Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.811 (2026)

Fees for operator's license, chauffeur's license, or minor's restricted license; renewal; refund to county or municipality; traffic law enforcement and safety fund; operator's license issued to persons under 18 years of age or licensed in another state; person on active military service at time of expiration; renewal rate; exception for late fees during 2021.

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

MICHIGAN VEHICLE CODE


Act 300 of 1949


257.811 Fees for operator's license, chauffeur's license, or minor's restricted license; renewal; refund to county or municipality; traffic law enforcement and safety fund; operator's license issued to persons under 18 years of age or licensed in another state; person on active military service at time of expiration; renewal rate; exception for late fees during 2021.

Sec. 811.

    (1) An application for an original operator's or an original or renewal chauffeur's license as provided in sections 307 and 312 and an application for an original minor's restricted license as provided in section 312 must be accompanied by the following fees:

    

    Operator's license

    $

    25.00

    Chauffeur's license

    35.00

    Minor's restricted license

    25.00

    The renewal fee for an operator's license renewed under this section is $18.00. Except as otherwise provided in subsections (4) and (5), if an operator's license is expired at the time of the renewal, the fee is the same as the original fee. The date of an application for a renewal of an operator's license under this section that is delivered to the secretary of state by regular mail is the postmark date in determining the fee to be assessed.

    (2) The secretary of state shall deposit the money received and collected under subsection (1) in the state treasury to the credit of the general fund. The secretary of state shall refund out of the fees collected to each county or municipality acting as an examining officer or examining bureau $2.50 for each applicant examined for an original license, $1.00 for each applicant examined for an original chauffeur's license, and $1.00 for every other applicant examined, if the application is not denied and the money refunded is paid to the county or local treasurer and is appropriated to the county, municipality, or officer or bureau receiving the money for the purpose of carrying out this act. The state treasurer shall deposit the sum of $4.00 in the traffic law enforcement and safety fund created in section 819a for each person examined for an original license, a renewal operator's license, an original chauffeur's license, or a renewal chauffeur's license, except that the sum deposited for each 2-year operator's or 2-year chauffeur's license is $2.00.

    (3) Notwithstanding sections 306 and 308, an operator's license must not be issued to an individual under 18 years of age unless that person successfully passes a driver education course and examination given by a driver education provider that has been certified to provide teen driver training under the driver education provider and instructor act, 2006 PA 384, MCL 256.621 to 256.705. An individual who has been a holder of a motor vehicle operator's license issued by any other state, territory, or possession of the United States, or any other sovereignty for 1 year immediately before application for an operator's license under this act is not required to comply with this subsection. Restricted licenses may be issued under section 312 without compliance with this subsection.

    (4) A person who is on active military service at the time his or her operator's license expires shall be charged the renewal rate for renewing his or her operator's license under this section if all of the following apply:

    (a) He or she applies for renewal within 30 days of returning to this state from active duty.

    (b) He or she held a valid, unexpired operator's license from this state immediately prior to leaving this state for active military service.

    (c) He or she presents such documentation as the secretary of state requires to establish eligibility under this subsection.

    (5) Notwithstanding any other provision of this act, both of the following apply:

    (a) The secretary of state shall not assess a late renewal fee for a document described under section 301(6), 306(1), (2), (4), or (6), 306a(4), 309(11), 312k(1), or 314(7) that expires after March 31, 2021 but before August 1, 2021 and is renewed within 120 days of the date of the expiration.

    (b) The secretary of state shall, upon an applicant's request, reimburse a late renewal fee assessed and collected for a document described under section 301(6), 306(1), (2), (4), or (6), 306a(4), 309(11), 312k(1), or 314(7) that expires after March 31, 2021 but before August 1, 2021 and is renewed within 120 days of the date of the expiration.

    

History: 1949, Act 300, Eff. Sept. 23, 1949 ;-- Am. 1953, Act 215, Eff. Oct. 2, 1953 ;-- Am. 1955, 1st Ex. Sess., Act 1, Imd. Eff. Nov. 10, 1955 ;-- Am. 1957, Act 235, Imd. Eff. June 6, 1957 ;-- Am. 1958, Act 217, Eff. Sept. 13, 1958 ;-- Am. 1959, Act 260, Eff. Mar. 19, 1960 ;-- Am. 1966, Act 327, Eff. Jan. 1, 1967 ;-- Am. 1967, Act 302, Eff. Sept. 1, 1967 ;-- Am. 1970, Act 124, Imd. Eff. July 23, 1970 ;-- Am. 1972, Act 244, Imd. Eff. Aug. 3, 1972 ;-- Am. 1975, Act 122, Imd. Eff. July 1, 1975 ;-- Am. 1980, Act 174, Imd. Eff. June 23, 1980 ;-- Am. 1980, Act 308, Imd. Eff. Dec. 4, 1980 ;-- Am. 1987, Act 232, Imd. Eff. Dec. 28, 1987 ;-- Am. 1989, Act 299, Imd. Eff. Jan. 3, 1990 ;-- Am. 1991, Act 193, Imd. Eff. Dec. 30, 1991 ;-- Am. 1992, Act 235, Imd. Eff. Oct. 22, 1992 ;-- Am. 1996, Act 387, Eff. Apr. 1, 1997 ;-- Am. 2000, Act 456, Imd. Eff. Jan. 10, 2001 ;-- Am. 2003, Act 152, Eff. Oct. 1, 2003 ;-- Am. 2004, Act 71, Imd. Eff. Apr. 20, 2004 ;-- Am. 2006, Act 589, Imd. Eff. Jan. 3, 2007 ;-- Am. 2021, Act 71, Imd. Eff. July 29, 2021

