Alabama
Alabama Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 12, 2026). · 10 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

No collector can garnish your wages in Alabama just because you missed payments. For ordinary consumer debt, a creditor must first sue you, win a judgment, and then get a writ of garnishment from the court before your employer withholds anything. That sequence is where most garnishments are actually won or lost: the majority happen through default judgments entered because the person being sued never answered the summons. If you take one action from this page, answer any lawsuit you receive, even if you believe the debt is too old or not yours.
Wage Garnishment in Alabama: Two Formulas, One Federal Ceiling
Alabama is unusual in running two parallel garnishment regimes, and which one applies depends on the kind of debt behind the judgment.
For general judgment debts, including tort judgments, Ala. Code 6-10-7 exempts 75 percent of wages and directs the garnishee, meaning your employer, to withhold the remaining 25 percent. The statute's own text states no minimum-wage floor.
For consumer credit transactions, Ala. Code 5-19-15 uses the federal-style test: the garnishment cannot exceed the lesser of 25 percent of your disposable earnings for the week, or the amount by which those disposable earnings exceed 30 times the federal minimum hourly wage. At the current $7.25 federal minimum wage, that 30-times floor is $217.50 per week. If your weekly disposable earnings are at or below that figure, nothing can be taken.
In practice the federal Consumer Credit Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. 1673, operates as a ceiling on every state, so even a judgment enforced under the flat 6-10-7 formula cannot lawfully reach wages the federal 25%/30-times test protects. Disposable earnings means what is left after legally required withholdings such as taxes and Social Security. Voluntary deductions like insurance premiums or 401(k) contributions do not reduce the figure.
A few Alabama-specific points worth knowing:
- Alabama has no general head-of-household wage exemption. Some websites claim otherwise, but no such statute appears in the current code for ordinary consumer-debt garnishment.
- Alabama's protection against being fired over a garnishment is the federal one: 15 U.S.C. 1674 bars discharge for a garnishment on any one debt. We could not locate an Alabama statute extending that protection to multiple garnishments, so a second garnishment for a different debt carries no clear firing protection in this state.
- The Alabama Department of Revenue collects unpaid state taxes on a different track: its wage garnishments take 25 percent of gross wages, not disposable earnings, and its bank garnishments can reach the full account balance up to the tax owed.
How to claim exemptions
Alabama's main exemption for personal property is Ala. Code 6-10-6: $7,500 of personal property, selected by the debtor. It is a resident-wide exemption, not limited to heads of family, and by its own terms it excludes wages, salaries, and other compensation. To assert it against a garnishment or levy on other property, you file a claim of exemption with the court that issued the process, identifying the property you select. Because wages are excluded, the practical wage protections are the percentage limits above, which apply automatically through the writ itself. If your employer is withholding more than the formula allows, you can move the court to correct the writ.
Bank Account Protections
Once wages land in a bank account, the wage-garnishment percentages no longer protect them as such. What you have instead:

- The $7,500 personal property exemption under 6-10-6 can be claimed over money in a bank account, since it covers personal property generally and bank deposits are not wages once paid.
- Federal benefits have their own shield. Social Security, VA, and similar federal benefits that arrive by direct deposit are automatically protected up to the last two months of deposits under federal rule 31 CFR Part 212. The bank must run that protection itself, and you do not need to file anything to access the protected amount. Benefits deposited by paper check do not get the automatic version and must be claimed as exempt through the court.
For state tax debts, note again that ALDOR's bank garnishment reaches the balance up to the liability, so the timing of an exemption claim matters.
Statute of Limitations on Debt in Alabama
Alabama splits debt lawsuits into buckets with very different deadlines:
| Debt type | Limitations period | Statute |
|---|---|---|
| Written contract (not under seal) | 6 years | Ala. Code 6-2-34(4) |
| Loans, stated or liquidated accounts | 6 years | Ala. Code 6-2-34(5) |
| Open or unliquidated account | 3 years | Ala. Code 6-2-37(1) |
| Promissory note | 6 years from the due date | Ala. Code 7-3-118 |
The open-account clock runs from the date of the last item on the account or from when the account became due. Credit card debt is commonly treated by courts applying Alabama law as an open account subject to the 3-year period, on the reasoning that the amount owed is not fixed in advance, though the characterization can be contested in a given case and the outcome may depend on the cardholder agreement. Alabama does not give purely oral contracts a shorter general period; they appear to fall under the 6-year catch-all in 6-2-34 unless they qualify as open accounts.
