Executive Order 9397: Numbering System for Federal Accounts Relating to Individual Persons
Summary
Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9397 on November 22, 1943 to reduce duplication in federal systems identifying individuals by number. It directed agencies toward Social Security account numbers rather than separate numerical account systems. A crucial 2008 amendment made that choice permissive instead of mandatory. The continuing order must therefore be read in its amended form, together with the Privacy Act and program-specific law, rather than quoted as an unchanged wartime command to use a Social Security number everywhere.
Status: In effect. Yes. As amended. EO 13478 changed EO 9397 in 2008 so that agencies may use Social Security account numbers when establishing new numerical account systems, replacing the original mandatory language. Current OPM privacy statements expressly cite the amended authority. The order does not override statutory privacy limits or authorize every possible collection and disclosure.
Key facts at a glance
| Signed | November 22, 1943 |
|---|---|
| President | Franklin D. Roosevelt |
| Federal Register | 8 FR 16095; published November 30, 1943 |
| Current label | In effect |
| Amended by | EO 13478 |
| Related orders | EO 13478 |
| Checked | October 25, 2026 |
What it requires today
The original preamble described the administrative problem: many people already had Social Security account numbers, including a large share of federal employees, while agencies needed numerical systems for their accounts. A shared identifier could avoid unnecessary duplication. The order addressed federal administrative systems; it did not transform a Social Security number into a universal authorization to demand personal information for any purpose.
As amended by EO 13478, the central direction permits agencies to use the Social Security account number when establishing a new system of permanent account numbers for individual persons. The distinction between may and shall is the major status qualification. An agency needs to assess its actual legal authority and operational purpose, not assume the 1943 order still commands mandatory exclusive use of an SSN in every new database.
The text also assigns administrative cooperation concerning the number system. References to the original Social Security Board were modernized to the Social Security Commissioner. Those terminology changes help connect the historical text to present institutions, but they do not provide an independent answer to every data-protection issue. The authority to collect a number, the purpose for using it, retention and later disclosure can involve different statutory requirements and agency notices.
Who it affects
The direct subjects are federal agencies maintaining numerical accounts for individuals and the Social Security administration supporting the identifier system. Federal employees, annuitants, benefit participants and other people can encounter the amended order in an agency's privacy statement. Its appearance there should be read with the other listed authorities and the stated purpose. A private business's request for an SSN is not governed simply by treating that business as an executive agency under this order.
How it came about
The 1943 instrument reflects an era in which millions of existing Social Security accounts appeared to offer an economical common identifier for federal administration. Subsequent privacy legislation and information-system practices changed the legal setting. President George W. Bush signed EO 13478 on November 18, 2008 to revise the older instruction. Some disposition indexes associate that amendment with November 20, its publication date; this guide distinguishes the signed amendment date from publication instead of substituting one for the other.
What agencies did under it
OPM's current Postal Service Health Benefits enrollment privacy statement cites EO 9397 as amended by EO 13478, together with title 5 health-benefit authorities and specific reporting laws. The statement identifies purposes such as recording enrollment, verifying benefit eligibility and coordinating benefits. That is contemporary positive evidence of agency use of the amended order, rather than a conclusion based only on an old historical compilation.
The current Employee Express privacy notice likewise identifies the amended order among its authorities for personnel and payroll information. Different systems have different purposes and supporting statutes. The presence of EO 9397 in both does not mean the systems may freely exchange all their information or that every field has the same disclosure rules. The actual system-of-records notices, Privacy Act provisions and agency practices remain necessary to evaluate those questions.
A Privacy Act statement is therefore useful because it puts the executive order alongside the particular collection's purpose and other legal authorities. The order's continuing status should not be shortened to an unconditional statement that the government can always require an SSN. Conversely, its change to permissive language does not itself repeal a separate statute that requires a number for a particular tax, benefits or reporting function. These are different legal propositions.
Implementation records: U.S. Code notes: amended EO 9397 text; OPM: current PSHB privacy statement and amendment date; OPM: Employee Express privacy notice.
Amendments and family tree
EO 13478 is the direct 2008 amendment. It did not abolish EO 9397; it changed the account-number direction and updated references to the responsible Social Security official. The Federal Register disposition records that amendment, and present OPM notices cite the combined authority. This is an amendment relationship, not a revocation-and-revival chain. The Privacy Act is legislation rather than a successor executive order, and its restrictions should be analyzed on their own terms.
Related guides: EO 13478.
Court cases
No court ruling specifically on EO 9397 was identified in the official order, disposition and agency sources reviewed as of October 25, 2026. A challenge to collection or disclosure of a Social Security number requires the applicable privacy and program law and the facts of the specific system. The amended order permits certain agency use; that status is not a judicial determination that every demand for a number or later disclosure is lawful.
Common questions
Does EO 9397 still require an SSN in every new federal account system?
No. EO 13478 replaced the original mandatory approach with permissive language. Separate statutes may require a number for particular programs, but that is not the same as saying the amended executive order commands universal use.
Did the 2008 amendment revoke the whole order?
It amended the earlier order rather than revoking it in full. Current OPM privacy statements explicitly identify EO 9397 as amended by EO 13478, which is why the present status is continuing with an amendment qualification.
Does citing the order authorize public release of my number?
Authority for collecting or using an identifier is not a blanket disclosure authorization. The Privacy Act, applicable statutes, the relevant system notice and other protections govern disclosure. The order's status alone does not resolve a particular release.
Why do some sources give different 2008 dates?
The signed amendment is dated November 18, 2008, while publication followed on November 20. OPM's current enrollment statement gives the signed date. Distinguishing those events avoids turning a publication date into a different presidential action.
Legal basis
EO 9397 rests on presidential authority over executive administration and operates within the Social Security and privacy-law framework. Its permissive wording does not remove limitations imposed by Congress. A legal assessment of a particular collection should identify the specific program authority, relevant Privacy Act requirements and the agency's published purpose rather than rely on a broad claim about a single wartime order.
Further reading
Sources
Cite this page
EO Explained, “Executive Order 9397: Numbering System for Federal Accounts Relating to Individual Persons”, checked October 25, 2026. https://eoexplained.com/historic-orders/historic-9397-numbering-system-for-federal-accounts-relating-to-individual-persons. Include an access date when citing this dated account. For the presidential instrument itself, cite 8 FR 16095 and the official text.
Last checked
. EO 9397 was checked against its signed record, current disposition and cited implementation sources for the status and scope described above. Report an error or a later official source.