Montana
Montana Debt Collection Laws: Garnishment Limits, the New 6-Year Rule, and Repossession
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 12, 2026). · 5 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

No debt collector in Montana can take money out of your paycheck just by threatening to. Before any wage garnishment for ordinary consumer debt, a creditor must sue you, win a judgment, and get a writ of execution from the court. Most garnishments start with a default judgment entered because the person being sued never answered the complaint, which makes answering the summons the single most valuable thing you can do if you are sued over a debt.
How Wage Garnishment Works in Montana
Montana's wage garnishment cap copies the federal Consumer Credit Protection Act formula. Plug your own pay period into our wage garnishment calculator to see that federal formula in dollars. Under MCA 25-13-614, a judgment creditor can reach the lesser of 25% 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 floor is $217.50 per week: if your weekly disposable earnings are at or below $217.50, nothing can be garnished for ordinary debt.
Disposable earnings means what is left after legally required deductions such as taxes and Social Security. Voluntary deductions like health insurance premiums or 401(k) contributions do not reduce the figure.
Support obligations run on a different track. Court-ordered child support or spousal maintenance can reach 50% of disposable earnings if you support another spouse or child, or 60% if you do not, with each figure rising 5 points (to 55% or 65%) for arrears more than 12 weeks old.
Montana's Department of Revenue collects unpaid state taxes through a levy that runs for 120 days at a time under MCA 15-1-706. The statute directs that the levy be executed in the same manner as execution on a judgment, which points back to the same 25% formula rather than a separate, higher tax percentage. That is worth knowing because some states, including Nebraska, exempt tax debt from their garnishment caps entirely.
Montana law also protects your job: MCA 39-2-302 says no employer may discharge or lay off an employee because of an attachment or garnishment served against the employee's wages. Federal law adds its own protection, though the federal rule only covers garnishment for a single debt.
Bank Accounts and Exempt Property
Montana does not give bank accounts a general dollar-amount exemption. Instead, MCA 25-13-608 exempts specific categories of funds without a dollar limit: Social Security and public assistance, veterans' benefits, disability and illness benefits, individual retirement accounts, medical and health savings accounts, child support payments received, Title 19 retirement system benefits, unmatured life insurance, and a few others. If the money in your account came from one of those sources, it keeps its protection; if it is ordinary wages already deposited, the categories do not cover it.

One important carve-out: subsection (2) of MCA 25-13-608 removes three of these exemptions when the debt being collected is child support or spousal maintenance. Veterans' and social security benefits based upon remuneration for employment, disability benefits, and the assets of individual retirement accounts all lose their protection against a support judgment. The rest of the list, including public assistance, health aids, medical and surgical benefits, child support and maintenance you have received, and medical savings accounts, stays exempt.
Federal law adds an automatic backstop for benefit recipients. When Social Security, VA, or other covered federal benefits arrive by direct deposit, the bank must protect an amount equal to the last two months of deposits from any garnishment order, without you having to claim anything. That protection applies only to direct deposits, not paper checks you deposited yourself.
How Long Can You Be Sued Over a Debt in Montana?
Montana shortened its main debt statute of limitations in 2025. Senate Bill 143 cut the period for written contracts from 8 years to 6, and the current text of MCA 27-2-202 reflects the 6-year rule. Contracts, accounts, or promises not founded on a written instrument carry 5 years. The enrolled text of SB 143 (Chapter 174, Laws of 2025) applies the 6-year period to lawsuits filed on or after October 1, 2025; lawsuits filed before that date had 8 years.
Promissory notes have their own rule. Montana recodified its version of the Uniform Commercial Code negotiable-instrument statute at MCA 30-3-122: 6 years after the due date for notes payable at a definite time, or 6 years after demand for demand notes, with an outer 10-year bar if no demand is ever made and no principal or interest is paid.
Whether a credit card account counts as a written contract (6 years) or an account (5 years) is not settled by any Montana case we could identify, so treat the longer period as the safe assumption when deciding whether a debt might still be enforceable.
A statute of limitations that has run does not erase the debt. Collectors may still contact you and ask for payment, and the debt can stay on your credit report for up to 7 years under a separate federal clock. What a collector cannot do is sue or threaten to sue on a time-barred debt; federal Regulation F flatly prohibits it.