The revival rule: Alabama is stricter than most
Ala. Code 6-2-16 is explicit: no act, promise, or acknowledgment removes the bar of the statute of limitations except a partial payment made on the contract before the bar is complete, or an unconditional promise in writing signed by the party to be charged. Two consequences follow. First, a partial payment made while the clock is still running restarts it, which means a small payment on a 2.5-year-old open account buys the collector three more years. Second, once the period has fully expired, no payment and no oral statement revives it. Only a signed written unconditional promise can do that, so be careful what you sign.
Time-barred does not mean erased. A collector may still ask you to pay a time-barred debt, but under federal Regulation F, 12 CFR 1006.26, a debt collector must not sue or threaten to sue you on it. Credit reporting also runs on its own clock: negative items generally fall off after about seven years regardless of the limitations period.
What Debt Collectors Can and Cannot Do
The federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act applies fully in Alabama. Third-party collectors cannot use false, deceptive, or misleading representations, including misstating the amount or legal status of a debt, and cannot threaten action they cannot legally take, 15 U.S.C. 1692e. Regulation F adds concrete rules on call frequency and the validation information collectors must give you.
Alabama has no comprehensive state-level consumer debt collection act layered on top of the FDCPA, so the federal statute is the main line of defense. Complaints can be filed with the CFPB and the Alabama Attorney General's consumer protection office.
Car Repossession Rules
Alabama adopted the Uniform Commercial Code's self-help rule as Ala. Code 7-9A-609. After default, a secured lender may take possession of the collateral without any court order, but only if it can do so without a breach of the peace. If you or someone at the scene objects and the repo agent proceeds anyway, or the agent breaks into a locked garage, the repossession can cross that line, though Alabama's statute does not define breach of the peace and courts decide it case by case.

Alabama has no statutory right-to-cure notice requirement before repossession of the kind some states impose, so a lender generally does not have to warn you or give you a fixed window to catch up before taking the vehicle. After repossession, the sale of the car must be commercially reasonable, the proceeds are applied to the debt, and you can be sued for any remaining deficiency. You are entitled to a written explanation of how a deficiency was calculated on request.
Servicemembers have an extra federal layer: for contracts entered before military service, the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act, 50 U.S.C. 3952, requires a court order before repossession.
If You Are Being Garnished or Sued in Alabama
Work the problem in this order:
- Answer the lawsuit. A garnishment almost always starts with a default judgment. Filing an answer, even a simple one disputing the amount, forces the collector to prove its case and often opens the door to settlement.
- Check the math on any garnishment. Compare the withholding against the 5-19-15 or 6-10-7 formula and the federal floor. Errors are common.
- Claim your exemptions promptly. The $7,500 personal property exemption and federal benefit protections do most of their work only when asserted, and deadlines to respond to a garnishment or levy are short.
- Ask whether the debt is time-barred. If the last activity on an open account is more than three years old, raise the statute of limitations as a defense in your answer. It is a defense you must raise; the court will not raise it for you.
- Consider bankruptcy if the debt is unpayable. A bankruptcy filing stops garnishment through the automatic stay, and Alabama's exemptions apply inside bankruptcy too. It is not the right tool for everyone, but for people facing multiple judgments it is often the only complete one.
Overwhelmed by debt? Get a free bankruptcy consultation
Bankruptcy can stop foreclosure, wage garnishment, and creditor calls, and which debts you can clear and what property you keep depend on your state's exemptions. Get a free, confidential consultation with a bankruptcy attorney to understand your options. There is no obligation.
Information last verified on 2026-08-12. This article has not yet been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.

Related Resources
- Debt Collection Laws by State
- How to Stop Wage Garnishment
- Statute of Limitations on Debt
- Can Social Security Be Garnished?
