End Predatory Court Fees Now

New Yorkers deserve to live without fear of lifelong debt and poverty, and they deserve a fair, transparent government.

The problem

For every traffic ticket or criminal conviction that gets handed down in New York, no matter how minor, courts attach mandatory fees (or surcharges) on top of any fine or sentence imposed. These fees alone can total hundreds of dollars, and the law offers no way for those who cannot afford to pay their fees to have them waived. The amount of the fees has only increased over the past several decades, outpacing the rate of inflation. New Yorkers who can’t afford to pay fines and fees live in fear of being arrested and jailed.

Court fees in New York were created for the sole purpose of raising revenue. They function as a form of regressive taxation, placing the burden of funding government services on the backs of New Yorkers who can least afford to do so. This system of taxation-by-citation encourages policing for profit, extracts wealth from people living in poverty, and disproportionately exposes Black and brown New Yorkers to more encounters with police. When this happens, even routine traffic stops can become deadly— as in the cases of  Philando Castile and Samuel DuBose , who were both killed by police during traffic stops.

In 2021, the No Price on Justice Campaign released  New York’s Ferguson Problem  which sounded the alarm on the state's reliance on fines and fees revenue. Despite the warnings from Ferguson, the report found that many localities’ reliance on fines and fees is just as bad — and in some cases worse — than when the Ferguson report was released in 2015.

The solution

Placing the burden of paying for government services on the backs of people with the fewest means to pay is indefensible. New York must get rid of its predatory system of court fees and surcharges, while also making sure that fines are not imposed in unduly harsh and inequitable ways.

Sponsored by Senator Julia Salazar and Assembly Member Kenny Burgos, the  End Predatory Court Fees Act (S.313/A.4183)  would eliminate court fees, mandatory minimum fines, incarceration on the basis of unpaid fines and fees, and garnishment of commissary accounts.

Learn everything you need to know about the End Predatory Court Fees Act  in our latest fact sheet. 

 Download our advocacy booklet  to get an in-depth look at the problem of predatory court fees and the solution to ending these cruel, counterproductive practices.

Watch our latest video to see how predatory court fees are impacting New Yorkers across the state.

What is the difference between fines and fees?

Fines are monetary punishments for doing something that’s against the law. They’re often intended to be a less severe punishment than going to jail. One of the most common types of fines — that almost every driver has received — are tickets for traffic violations.

Fees (or surcharges) are extra costs that the government attaches to every conviction — even traffic tickets and minor infractions. Fees exist only to raise money for state and local governments. They can total hundreds of dollars. Individuals are often required to pay fees on top of a fine, or in many cases, even when the judge decides not to impose a fine at all.

The fiscal impact of court fees

In the current economic environment, roughly 60% of New Yorkers are unable to afford their basic needs. For New Yorkers living paycheck-to-paycheck, paying just one traffic ticket and its mandatory surcharge could mean missing rent, going without health care, or living without basic necessities. Additionally, 63% of court debt is paid by family members, harming whole families and forcing children to go without when their caregivers have to pay court fines and fees.

 A recent analysis by the Fines and Fees Justice Center  revealed eliminating court fees would have very little impact on the state’s budget, despite having life-changing implications for the tens of thousands of New Yorkers who face giving up food and rent just to pay them off. The cost of eliminating these court fees would likely be between $28 million and $33 million, or approximately .01% of the state’s proposed $233 billion budget proposed for FY25. 

If New York lawmakers continue to rely on this volatile revenue source, they are putting both the State budget and working class families at even greater risk of financial destabilization.

New York is out of compliance with key constitutional principles

New York’s fines and fees practices are also out of compliance with key constitutional principles including the excessive fines clause, due process and equal protection principles. What’s worse: the state has continued these policies even after The United States Department of Justice  issued a revised and updated ‘Dear Colleague’ letter,  advising state and local courts that their fines and fees practices may violate the United States Constitution and federal law. Failure to comply with the constitutional and legal requirements described in this letter could expose jurisdictions to civil enforcement actions by DOJ. For more information on how New York's fines and fees practices fail to comply with these key clauses, go to page 9 of  our advocacy booklet.  

Who is impacted by predatory fines and fees policies?

If you are one of millions of New Yorkers living paycheck-to-paycheck, paying just one traffic ticket and its mandatory surcharge could mean missing rent, going without healthcare, or living without basic necessities. 3 out of 5 New Yorkers do not earn a living wage.

"Roughly 60% of New Yorkers are unable to afford their basic needs."

New York's top predatory fee: the mandatory surcharge

The mandatory surcharge is a fee attached to every conviction in New York — from minor violations to felonies. Courts do not waive or reduce these fees or surcharges — or even consider your ability to pay them. Depending on the type of conviction, a single mandatory surcharge can amount to hundreds of dollars. 

Lawmakers repeatedly increase mandatory surcharges — often during times of financial strain or recession.

Mandatory surcharges and fees were first introduced in the 1980s with the explicit purpose of raising state revenue. Since then, lawmakers have repeatedly increased the amounts over the years — often at times of financial strain or recession. They even removed the ability of judges to waive the surcharge for people who could not afford to pay in 1995.

The surcharge for violations increased 178% more than the inflation rate. For misdemeanors and felonies, the surcharge increased by 92% and 75%, respectively, relative to inflation.

Missing data lets governments avoid accountability.  

New York fails to keep records on how the government assesses, collects, and distributes the money it receives from fines and fees, in violation of a law requiring them to do so. Since January 2020, legislators and advocates have repeatedly requested this reporting without success. No data means no accountability. Ignoring legal mandates to track the assessment, collection, and distribution of fines and fees revenue is not only bad fiscal policy — it is bad government.

It’s time to end predatory court fees.

New Yorkers deserve to feel safe in their communities. They deserve to live without fear of lifelong debt and poverty. They deserve a fair, transparent government. Read our policy recommendations to see what steps New York state needs to take now to end our dangerous reliance on fines and fees revenue.

Join the coalition.  

No Price on Justice is a coalition of economic and racial justice advocates, grassroots organizations, and impacted people working to end New York’s predatory fines and fees. Our mission is to eliminate legal system fees and find equitable ways to fund our government. Want to be part of our growing movement?

Stay informed.

Read the latest updates on fines and fees reform from across New York state. Find out when the next No Price on Justice event is happening near you.

The surcharge for violations increased 178% more than the inflation rate. For misdemeanors and felonies, the surcharge increased by 92% and 75%, respectively, relative to inflation.