Partial Payments Restart the Clock
Montana is a payment-revival state. Under MCA 27-2-409, an acknowledgment of a debt must be in a signed writing to restart the statute of limitations, but a part payment of principal or interest restarts it on its own, no writing required. A small good-faith payment on an old account can hand the collector a brand-new 5 or 6 year window to sue. Before paying anything on an old debt, work out when the clock started and whether it has already run.

Repossession Rules in Montana
Montana enacted the standard self-help repossession rule at MCA 30-9A-609: after default, a secured lender may take the collateral either through the courts or without judicial process, as long as it proceeds without breach of the peace. Breaking into a locked garage or pushing past you when you object crosses the line; taking a car from an open driveway generally does not.
Montana has no general statute requiring a right-to-cure notice before repossession of goods bought on credit. We reviewed the Retail Installment Sales part of the Montana code and found no default-notice or cure section. The one cure-style protection on the books is narrower, and it is a right to reinstate rather than a delay on pickup: MCA 30-19-112 lets rent-to-own (rental-purchase) customers reinstate an agreement within at least 5 days of the renewal date on a monthly payment schedule, or at least 2 days on a semimonthly schedule. If the property has already gone back to the lessor, the customer still has at least 21 days after the return to reinstate, or at least 45 days if two-thirds of the payments toward ownership have been made. Subsection (6) is the part people misread: it expressly says the section does not prevent a lessor from attempting to repossess the property during the reinstatement period, so the window protects the right to get the agreement back, not possession of the goods in the meantime.
After repossession, any sale of the collateral must be commercially reasonable in its method, manner, time, place, and terms under MCA 30-9A-610. If you are a servicemember and the loan predates your military service, federal law requires a court order before repossession.
If You Are Being Garnished or Sued in Montana
Start with the paperwork. If you were served with a summons, answer it before the deadline, even with a simple denial; a default judgment gives the creditor everything and skips any review of the debt. If a garnishment has already started, check the math against the 25% formula, and claim exempt income categories under MCA 25-13-608 with the court if protected funds are being taken. If the debt is old, do not make a payment before checking the statute of limitations, because payment restarts it. When judgments and garnishments have stacked beyond what a budget can absorb, bankruptcy's automatic stay stops garnishment while the case is pending, and a structured guide to stopping wage garnishment walks through the options in order.

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
- Statute of Limitations on Debt
- How to Stop Wage Garnishment
- Car Repossession Laws
- Montana Statute of Limitations
- Montana Bankruptcy
Last updated: 2026-08-12.
More Montana Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
How much of my paycheck can be garnished in Montana?
For ordinary consumer debt, the lesser of 25% of your disposable earnings or the amount by which weekly disposable earnings exceed 30 times the federal minimum wage ($217.50 per week). Child support and spousal maintenance can take 50% to 65% under separate federal tiers.
What is the statute of limitations on debt in Montana?
Six years for written contracts (reduced from 8 years by Senate Bill 143 in 2025) and 5 years for oral contracts and accounts not founded on a writing. Promissory notes run 6 years under MCA 30-3-122.
Does making a payment restart the clock on old debt in Montana?
Yes. Under MCA 27-2-409, a part payment of principal or interest restarts the statute of limitations by itself. A signed written acknowledgment also restarts it.
Can my employer fire me over a wage garnishment in Montana?
MCA 39-2-302 says no employer may discharge or lay off an employee because of an attachment or garnishment served against the employee's wages. Federal law separately bars firing over garnishment for any single debt.
Can a repo company take my car without warning in Montana?
Generally yes, after default. Montana has no general pre-repossession notice or right-to-cure statute, and MCA 30-9A-609 allows repossession without a court order as long as there is no breach of the peace. Rent-to-own contracts have separate reinstatement rights.
Updates
Updated the statute of limitations and debt-revival details to match a primary-source review of every state (October 2026).
Corrected the scope of Montana's support-debt exception to its exempt-property statute, clarified how the rent-to-own reinstatement windows and repossession rule actually work, and fixed a geographic description of Nebraska.
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.
