Wash. Rev. Code » Title 3 · Chapter 3.50
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 3.50.100 (2025)

Revenue—Disposition—Interest

✓ laws through the 2025 session: 2026 session laws are not yet included
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) Costs in civil and criminal actions may be imposed as provided in district court. All fees, costs, fines, forfeitures and other money imposed by any municipal court for the violation of any municipal or town ordinances shall be collected by the court clerk and, together with any other noninterest revenues received by the clerk, shall be deposited with the city or town treasurer as a part of the general fund of the city or town, or deposited in such other fund of the city or town, or deposited in such other funds as may be designated by the laws of the state of Washington.
(2) Except as provided in RCW 9A.88.120 and 10.99.080, the city treasurer shall remit monthly thirty-two percent of the noninterest money received under this section, other than for parking infractions, and certain costs to the state treasurer. "Certain costs" as used in this subsection, means those costs awarded to prevailing parties in civil actions under RCW 4.84.010 or 36.18.040, or those costs awarded against convicted defendants in criminal actions under RCW 10.01.160, 10.46.190, or 36.18.040, or other similar statutes if such costs are specifically designated as costs by the court and are awarded for the specific reimbursement of costs incurred by the state, county, city, or town in the prosecution of the case, including the fees of defense counsel. Money remitted under this subsection to the state treasurer shall be deposited in the state general fund.
(3) The balance of the noninterest money received under this section shall be retained by the city and deposited as provided by law.
(4)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, penalties, fines, fees, and costs may accrue interest at the rate of twelve percent per annum, upon assignment to a collection agency. Interest may accrue only while the case is in collection status.
(b) As of June 7, 2018, penalties, fines, bail forfeitures, fees, and costs imposed against a defendant in a criminal proceeding shall not accrue interest.
(5) Interest retained by the court on penalties, fines, bail forfeitures, fees, and costs shall be split twenty-five percent to the state treasurer for deposit in the state general fund, twenty-five percent to the state treasurer for deposit in the judicial information system account as provided in RCW 2.68.020, twenty-five percent to the city general fund, and twenty-five percent to the city general fund to fund local courts.
[ 2018 c 269 s 2; 2012 c 136 s 3; 2012 c 134 s 5; 2009 c 479 s 3; 2004 c 15 s 3; 1995 c 291 s 3; 1988 c 169 s 2; 1985 c 389 s 4; 1984 c 258 s 304; 1975 1st ex.s. c 241 s 3; 1961 c 299 s 59.]

Notes:

Construction—2018 c 269: See note following RCW 10.82.090.
Effective date—2009 c 479: See note following RCW 2.56.030.
Intent—2004 c 15: See note following RCW 10.99.080.
Effective date—1985 c 389: See note following RCW 27.24.070.
Court Improvement Act of 1984—Effective dates—Severability—Short title—1984 c 258: See notes following RCW 3.30.010.
Intent—1984 c 258: See note following RCW 3.34.130.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2020–2021 · leading case: State Of Washington v. George Abraham Dillon, 456 P.3d 1199 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State Of Washington v. George Abraham Dillon, 456 P.3d 1199 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “Second, Dillon contends that remand is necessary to strike the interest accrual provision. The State concedes that the interest accrual in the judgment and sentence should be struck.”
State Of Washington, V Mark Michael Stredicke, No. 52789-8 (Wash. Ct. App. Aug. 11, 2020). · cites it 4× “52789-8-II “As of June 7, 2018, no interest shall accrue on nonrestitution [LFOs].”
State Of Washington v. Darius M. Burgens, No. 81374-9 (Wash. Ct. App. June 29, 2020). “The State concedes the error. Legislative action has eliminated the trial court’s authority to impose interest on legal financial obligations other than restitution.”
State Of Washington v. Michael Craig Okler, No. 79358-6 (Wash. Ct. App. Oct. 19, 2020). “This concession is proper under RCW 3.50.100(4)(b), which prohibits interest accrual on financial obligations other than restitution.”
State of Washington v. Stephen Benton Harris, Jr., No. 36951-0 (Wash. Ct. App. Dec. 3, 2020). “RCW 3.50.100(4)(b). Therefore, we agree that the court erred by imposing interest on the LFOs.”
State Of Washington v. Cyrus N. Plush, Ii, No. 53013-9 (Wash. Ct. App. Feb. 2, 2021). “Interest Accrual Provision Plush argues that the interest accrual provision for nonrestitution LFOs must be stricken under RCW 3.50.100(4)(b). RCW 10.82.090(1) states, “As of June 7, 2018, no interest shall accrue on nonrestitution legal financial obligations.”
State Of Washington, V. Jamal S. Baker, No. 80227-5 (Wash. Ct. App. Aug. 2, 2021). “At sentencing, the trial court indicated that it did not wish to impose any additional financial obligations beyond the victim penalty assessment, restitution, DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) fee, and crime lab fee.”
State v. Bowman, 498 P.3d 478 (Wash. 2021). “See RCW 3.50.100(4)(b) 23 State v. Bowman, No.”
Wash. Rev. Code § 3.50.100(1): 1 case
State Of Washington, V Mark Michael Stredicke, No. 52789-8 (Wash. Ct. App. Aug. 11, 2020). “52789-8-II “As of June 7, 2018, no interest shall accrue on nonrestitution [LFOs].”
Wash. Rev. Code § 3.50.100(4)(b): 8 cases
State Of Washington v. George Abraham Dillon, 456 P.3d 1199 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “Second, Dillon contends that remand is necessary to strike the interest accrual provision. The State concedes that the interest accrual in the judgment and sentence should be struck.”
State Of Washington v. Darius M. Burgens, No. 81374-9 (Wash. Ct. App. June 29, 2020). “The State concedes the error. Legislative action has eliminated the trial court’s authority to impose interest on legal financial obligations other than restitution.”
State Of Washington, V Mark Michael Stredicke, No. 52789-8 (Wash. Ct. App. Aug. 11, 2020). “52789-8-II “As of June 7, 2018, no interest shall accrue on nonrestitution [LFOs].”
State Of Washington v. Michael Craig Okler, No. 79358-6 (Wash. Ct. App. Oct. 19, 2020). “This concession is proper under RCW 3.50.100(4)(b), which prohibits interest accrual on financial obligations other than restitution.”
State of Washington v. Stephen Benton Harris, Jr., No. 36951-0 (Wash. Ct. App. Dec. 3, 2020). “RCW 3.50.100(4)(b). Therefore, we agree that the court erred by imposing interest on the LFOs.”
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.