums [1] [3].
7. What the records don’t tell us — limits of available sources
Available sources document many agency self‑reported ADA incidents and GAO summaries [1] [2], but they do not provide a comprehensive, independent tally of every historical ADA violation, nor do they detail every internal disposition (e.g., personnel discipline) beyond agency claims [1] [2]. Sources do not mention a definitive list of prosecutions or a database linking outcomes to each report; GAO compilations are summaries based on unaudited agency reports [1] [2].
8. Bottom line for readers seeking historical examples
For documented, source‑backed examples start with GAO’s annual ADA report compilations — they include concrete cases like CSB’s improper ten‑year lease and numerous allotment/recapture accounting errors — and supplement that with GAO opinions and watchdog reporting on shutdown‑era controversies such as IRS refunds and park operations [1] [2] [4]. For contested or politically charged episodes, expect competing legal interpretations: GAO and watchdogs emphasize statutory limits, while some executive actors argue necessity or the permissibility of workarounds [1] [3] [6].