Montana Code Annotated, Title 25
§ 25-13-614Earnings Of Judgment DebtorIn forcecited in 2 of our articles
25-13-614. Earnings of judgment debtor. (1) Earnings of a judgment debtor that are not subject to garnishment, as provided in this section, are exempt. (2) Except as provided in subsections (3) and (4), the maximum part of the aggregate disposable earnings of a judgment debtor for any workweek that is subjected to garnishment may not exceed the lesser of: (a) the amount by which the debtor's disposable earnings for the week exceed 30 times the federal minimum hourly wage in effect at the time the earnings are payable; or (b) 25% of the debtor's disposable earnings for that week. (3) The restrictions of subsection (2) do not apply in the case of an order or judgment for the maintenance or support of any person, issued by a court of competent jurisdiction or pursuant to an administrative procedure that is established by state law, affords substantial due process, and is subject to judicial review.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 5 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2012
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Montana courts have applied MCA 25-13-614 as a percentage limit on garnishing a debtor's disposable earnings. In Re the Marriage of Mease (2004) held it allows wage garnishment for maintenance but does not excuse first executing on a judgment or order; Marriage of Winters v. Winters (2004) placed a business bank account outside it.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Marriage of Winters v. Winters (Montana Supreme Court 2004, 320 Mont. 459)✓A district court shielded a self-employed father's business bank account from execution; the court held the account was not a percentage of disposable earnings under this section nor tools of a trade, so nothing in Title 25 exempted it, and reversed.
- In Re the Marriage of Mease (Montana Supreme Court 2004, 320 Mont. 229)✓An ex-wife argued this garnishment statute let her withhold wages immediately for past-due maintenance; the court rejected that reading, holding the statute allows garnishment for maintenance but does not excuse first executing on a judgment or order.
- White v. White (Montana Supreme Court 1981, 195 Mont. 470)✓An ex-wife sought execution on a $39,502 delinquent alimony judgment; applying the earnings exemption then in force, the court held the statute does not differentiate among types of judgments and affirmed the exemption of earnings needed to support the debtor's family.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Bankruptcy in Montana (2026): Exemptions & Means Test
§ 25-13-608Property Exempt Without Limitation -- ExceptionsIn force
25-13-608. Property exempt without limitation -- exceptions. (1) A judgment debtor is entitled to exemption from execution of the following: (a) professionally prescribed health aids for the judgment debtor or a dependent of the judgment debtor; (b) benefits the judgment debtor has received or is entitled to receive under federal social security or local public assistance legislation, except as provided in subsection (2); (c) veterans' benefits, except as provided in subsection (2); (d) disability or illness benefits, except as provided in subsection (2); (e) except as provided in subsection (2), individual retirement accounts, as defined in 26 U.S.C. 408(a), to the extent of deductible contributions made before the suit resulting in judgment was filed and the earnings on those contributions, Roth individual retirement accounts, as defined in 26 U.S.C. 408A, to the extent of qualified contributions made before the suit resulting in judgment was filed and the earnings on those contributions, and rollover contributions, as defined in 26 U.S.C.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 20 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2020
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Dean v. Fred's Towing (Montana Supreme Court 1990, 245 Mont. 366)“…t exempt from execution? The District Court, applying B 25-13-608, MCA, found that bank deposits traceable to…”
- In Re the Marriage of Castor (Montana Supreme Court 1991, 249 Mont. 495)“…bility retirement annuities? Mr. Castor claims that under § 25-13-608, MCA, his retirement benefits, as “disabilit…”
- Marriage of Strong v. Strong (Montana Supreme Court 2000, 300 Mont. 331)“…upon by creditors pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 5301 and § 25-13-608, MCA. This claim raises a question of law wh…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Montana Code Annotated, Title 27
§ 27-2-202Actions Based On Contract Or Other ObligationIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
27-2-202. Actions based on contract or other obligation. (1) The period prescribed for the commencement of an action on any contract, covenant, obligation, or liability founded on an instrument in writing is within 6 years. (2) The period prescribed for the commencement of an action on a contract, account, or promise not founded on an instrument in writing is within 5 years. (3) The period prescribed for the commencement of an action on an obligation or liability, other than a contract, account, or promise, not founded on an instrument in writing is within 3 years.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 48 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2025
