Florida Statutes

Fla. Stat. § 501.0117 (2025)

Credit cards; transactions in which seller or lessor prohibited from imposing surcharge; penalty.

✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us JustiaFla. Statutes CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

501.0117 Credit cards; transactions in which seller or lessor prohibited from imposing surcharge; penalty.—

(1) A seller or lessor in a sales or lease transaction may not impose a surcharge on the buyer or lessee for electing to use a credit card in lieu of payment by cash, check, or similar means, if the seller or lessor accepts payment by credit card. A surcharge is any additional amount imposed at the time of a sale or lease transaction by the seller or lessor that increases the charge to the buyer or lessee for the privilege of using a credit card to make payment. Charges imposed pursuant to approved state or federal tariffs are not considered to be a surcharge, and charges made under such tariffs are exempt from this section. A convenience fee imposed upon a student or family paying tuition, fees, or other student account charges by credit card to a William L. Boyd, IV, ¹Effective Access to Student Education grant eligible institution, as defined in s. 1009.89, or to a private school, as defined in s. 1002.01, is not considered to be a surcharge and is exempt from this section if the amount of the convenience fee does not exceed the total cost charged by the credit card company to the institution. The term “credit card” includes those cards for which unpaid balances are payable on demand. This section does not apply to the offering of a discount for the purpose of inducing payment by cash, check, or other means not involving the use of a credit card, if the discount is offered to all prospective customers.

(2) A person who violates the provisions of subsection (1) is guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.

History.—ss. 1, 2, ch. 87-43; s. 3, ch. 2010-219; s. 1, ch. 2016-53; s. 25, ch. 2018-4.

¹Note.—Section 25, ch. 2018-4, directs the Division of Law Revision and Information “to substitute the term ‘Effective Access to Student Education Grant Program’ for ‘Florida Resident Access Grant Program’ and the term ‘Effective Access to Student Education grant’ for ‘Florida resident access grant’ wherever those terms appear in the Florida Statutes.” The division included s. 501.0117(1) in ch. 2019-3, the reviser’s bill including material prepared in accordance with the directive; the bill section amending s. 501.0117(1) to revise the reference to “Florida resident access grant” was omitted from the bill in committee.

Arrestable Offenses under F.S. 501.0117

M = misdemeanor · F = felony · degree: F=1st S=2nd T=3rd

§501.0117PUBLIC ORDER CRIMESIMPOSE CREDIT CARD SURCHARGEM · 2nd

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 7 cases, 2013–2018 · leading case: Dana's R.R. Supply v. Attorney Gen., State of Florida, 807 F.3d 1235 (11th Cir. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Dana's R.R. Supply v. Attorney Gen., State of Florida, 807 F.3d 1235 (11th Cir. 2015). · cites it 28× “What may be shocking to learn is that Florida makes it a second-degree misdemeanor for “[a] sellor or lessor in a sales or lease transaction” to “impose a surcharge on the buyer or lessee for electing to use a credit card,” Fla. Stat. § 501.0117 (1)–(2), while the State…”

Lynn Rowell v. Leslie Pettijohn, 816 F.3d 73 (5th Cir. 2016). · cites it 6× “§ 42 -133ff; Fla. Stat. § 501.0117 , held unconstitutional by Dana’s R.”

Pincus v. Speedpay, Inc., 161 F. Supp. 3d 1150 (S.D. Fla. 2015). · cites it 15× “Plaintiff brings the following claims against Defendant: unjust enrichment for a violation of Florida Statute § 501.0117 (count one); money had and received for a violation of Florida Statute § 501.”

Italian Colors Restaurant v. Xavier Becerra, 878 F.3d 1165 (9th Cir. 2018). “Bus. & Com. Code § 604A.0021. California enacted its surcharge ban, codified at Civil Code Section 1748.”

Hucke v. Kubra Data Transfer Ltd., 160 F. Supp. 3d 1320 (S.D. Fla. 2015). · cites it 2× “Plaintiff alleges that he paid his residential electricity bill to Duke Energy Florida by using Defendant’s “EZ-Pay” service, and that Defendant imposed a .”

Expressions Hair Design v. Schneiderman, 975 F. Supp. 2d 430 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). “§ 42-133ff(a); Fla. Stat. § 501.0117 ; Kan Stat. Ann. § 16a-2-403; Me.”

Italian Colors Restaurant v. Harris, 99 F. Supp. 3d 1199 (E.D. Cal. 2015). “§ 42-133ff(a); *1204 Fla. Stat § 501.0117; Kan. Stat. Ann. § 16a-2-403; Me.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.