Compiler's Notes:

    Enacting section 1 of Act 71 of 2021 provides:

    "Enacting section 1. Sections 216(2), 217(11) and (12), 226(11) and (13), 255(4), 301(6), 306(1), (2), (4), and (6), 306a(4), 309(11), 312k(1), 314(7), 801k(1) and (2), and 811(5) of the Michigan vehicle code, 1949 PA 300, MCL 257.216, 257.217, 257.226, 257.255, 257.301, 257.306, 257.306a, 257.309, 257.312k, 257.314, 257.801k, and 257.811, as amended by this amendatory act, are intended to be retroactive and apply retroactively."

AdminRule Notes:

    R 388.301 et seq. of the Michigan Administrative Code.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1971–1998 · leading case: Traverse City Sch. Dist. v. Atty. Gen., 185 N.W.2d 9 (Mich. 1971).
Traverse City Sch. Dist. v. Atty. Gen., 185 N.W.2d 9 (Mich. 1971). · cites it 7× “(1955 Extra Legislative Session PA 1; for the present state of the law, see MCLA § 257.811 [Stat Ann 1968 Rev § 9.2511].”
Durant v. Dep't of Educ., 463 N.W.2d 461 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 4× “1919(956), and driver’s education, MCL 257.811; MSA 9.2511. [Durant, 129 Mich App 531 -532.”
Durant v. State Bd. of Educ., 381 N.W.2d 662 (Mich. 1986). · cites it 2× “We address the issues raised by plaintiffs in that case only in illustration of impermissible reductions under the Headlee Amendment. This issue must be dealt with here because of inconsistencies in the holding of the Court of Appeals which leave the proper interpretation of §…”
Snyder v. Charlotte Pub. Sch. Dist., 365 N.W.2d 151 (Mich. 1985). · cites it 2× “[4] School districts are required to offer to nonpublic school students driver education, MCL 257.811; MSA 9.2511; special education programs for handicapped persons residing in the school district, MCL 380.”
Durant v. Dep't of Educ., 342 N.W.2d 591 (Mich. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “MCL 257.811; MSA 9.2511. The parties do not appear to dispute the fact that these specific, identifiable programs which are mandated by the state Legislature fall within the purview of § 29 of the Head-lee Amendment.”
Sharp v. Huron Valley Bd. of Educ., 314 N.W.2d 785 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 5× “One provision of the statute *21 states, " 'shall’ and 'may’ means shall is mandatory and may is permissive”. MCL 257.82; MSA 9.”
Stevens v. Veenstra, 573 N.W.2d 341 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998). “Veenstra argues that, because he was participating in a minor-oriented driver training program, he was not engaged in an adult activity and attempts to bolster this argument by referring to MCL 257.811(6); MSA 9.2511(6), which states that an operator’s license shall not be…”
Nat'l Ass'n for Advancement of Colored People v. Lansing Bd. of Educ., 429 F. Supp. 583 (W.D. Mich. 1976). “§ 257.811(c). 5 M.S.A. § 15.3732(g), M.C.”
Vitale v. Lentine, 358 N.W.2d 2 (Mich. Ct. App. 1984). “While generally amendment is liberally allowed, we find that the trial court properly exercised its discretion to deny amendment in this case.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.811(3) — 2 cases
Durant v. Dep't of Educ., 463 N.W.2d 461 (Mich. Ct. App. 1990). “1919(956), and driver’s education, MCL 257.811; MSA 9.2511. [Durant, 129 Mich App 531 -532.”
Sharp v. Huron Valley Bd. of Educ., 314 N.W.2d 785 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). “One provision of the statute *21 states, " 'shall’ and 'may’ means shall is mandatory and may is permissive”. MCL 257.82; MSA 9.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.811(6) — 2 cases
Stevens v. Veenstra, 573 N.W.2d 341 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998). “Veenstra argues that, because he was participating in a minor-oriented driver training program, he was not engaged in an adult activity and attempts to bolster this argument by referring to MCL 257.811(6); MSA 9.2511(6), which states that an operator’s license shall not be…”
Sharp v. Huron Valley Bd. of Educ., 314 N.W.2d 785 (Mich. Ct. App. 1981). “One provision of the statute *21 states, " 'shall’ and 'may’ means shall is mandatory and may is permissive”. MCL 257.82; MSA 9.”
— Mich. Comp. Laws § 257.811(c) — 1 case
Nat'l Ass'n for Advancement of Colored People v. Lansing Bd. of Educ., 429 F. Supp. 583 (W.D. Mich. 1976). “§ 257.811(c). 5 M.S.A. § 15.3732(g), M.C.”
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.