Criminal Penalty Fees Related to Sexual Exploitation Crimes — Report to the Legislature (June 2026)
- Issuer
- Congressional materials
- Document type
- Report
Summary
A June 2026 report to the Legislature by the Washington State Department of Commerce on criminal penalty fees related to sexual exploitation crimes, submitted pursuant to Chapter 121, Laws of 2013. It is the 12th annual report and covers state fiscal year 2025 fees under RCW 9.68A.105, 9A.88.120, or 9A.88.140. The report states that courts assessed $134,883.65 out of a potential $294,800 and collected $35,292.73, and that 71 courts handed down convictions but only five assessed any fees. It lists 938 arrests and 347 convictions, sets out the fixed and conditional fee amounts, and gives a county-by-county table of arrests, convictions and fees. Appendix C describes King County's approach, with figures comparing King County arrests and convictions to the rest of the state.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“Criminal Penalty Fees Related to Sexual Exploitation Crimes — Report to the Legislature (June 2026).”
Original at app.leg.wa.gov. Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/2026-2025-criminal-penalty-fees-report-final-4547db6d-13c5-4443-8359-9d51b4/
, SHA-256 38991ec1e7e1e8e9aa84db71b7591b1a2b49e5a87f3aa399b36b7802b711567c.Full text
Criminal Penalty Fees Related to Sexual
Exploitation Crimes
Report submitted pursuant to Chapter 121, Laws of 2013
June 2026
Report to the Legislature
COMMUNITY SERVICES
DIVISION Interim Director Sarah Cliffthorne
Acknowledgments
Washington State Department of Commerce
Kate Fernald, Research Program Manager
Research Services Section
Trisha Smith, Managing Director
Office of Crime Victims Advocacy
1011 Plum St. SE
P.O. Box 42525
Olympia, WA 98504-2525
www.commerce.wa.gov
For people with disabilities, this report is available on
request in other formats. Please call 360-725-4000 with
your request.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 2
Table of contents
Executive summary .............................................................................................................................................4
Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................5
Fee assessments and crime rates........................................................................................................................7
How jurisdictions reported spending the funds .................................................................................................. 17
Appendix A: Distribution of criminal penalty fees ............................................................................................... 19
Appendix B: Courts with convictions for applicable charges ............................................................................... 21
Appendix C: King County's approach.................................................................................................................. 24
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 3
Executive summary
Overview
In 2013, the Washington State Legislature passed Chapter 121, Laws of 2013 (ESHB 1291), which assessed
additional fees on the crime of commercial sexual abuse of a minor (CSAM) and other sexual exploitation crimes.
The fees, ordered on people convicted of crimes, are in addition to other criminal penalties, including statutory
fines and jail time. Local jurisdictions retain most of the fee revenue to fund preventative efforts, services for
victims and law enforcement activities to reduce the commercial sale of sex. Judges may reduce some fees by up
to two-thirds if the judge finds, on the record, that an offender cannot pay. Courts may not entirely waive any of the
fees. Chapter 121, Laws of 2013, directs the Washington State Department of Commerce to:
"…prepare and submit an annual report to the legislature on the amount of revenue collected by local jurisdictions under
RCW 9.68A.105, 9A.88.120, or 9A.88.140 and the expenditure of that revenue [codified under RCW 43.280.100]."
The three statutes listed above assess fees on convictions related to the commercial sexual exploitation of
children, indecent exposure and prostitution. We discuss the specifics of these fees in more detail in the
Introduction.
This report, for state fiscal year 2025, is the 12th annual report prepared on the fee revenue and expenditures
related to this set of crimes. The Introduction includes the complete statutory report requirements.
Key findings
As in recent years, it does not appear that courts are ordering people convicted of crimes to pay the amounts that
statutes require for their crimes. It is beyond the scope of this report to investigate why many courts are not
imposing these fees. Further research and judicial outreach could better explain why courts do not consistently
assess the fees.
• Compared to the year prior, Washington courts assessed more than twice as much ($134,883.65 compared
to $55,381.54) but collected nearly half as much in applicable fees ($35,292.73 and $64,325.74 respectively).
• In state fiscal year 2025, there were more than eight times as many convictions for sexual exploitation
crimes (347 convictions) as in the prior year (42 convictions).
• Arrests for sexual exploitation crimes increased by more than 92% compared to state fiscal year 2024, with
938 arrests in 2025 compared to 488 in 2024 — an increase of 450 arrests.
• Convictions for sexual exploitation crimes also increased from 2024 to 2025. Specifically: indecent exposure
convictions increased by 8,667% with 260 more convictions; commercial sexual abuse of a minor convictions
increased by 55%; promoting prostitution in the second degree increased by 207%; and patronizing a
prostitute convictions increased by 50%.
• Although 71 courts handed down convictions for sexual exploitation crimes, only 7% (five courts) assessed
any fees concerning those convictions.
• Washington courts assessed 45% of the total amount of penalty fees possible for convictions of sexual
exploitation crimes.
• Excluding King County, Washington courts assessed only 10% of the total amount of penalty fees possible
for convictions of sexual exploitation crimes.