- Alabama Statute of Limitations
- Alabama Bankruptcy Laws
Last updated: 2026-08-12.
More Alabama Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
How much of my paycheck can be garnished in Alabama?
For consumer credit debts, the lesser of 25% of your disposable earnings or the amount above $217.50 per week, per Ala. Code 5-19-15 and federal law. General judgments use a flat 25% under 6-10-7, but the federal formula still caps what can actually be taken.
Can I be fired for a wage garnishment in Alabama?
Federal law, 15 U.S.C. 1674, protects you from discharge over garnishment for any one debt. We found no Alabama statute extending that protection to garnishments for multiple debts, so a second, separate garnishment carries no clear firing protection in Alabama.
What is the statute of limitations on credit card debt in Alabama?
Courts applying Alabama law commonly treat credit card debt as an open account with a 3-year period under Ala. Code 6-2-37, measured from the last activity. Written contracts and loans get 6 years under 6-2-34. The characterization can be contested, so treat the 3-year figure as the common outcome rather than a guarantee.
Does making a payment restart the statute of limitations in Alabama?
Only if the clock is still running. Under Ala. Code 6-2-16, a partial payment made before the period expires restarts it, but once the debt is fully time-barred, only a signed written unconditional promise can revive it. An oral acknowledgment never does.
Can a collector take money from my bank account in Alabama?
After a judgment, yes, through a bank garnishment. You can claim up to $7,500 of personal property, including bank funds, as exempt under Ala. Code 6-10-6, and the last two months of directly deposited federal benefits are automatically protected under 31 CFR Part 212.
Can a repo company take my car without notice in Alabama?
Generally yes. Ala. Code 7-9A-609 allows repossession after default without a court order or advance notice, as long as there is no breach of the peace. Alabama has no statutory pre-repossession cure notice for car loans.
Updates
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Code of Alabama 1975, Title 6: Civil Practice.
§ 6-10-7Wages, Salaries, or Other Compensation of Laborers or Employees for Personal Services.In force
(a) The wages, salaries, or other compensation of laborers or employees, residents of this state, for personal services, shall be exempt from levy under writs of garnishment or other process for the collection of debts contracted or judgments entered in tort in an amount equal to 75 percent of such wages, salaries, or other compensation due or to become due to such laborers or employees, and the levy as to such percentage of their wages, salaries, or other compensation shall be void. The court issuing the writ or levy shall show thereon the amount of the claim of the plaintiff and the court costs in the proceedings. If at any time during the pendency of the proceedings in the court a judgment is entered for a different amount, then the court shall notify the garnishee of the correct amount due by the defendant under the writ or levy. The garnishee shall retain 25 percent of the wages, salaries, or other compensation of the laborer or employee during the period of time as is necessary to accumulate a sum equal to the amount shown as due by the court on the writ or levy.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at alison.legislature.state.al.us
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2016
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Lana M. Henderson v. Henry A. Henderson. (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama 2011, 73 So. 3d 1282)“…ld necessarily include the former husband’s contention that Ala.Code 1975, § 6-10-7, which speaks to exemptions from garnis…”
- First National Bank of Jasper v. Robinson (In Re Robinson) (United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Alabama 1999, 240 B.R. 70)“…potentially applicable statutes, Ala.Code § 5-19-15 (1996), Ala.Code § 6-10-7 (1993), or 15 U.S.C.S. § 1673 (Law.Co…”
- Wheeler Bros. Inc. v. Jones (District Court, M.D. Alabama 2016, 167 F. Supp. 3d 1283)“…s health insurance. (Doc. #67-4). Virginia Jones cites to Ala. Code § 6-10-7 for the proposition that 75% of wages…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 6-2-37Commencement of Actions - Three Years.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
The following must be commenced within three years: (1) Actions to recover money due by open or unliquidated account, the time to be computed from the date of the last item of the account or from the time when, by contract or usage, the account is due; and (2) Proceedings in any court of this state to disbar any attorney authorized to practice law in this state.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at alison.legislature.state.al.us
Cited in 8 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Anniston Development Co. (Supreme Court of Alabama 2002, 853 So. 2d 218)“…or an action for money due by open or unliquidated account (Ala.Code 1975, § 6-2-37(1) - 1 ) had expired. Wal-Mart conten…”
- Thomas v. American Express Bank, FSB (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama 2013, 139 So. 3d 809)“…pursuant to the three-year statute of limitations found in Ala.Code 1975, § 6-2-37. American Express admitted that it ha…”
