(a) The CFO may compromise a claim pursuant to this section if USAID cannot collect the full amount because:

(1) The debtor is unable to pay the full amount of the debt within reasonable time, as verified through credit reports or other financial information;

(2) The Federal Government is unable to collect the debt in full within a reasonable time by enforced collection proceedings;

(3) The cost of collecting the debt does not justify the enforced collection of the full amount; or

(4) There is significant doubt concerning the Government's ability to prove its case in court;

(b) In evaluating the debtor's inability to pay, the CFO may consider, among other factors, the following:

(1) Age and health of the debtor;

(2) Present and potential income;

(3) Inheritance prospects;

(4) The possibility that assets have been concealed or improperly transferred by the debtor;

(5) The availability of assets or income which may be realized by enforced collection proceedings; or

(6) The applicable exemptions available to the debtor under State and Federal law in determining the Federal Government's ability to enforce collection;

(c) The CFO may compromise a claim, or recommend acceptance of a compromise to DOJ, where there is significant doubt concerning the Federal Government's ability to prove its case in court for the full amount of the claim, either because of the legal issues involved or because of a bona fide dispute as to the facts. The amount accepted in compromise in such cases will fairly reflect the probability of prevailing on the legal issues involved, considering fully the availability of witnesses and other evidentiary data required to support the Government's claim. In determining the litigative risks involved, USAID will give proportionate weight to the likely amount of court costs and attorney fees the Government could incur if it is unsuccessful in litigation;

(d) The CFO may compromise a claim, or recommend acceptance of a compromise to DOJ, if the cost of collection does not justify the enforced collection of the full amount of the debt. The amount accepted in compromise in such cases may reflect an appropriate discount for the administrative and litigative costs of collection, taking into consideration the time it will take to effect collection. Costs of collection might be a substantial factor in the settlement of small claims, but normally will not carry great weight in the settlement of large claims. In determining whether the cost of collection justifies enforced collection of the full amount, USAID may consider the positive effect that enforced collection of the claim could have on the collection of other similar claims;

(e) To assess the merits of a compromise offer, the CFO should obtain a current financial statement from the debtor, executed under penalty of perjury, that shows the debtor's assets, liabilities, income and expense; and

(f) The CFO may compromise statutory penalties, forfeitures, or debts established as an aid to enforcement, and to compel compliance, when he or she determines that accepting the offer will serve the Agency's enforcement policy adequately, in terms of deterrence and securing compliance (both present and future).

[86 FR 31145, June 11, 2021]