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Christian v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (Montana Supreme Court 2015, 380 Mont. 495)“…ears, § 27-2-207, MCA; for unjust enrichment, three years, § 27-2-202, MCA; N. Cheyenne Tribe v. Roman Catholic Ch…”
- Maloney v. Heer (Montana Supreme Court 1993, 257 Mont. 500)“…der 27-2-203, MCA, applies to this action instead of 5 27-2-202, MCA, which allows an eight-year period for…”
- Demarest v. Broadhurst (Montana Supreme Court 2004, 321 Mont. 470)“…instrument in writing pursuant to Subsection (2) of Section 27-2-202, MCA. Subsequent to discovery, Craig and Pa…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Statute of Limitations by State: Filing Deadlines (2026), Montana Statute of Limitations: Filing Deadlines by Case Type
§ 27-2-409Acknowledgment Of Debt Or Part PaymentIn force
27-2-409. Acknowledgment of debt or part payment. (1) An acknowledgment or the part payment of a debt is sufficient evidence to cause the relevant statute of limitations to begin running anew. (2) An acknowledgment must be contained in some writing signed by the party to be charged thereby. (3) Part payment is any payment of principal or interest.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 7 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Hughes v. Hughes (Montana Supreme Court 2013, 370 Mont. 499)“…e partial payment of interest on the 1989 promissory note. Section 27-2-409, MCA, provides that “[a]n acknowledgment or…”
- Worden Trading Co. v. Trenka (Montana Supreme Court 1979, 184 Mont. 256)“…r 10, 1970, allegedly constituting an acknowledgement under section 27-2-409, MCA. Defendant Trenka asserted several affi…”
- In Re the Marriage of Brown (Montana Supreme Court 1994, 263 Mont. 184)“…ded down is, perhaps, best underscored by the amendment of 5 27-2-409, MCA, in 1987 to provide, in pertinent part…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Montana Code Annotated, Title 15
§ 15-1-706Execution Upon WarrantIn force
15-1-706. Execution upon warrant. (1) Upon receipt of a copy of the filed warrant and notice from the department by electronic or other means that the applicable hearing provisions have been complied with, the sheriff or agent authorized to collect the tax shall proceed to execute upon the warrant in the same manner as prescribed for execution upon a judgment. (2) A notice of levy may be made by means of a certified letter or, upon written consent of the recipient, by electronic means by an agent authorized to collect the tax. An agent is not entitled to any fee or compensation in excess of actual expenses incurred in enforcing the warrant. (3) When issued, a notice of levy has the same force and effect as a writ of execution. A levy upon earnings continues in effect for 120 days or until the judgment is satisfied, whichever occurs first. The levy applies to all pay periods beginning during the 120-day period. (4) A sheriff or agent shall return a warrant, along with any funds collected, within 90 days of the date of the warrant.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Montana Code Annotated, Title 30
§ 30-19-112Reinstatement Of Agreement -- RepossessionIn force
30-19-112. Reinstatement of agreement -- repossession. (1) A consumer who fails to make a timely rent payment may reinstate the agreement, without losing any rights or options that existed in the original agreement, by paying: (a) all past-due rent payments; (b) the next rent payment; (c) reasonable pickup and redelivery costs if the property was picked up by the lessor; and (d) any applicable late fees. (2) A consumer exercising the reinstatement option provided for in subsection (1) must provide the applicable payments to the lessor within: (a) 5 days of the renewal date if the agreement specified a monthly payment schedule; or (b) 2 days of the renewal date if the agreement specified a semimonthly payment schedule. (3) If a consumer has not made two-thirds of the total payments necessary to acquire ownership of the property and has returned or voluntarily surrendered the property during the applicable reinstatement period established in this section, the consumer may reinstate the agreement during a period of not less than 21 days after the date of the return of the property.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
§ 30-3-122Statute Of LimitationsIn force
30-3-122. Statute of limitations. (1) Except as provided in subsection (5), an action to enforce the obligation of a party to pay a note payable at a definite time must be commenced within 6 years after the payment date or dates stated in the note or, if a payment date is accelerated, within 6 years after the accelerated payment date. (2) Except as provided in subsection (4) or (5), 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 6 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. (3) Except as provided in subsection (4), an action to enforce the obligation of a party to an unaccepted draft to pay the draft must be commenced within 6 years after dishonor of the draft or 10 years after the date of the draft, whichever period expires first.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Cited in 6 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2018