- Home Indemnity Co. v. Ball-Co Contractors, Inc. (District Court, S.D. Alabama 1986, 645 F. Supp. 25)“…ject to the three-year statute of limitations set forth in Ala. Code § 6-2-37 (1975). The court finds that the sub…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Alabama Statute of Limitations: Filing Deadlines by Case Type
§ 6-2-34Commencement of Actions - Six Years.In forcecited in 3 of our articles
The following must be commenced within six years: (1) Actions for any trespass to person or liberty, such as false imprisonment or assault and battery; (2) Actions for any trespass to real or personal property; (3) Actions for the detention or conversion of personal property; (4) Actions founded on promises in writing not under seal; (5) Actions for the recovery of money upon a loan, upon a stated or liquidated account or for arrears of rent due upon a parol demise; (6) Actions for the use and occupation of land; (7) Motions and other actions against the sureties of any sheriff, coroner, constable, or any public officer and actions against the sureties of executors, administrators, or guardians for any nonfeasance, misfeasance, or malfeasance, whatsoever, of their principal, the time to be computed from the act done or omitted by their principal which fixes the liability of the surety; (8) Motions and other actions against attorneys-at-law for failure to pay over money of their clients or for neglect or omission of duty; and (9) Actions upon any simple contract or speciality not specifically enumerated in this section.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at alison.legislature.state.al.us
Cited in 129 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Turner v. Westhampton Court, L.L.C. (Supreme Court of Alabama 2004, 903 So. 2d 82)“…ations on a breach-of-express-warranty action is six years. Ala.Code 1975, § 6-2-34(9); the statute of limitations on a bre…”
- ROMAR DEV. v. Gulf View Management Corp. (Supreme Court of Alabama 1994, 644 So. 2d 462)“…ad. It also held that the counterclaim was *465 barred by Ala.Code 1975, § 6-2-34(9), the statute of limitations applicab…”
- Alabama Insurance Guaranty Ass'n v. Water Works & Sanitary Sewer Board of the City of Montgomery (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama 2011, 93 So. 3d 88)“…ad one governed by a six-year statute of limitations (see Ala.Code 1975, § 6-2-34(5) 4 ) and that, regardless of which li…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Alabama Car Accident Laws: Fault, Insurance, and Your Claim
§ 6-2-16Sufficiency of Partial Payment or Written Promise to Remove Bar.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
No act, promise, or acknowledgment is sufficient to remove the bar to an action created by the provisions of this chapter, nor is such evidence of a new and continuing contract, except a partial payment, made upon the contract by the party sought to be charged before the bar is complete or an unconditional promise in writing signed by the party to be charged thereby.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at alison.legislature.state.al.us
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Defco, Inc. v. Decatur Cylinder, Inc. (Supreme Court of Alabama 1992, 595 So. 2d 1329)“…ccount. Responding to that argument, Decatur Cylinder cites Ala. Code 1975, § 6-2-16 , and argues that an oral promise to pa…”
- McKerall v. Kaiser (Supreme Court of Alabama 2010, 60 So. 3d 288)“…Alabama Comment to § 7-3-118 states, in pertinent part: "Ala.Code Section 6-2-16 continues to apply to determine the suf…”
- In re Templeton (United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Alabama 2015, 538 B.R. 578)“…trustee removed the statute of limitations’ bar pursuant to Ala.Code 1975 § 6-2-16. The creditors contend further that for…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Statute of Limitations on Debt: The 50-State Payment-Revival Table
§ 6-10-6Personalty.In forcecited in 2 of our articles
The personal property of such resident, except for wages, salaries, or other compensation, to the extent of the resident’s interest therein, to the amount of seven thousand five hundred dollars ($7,500) in value, to be selected by him or her, and, in addition thereto, all necessary and proper wearing apparel for himself or herself and family, all family portraits or pictures and all books used in the family shall also be exempt from levy and sale under execution or other process for the collection of debts. No wages, salaries, or other compensation shall be exempt except as provided in Section 5-19-15 or Section 6-10-7.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at alison.legislature.state.al.us
Cited in 26 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2020
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Roberts v. Carraway Methodist Med. Ctr. (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama 1991, 591 So. 2d 870)“…nal property exemption was increased from $1,000 to $3,000. Ala. Code 1975, § 6-10-6 . Section 6-10-6 now provides in pe…”
- Ex Parte Avery (Supreme Court of Alabama 1987, 514 So. 2d 1380)“…Appeals that future wages cannot be claimed as exempt under Ala. Code 1975, § 6-10-6 , and with its reasoning that "property…”
- Sumlin Constr. Co., LLC v. Taylor (Supreme Court of Alabama 2002, 850 So. 2d 303)“…gnized as exempt from bankruptcy administration pursuant to Ala. Code 1975, § 6-10-6 . No party to the bankruptcy proceeding…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Bankruptcy in Alabama (2026): Exemptions & Means Test
Code of Alabama 1975, Title 5: Banks and Financial Institutions.
§ 5-19-15Garnishment.In force
Prior to entry of judgment on a consumer credit transaction, the creditor may not attach unpaid earnings of the debtor by garnishment. Notwithstanding the garnishment procedure otherwise applicable after judgment, with respect to a consumer credit transaction, the amount of unpaid earnings of the debtor subject to garnishment shall not exceed the lesser of: (1) Twenty-five percent of the debtor’s disposable earnings for that week; or (2) The amount by which the debtor’s disposable earnings for that week exceed 30 times the federal minimum hourly wage in effect when payable. “Disposable earnings” means that part of the earnings of a debtor remaining after deduction of amounts required by law to be withheld, and disposable earnings shall not include periodic payments pursuant to a pension, retirement, or disability program.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at alison.legislature.state.al.us
Cited in 3 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2019
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- First National Bank of Jasper v. Robinson (In Re Robinson) (United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Alabama 1999, 240 B.R. 70)“…his amount under the three potentially applicable statutes, Ala.Code § 5-19-15 (1996), Ala.Code § 6-10-7 (1993), or 1…”
- Shuler v. Ingram & Associates & NCO Financial Systems, Inc. (District Court, N.D. Alabama 2010, 710 F. Supp. 2d 1213)“…9 . This statement is consistent with Ala.Code § 5-19-15. 10 . The…”
- Andrew F Dawson (United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Alabama 2019)“…itors under Alabama law, if any benefits were awarded. See Ala. Code § 5-19-15. The Movant also alleges that the Debto…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Code of Alabama 1975, Title 7: Commercial Code.
§ 7-3-118Statute of Limitations.In force
(a) Note payable at a definite time. Except as provided in subsection (e), an action to enforce the obligation of a party to pay a note payable at a definite time must be commenced within six years after the due date or dates stated in the note or, if a due date is accelerated, within six years after the accelerated due date. (b) Note payable on demand. Except as provided in subsection (d) or (e), if demand for payment is made to the maker of a note payable on demand, an action to enforce the obligation of a party to pay the note must be commenced within six years after the demand. If no demand for payment is made to the maker, an action to enforce the note is barred if neither principal nor interest on the note has been paid for a continuous period of 10 years. (c) Unaccepted draft. Except as provided in subsection (d), an action to enforce the obligation of a party to an unaccepted draft to pay the draft must be commenced within three years after dishonor of the draft or 10 years after the date of the draft, whichever period expires first. (d) Certified check, teller’s check, cashier’s check and traveler’s check.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at alison.legislature.state.al.us
Cited in 4 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2008
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Pavco Industries, Inc. v. First Nat. Bank of Mobile (Supreme Court of Alabama 1988, 534 So. 2d 572)“…on is typed, and typed provisions govern over printed ones. Ala. Code 1975, § 7-3-118 (b). Timsco and Pavco similarly cite…”
- Compass Bank v. Richerson (Supreme Court of Alabama 1998, 724 So. 2d 14)“…penalty, or on the renewal date without interest penalty. Ala.Code 1975, § 7-3-118 cmt. 4. Yet, for more than 20 years, Ri…”
- Barrett v. McPherson (Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama 2008, 990 So. 2d 430)“…the applicable statute of limitations. Barrett claims that Ala. Code 1975, § 7-3-118 (a), applies. That section provides:…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