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Hughes v. Hughes (Montana Supreme Court 2013, 370 Mont. 499)“…MCA. ¶24 Johnny argues that the more specific statute, § 30-3-122, MCA, directly addresses a statute of limit…”
- Fisher v. First Citizens Bank (Montana Supreme Court 2000, 302 Mont. 473)“…on appeal as follows: ¶3 1. Whether the 1991 amendment to § 30-3-122, MCA, which reduced the statute of limitatio…”
- Bottrell v. American Bank (Montana Supreme Court 1989, 237 Mont. 1)“…accrues upon its date, and no further demand is necessary. Section 30-3-122, MCA. I interpose this special concurrence…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Montana Code Annotated, Title 39
§ 39-2-302Discharge Or Layoff Of Employee Because Of Attachment Or Garnishment ProhibitedIn force
39-2-302. Discharge or layoff of employee because of attachment or garnishment prohibited. No employer shall discharge or lay off an employee because of attachment or garnishment served on the employer against the wages of the employee.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-07-29 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at mca.legmt.gov
Nebraska Revised Statutes, Chapter 25: COURTS; CIVIL PROCEDURE
§ 25-1558Wages; subject to garnishment; amount; exceptionsIn forcecited in 3 of our articles
(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, the maximum part of the aggregate disposable earnings of an individual for any workweek which is subject to garnishment shall not exceed the lesser of the following amounts: (a) Twenty-five percent of his or her disposable earnings for that week; (b) The amount by which his or her disposable earnings for that week exceed thirty times the federal minimum hourly wage prescribed by 29 U.S.C. 206(a)(1) in effect at the time earnings are payable; or (c) Fifteen percent of his or her disposable earnings for that week, if the individual is a head of a family. (2) The restrictions of subsection (1) of this section shall not apply in the case of: (a) Any order of any court for the support of any persons; (b) Any order of any court of bankruptcy under Chapter XIII of the Bankruptcy Act; or (c) Any debt due for any state or federal tax. (3) No court shall make, execute, or enforce any order or process in violation of this section. The exemptions allowed in this section shall be granted to any person so entitled without any further proceedings.
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-02 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at nebraskalegislature.gov
Cited in 12 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2022
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Spaghetti Ltd. Partnership v. Wolfe (2002) held the Neb. Rev. Stat. 25-1558 wage exemption protects the debtor, not the garnishee, so an employer that had already paid the wages could not claim it. Kropf v. Kropf (1995) held subsection (2)(a) lifts the state percentage limits for support orders, but federal caps still apply.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Spaghetti Ltd. Partnership v. Wolfe (Nebraska Supreme Court 2002, 264 Neb. 365)✓An employer served with a garnishment summons paid the debtor his wages anyway and then tendered only 25%; the court held the wage exemption in section 25-1558(1)(a) protects the judgment debtor and may not be raised by the garnishee, and remanded for the full sum owed.
- Friedman v. Friedman (Nebraska Supreme Court 2015, 290 Neb. 973)“…centage of disposable earnings subject to garnishment under Neb. Rev. Stat. § 25-1558 (Reissue 2008). Roggentine asked tha…”
- Kropf v. Kropf (Nebraska Supreme Court 1995, 248 Neb. 614)✓An ex-husband argued only 15% of his Social Security benefits could be garnished for $500 monthly spousal support; the court held the award was alimony, so section 25-1558(2)(a) lifted the 15% cap, but reversed the $500 order because federal law allowed at most 55%.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Bankruptcy in Nebraska (2026): Exemptions & Means Test, Nebraska Debt Collection Laws: The 15% Head-of-Family Cap, Debt Deadlines, and Repossession
Sources and References
- Mont. Code Ann. Section 25-13-614, Amount of Earnings Subject to Execution(mca.legmt.gov).gov
- Mont. Code Ann. Section 25-13-608, Exempt Property Without Limitation(mca.legmt.gov).gov
- Mont. Code Ann. Section 27-2-202, Actions Founded Upon Contract, Account, or Promise(mca.legmt.gov).gov
- Mont. Code Ann. Section 30-9A-609, Secured Party's Right to Take Possession After Default(mca.legmt.gov).gov
- Mont. Code Ann. Section 15-1-706, Levy Upon Wages of Delinquent Taxpayer(mca.legmt.gov).gov
- Mont. Code Ann. Section 30-19-112, Reinstatement of Rental-Purchase Agreement(mca.legmt.gov)
- Neb. Rev. Stat. Section 25-1558, Wages, Garnishment Restrictions and Exceptions(nebraskalegislature.gov)
Paid attorney referral. RecordingLaw may receive compensation when you use an attorney-help link. RecordingLaw is not a law firm. Submitting a request does not guarantee that an attorney will accept your case and does not create an attorney-client relationship.