§ 7-9A-609Secured Party’s Right to Take Possession After Default.In force
(a) Possession; rendering equipment unusable; disposition on debtor’s premises. After default, a secured party: (1) may take possession of the collateral; and (2) without removal, may render equipment unusable and dispose of collateral on a debtor’s premises under Section 7-9A-610. (b) Judicial and nonjudicial process. A secured party may proceed under subsection (a): (1) pursuant to judicial process; or (2) without judicial process, if it proceeds without breach of the peace. (c) Assembly of collateral. If so agreed, and in any event after default, a secured party may require the debtor to assemble the collateral and make it available to the secured party at a place to be designated by the secured party which is reasonably convenient to both parties.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at alison.legislature.state.al.us
Cited in 3 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Felton (District Court, N.D. Alabama 2025)“…a secured party “may take possession of the collateral.” Ala. Code § 7-9A-609. Because even his own filings show tha…”
- Guidry v. JP Morgan Chase NA (District Court, N.D. Alabama 2021)“…e repossession “proceeds without a breach of the peace.” Ala. Code § 7-9A-609(a)(1), (b)(2). Mr. Guidry’s amended c…”
- Alice Westbrook v. Twenty 4 Seven Recovery Inc. (Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit 2020)“…cial process, if it proceeds without breach of the peace.” Ala. Code § 7-9A-609(b)(2). But even assuming for the sake…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
United States Code Title 15
§ 1673Restriction on garnishmentIn forcecited in 8 of our articles
Except as provided in subsection (b) and in section 1675 of this title, the maximum part of the aggregate disposable earnings of an individual for any workweek which is subjected to garnishment may not exceed 25 per centum of his disposable earnings for that week, or the amount by which his disposable earnings for that week exceed thirty times the Federal minimum hourly wage prescribed by section 206(a)(1) of title 29 in effect at the time the earnings are payable, whichever is less. In the case of earnings for any pay period other than a week, the Secretary of Labor shall by regulation prescribe a multiple of the Federal minimum hourly wage equivalent in effect to that set forth in paragraph (2). The restrictions of subsection (a) do not apply in the case of any order for the support of any person issued by a court of competent jurisdiction or in accordance with an administrative procedure, which is established by State law, which affords substantial due process, and which is subject to judicial review. any order of any court of the United States having jurisdiction over cases under chapter 13 of title 11. any debt due for any State or Federal tax.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 450 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Courts have read the section 1673 garnishment cap narrowly. Kokoszka v. Belford (1974) held that "disposable earnings" reaches periodic compensation and not an income tax refund, so the cap did not keep a refund out of the bankruptcy estate. Jordan v. Chase Manhattan Bank (2015) held section 1673 creates no private right of action.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Hisquierdo v. Hisquierdo (Supreme Court of the United States 1979, 439 U.S. 572)“…and amended § 303 of the Consumer Credit Protection Act, 15 U. S. C. § 1673 (b), to pre-empt state law by limiting…”
- Kokoszka v. Belford (Supreme Court of the United States 1974, 417 U.S. 642)✓A bankrupt argued the 25 percent garnishment cap exempted 75 percent of his $250.90 income tax refund from the trustee; the Supreme Court held Section 1673's limit covers periodic compensation, not a tax refund, so the whole refund passed to the estate.
- Jordan v. Chase Manhattan Bank (District Court, S.D. New York 2015, 91 F. Supp. 3d 491)✓After a Florida garnishment froze a disabled borrower's bank account holding disability benefits, she sued under Section 1673; the court held the section creates no private right of action and is enforced by the Secretary of Labor, and dismissed the claim.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Bankruptcy in South Dakota (2026): Exemptions & Means Test, Alaska Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession, Arkansas Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession
§ 1674Restriction on discharge from employment by reason of garnishmentIn forcecited in 15 of our articles
No employer may discharge any employee by reason of the fact that his earnings have been subjected to garnishment for any one indebtedness. Whoever willfully violates subsection (a) of this section shall be fined not more than $1,000, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 48 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2022
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Federal appeals courts have held that 15 U.S.C. 1674 gives no private right of action to an employee fired over a garnishment. Smith v. Cotton Brothers Baking Co., Inc. (1980) found no implied civil remedy, and Le Vick v. Skaggs Companies, Inc. (1983) agreed, leaving enforcement to the Secretary of Labor under Section 1676.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- James E. Le Vick v. Skaggs Companies, Inc. (Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit 1983, 701 F.2d 777)✓An employee fired after his wages were garnished sued his employer under 15 U.S.C. 1674(a); the Ninth Circuit declined to follow its own Stewart precedent and held Congress created no private right of action, leaving enforcement to the Secretary of Labor.
- Hodgson v. Cleveland Municipal Court (District Court, N.D. Ohio 1971, 326 F. Supp. 419)✓The Secretary of Labor argued federal garnishment law preempted Ohio's narrower anti-discharge provision; the court found no showing that 15 U.S.C. 1674, a self-enforcing criminal section, was frustrated by the Ohio statute, and no justiciable controversy under it.
- Reginald O. Wallace v. Debron Corporation (Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit 1974, 494 F.2d 674)✓A Black welder was fired under a rule barring two garnishments in a year; reversing summary judgment on his Title VII disparate-impact claim, the Eighth Circuit read 15 U.S.C. 1674 as preventing discharge for one indebtedness, not authorizing it for others.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Georgia Debt Collection Laws: Garnishment Caps, the 10-Day Repo Notice, and Debt Time Limits, Arizona Debt Collection Laws: The 10% Garnishment Cap, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession, Hawaii Debt Collection Laws: The Bracket Garnishment Formula, 6-Year Debt Limit, and Repossession
§ 1692eFalse or misleading representationsIn forcecited in 10 of our articles
A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section: The false representation or implication that the debt collector is vouched for, bonded by, or affiliated with the United States or any State, including the use of any badge, uniform, or facsimile thereof. The false representation of— the character, amount, or legal status of any debt; or any services rendered or compensation which may be lawfully received by any debt collector for the collection of a debt. The false representation or implication that any individual is an attorney or that any communication is from an attorney. The representation or implication that nonpayment of any debt will result in the arrest or imprisonment of any person or the seizure, garnishment, attachment, or sale of any property or wages of any person unless such action is lawful and the debt collector or creditor intends to take such action. The threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 3,533 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Courts read Section 1692e through the least sophisticated consumer test. Christ Clomon v. Philip D. Jackson (1993) held that mass-mailed letters bearing an attorney signature, sent without file review, violated subsections (3) and (10); Gonzalez v. Kay (2009) held a back-page disclaimer did not defeat the claim on a motion to dismiss.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Miller v. Wolpoff & Abramson, L.L.P. (Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit 2003, 321 F.3d 292)✓Debt letters went out on law firm letterhead after an attorney reviewed only a file showing the debt was outstanding; the Second Circuit held that merely being told by a client that a debt is overdue is not enough attorney involvement, and vacated summary judgment.
- William C. Lewis v. Acb Business Services, Inc., (96-3093/3498), American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. James P. Connors, (96-3498) (Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit 1998, 135 F.3d 389)✓A collection letter told the debtor to contact 'M. Hall,' a name no employee at the agency actually used; the Sixth Circuit held the alias was not a false or deceptive means under 1692e(10) because the account had been assigned to a real representative and no harm was shown.
- Gonzalez v. Kay (Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit 2009, 577 F.3d 600)✓A law firm collecting a $448.97 phone debt sent an unsigned letter on its letterhead with the disclaimer of attorney review only on the back; the Fifth Circuit held the least sophisticated consumer might think a lawyer was involved and reversed dismissal of the 1692e claim.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: California Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession, Colorado Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession, Connecticut Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession
Code of Federal Regulations Title 12
§ 1006.26Collection of time-barred debts.In forcecited in 37 of our articles
(a) Definitions. For purposes of this section: (1) Statute of limitations means the period prescribed by applicable law for bringing a legal action against the consumer to collect a debt. (2) Time-barred debt means a debt for which the applicable statute of limitations has expired. (b) Legal actions and threats of legal actions prohibited. A debt collector must not bring or threaten to bring a legal action against a consumer to collect a time-barred debt. This paragraph (b) does not apply to proofs of claim filed in connection with a bankruptcy proceeding.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at ecfr.gov
Cited in 3 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Hanover v. Real Time Resolutions, Inc. (2024) dismissed FDCPA claims built on 12 CFR 1006.26(b), reasoning it bars only collection of time-barred debts and the loans at issue were not time barred. Raja v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC (2025) dismissed a Regulation F claim because nonjudicial foreclosure is not covered by the FDCPA.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Hanover v. Real Time Resolutions, Inc. (District Court, S.D. Ohio 2024)✓A borrower claimed a servicer's letter and billing statement lacked language required by 12 CFR 1006.26(b); the court granted the servicer summary judgment, since the rule only bars collecting time-barred debts and it had already found her HELOC and mortgage enforceable.
- Raja v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC (District Court, E.D. Virginia 2025)✓Pro se homeowners alleged a servicer and foreclosure attorneys pursued a time-barred, discharged second mortgage in violation of 12 CFR 1006.26(b); the court dismissed that claim, holding parties carrying out a nonjudicial foreclosure are not FDCPA debt collectors.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Idaho Debt Collection Laws: Garnishment Limits, Debt Deadlines, and Repossession, Maine Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession, Michigan Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession
United States Code Title 50
§ 3952Protection under installment contracts for purchase or leaseIn forcecited in 17 of our articles
After a servicemember enters military service, a contract by the servicemember for— the purchase of real or personal property (including a motor vehicle); or the lease or bailment of such property, may not be rescinded or terminated for a breach of terms of the contract occurring before or during that person’s military service, nor may the property be repossessed for such breach without a court order. This section applies only to a contract for which a deposit or installment has been paid by the servicemember before the servicemember enters military service. A person who knowingly resumes possession of property in violation of subsection (a), or in violation of section 3918 of this title, or who knowingly attempts to do so, shall be fined as provided in title 18, or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-28 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at uscode.house.gov
Cited in 1 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Ditech Holding Corporation (United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York 2025)“…d on, or sold during or within a year after active service. 50 U.S.C. §§ 3952, 3953. Claimant states that he re…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Louisiana Debt Collection Laws: Prescription, Garnishment, and Repossession, Maryland Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession, Massachusetts Debt Collection Laws: Wage Garnishment, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession
Search our full record of US law — 2.1 million sections, every state + federal →
Sources and References
- Ala. Code 6-10-7, Wages, salaries, or other compensation exempt from garnishment (75% exemption)(alison.legislature.state.al.us).gov
- Ala. Code 5-19-15, Garnishment limits for consumer credit transactions(alison.legislature.state.al.us).gov
- Ala. Code 6-2-34, Six-year statute of limitations (written contracts, loans, stated accounts)(alison.legislature.state.al.us).gov
- Ala. Code 6-2-37, Three-year statute of limitations (open or unliquidated accounts)(alison.legislature.state.al.us).gov
- Ala. Code 6-2-16, Partial payment or written promise removing the bar of the statute of limitations(alison.legislature.state.al.us).gov
- Ala. Code 6-10-6, Personal property exemption ($7,500)(alison.legislature.state.al.us).gov
- Ala. Code 7-9A-609, Secured party's right to take possession after default(alison.legislature.state.al.us).gov
- 15 U.S.C. 1673, Federal restriction on garnishment (25%/30-times test)(govinfo.gov).gov
- 12 CFR 1006.26, Regulation F prohibition on suits and threats of suit on time-barred debt(ecfr.gov).gov
- Alabama Department of Revenue, Garnishments (25% gross-wage state tax garnishment; full-balance bank garnishment)(revenue.alabama.gov).gov