• Courts in King County assessed and collected most of the fees – 90% and 62%, respectively.
• Some individuals arrested in state fiscal year 2025 likely have not yet begun court proceedings, which may
skew the analysis.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 4
Introduction
Background
The three statutes listed under RCW 43.280.100 (RCW 9.68A.105, 9A.88.120, or 9A.88.140) assess fees on
convictions related to prostitution, indecent exposure and the commercial sexual exploitation of children. The fees
are in addition to other penalties, including statutory fines and jail time. Courts assess the fees on people convicted
of crimes who have entered into a statutory or non-statutory diversion agreement 1 because of arrests for one of
the applicable crimes. The "additional penalty fees" section below lists the statutes, the additional penalty, and the
crimes to which the penalty fee applies.
Statutes 9.68A.105, 9A.88.120, and 9A.88.140 describe how jurisdictions must use the revenue from the fees
collected:
• Cities and counties must spend at least 50%, and up to 98%, of the revenue on prevention and rehabilitation
services for victims. Prevention includes education programs for persons convicted of crimes, such as
accountability programs, 2 which provide curriculum on the sexual exploitation of people, legal ramifications,
and confronting and healing from sexual addiction. Rehabilitative services for victims include mental health
and substance abuse counseling, parenting skills, housing relief, education, vocational training, drop-in
centers and employment counseling.
• Jurisdictions may use between 0% and 48% for local efforts to reduce the commercial sale of sex, including,
but not limited to, increasing enforcement of commercial sex laws.
• Quarterly, jurisdictions must remit 2% of the revenue to Commerce, with a report detailing the fees assessed,
the revenue received and how it was spent.
Judges may reduce some of the fees if the court finds, on the record, that the offender cannot pay the fee. In those
cases, judges may only reduce the fee by up to two-thirds.
Courts may not reduce the fees attached to vehicle impoundment. Impounding agencies collect these fees if a law
enforcement officer impounds a vehicle used in the commission of a commercial sexual abuse of a minor (CSAM)
crime or prostitution-related crime or if other conditions are met. The owner must pay the fee before redeeming the
vehicle. Subsequently, if the defendant is found not guilty of the crime, the defendant is entitled to a refund of the
fee.
It is important to note that arrests, charges, prosecutions and/or resolutions of cases can occur in different fiscal
years. This can result in the fees that are assessed not matching the fees collected within the same fiscal year.
Additional penalty fees
Judges may assess additional penalty fees on convictions related to prostitution, indecent exposure and the
commercial sexual exploitation of children under statutes modified by Chapter 121, Laws of 2013 including RCW
1 RCW 9A.88.120 defines statutory or non-statutory agreement as an agreement under RCW 13.40.080 or any written agreement between a
person accused of an offense and a court, county, or city prosecutor, whereby the person agrees to fulfill certain conditions in lieu of
prosecution.
2 Programs like this are sometimes called "john schools”, but this term is not survivor informed, as not all buyers are men. Some
accountability programs may still have titles including "johns" or "men", but it is important to note that not all buyers are men, just as not all
victims of sexual exploitation are women.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 5
9.68A.105, 9A.88.120, or 9A.88.140. These three statutes define the maximum additional penalty fee that a judge
may assess for each crime below.
Fixed penalty fees (do not change whether this is a first-time or repeat offense):
Judges must assess a $5,000 additional penalty fee for convictions related to the following crimes:
• 9.68A.105 9.68A.100 — Commercial Sexual Abuse of a Minor (CSAM)
• 9.68A.101 — Promoting CSAM
• 9.68A.102 — Promoting travel for CSAM
Judges must assess a $50 additional penalty fee for convictions related to the following crimes:
• 9A.88.010 — Indecent exposure
• 9A.88.030 — Prostitution
Conditional penalty fees (based on number of previous offenses):
For crimes related to permitting prostitution (RCW 9A.88.090) and patronizing a prostitute (RCW 9A.88.110), the
maximum additional penalty fee amount that judges must assess depends on the number of times a person has
been convicted of the crime.
• 1st offense: $1,500
• 2nd offense: $2,500
• 3rd and subsequent offense: $5,000
For crimes related to promoting prostitution in the first degree (9A.88.070) or in the second degree (9A.88.080), the
maximum additional penalty fee amount that judges must assess also depends on the number of times a person
has been convicted of the crime.
• 1st offense: $3,000
• 2nd offense: $6,000
• 3rd and subsequent offense: $10,000
Vehicle impound fines for crimes related to prostitution:
A $500 vehicle impound fine is assessed for convictions related to the following crimes:
• 9A.88.110 – Patronizing a prostitute
• 9A.88.070 – Promoting prostitution in the first degree
• 9A.88.080 – Promoting prostitution in the second degree
• 9A.88.085 – Promoting travel for prostitution
Vehicle impound fines for crimes related to commercial sexual abuse of a minor (CSAM):
A $2,500 vehicle impound fine is assessed for convictions related to the following crimes:
• 9.68A.100 – CSAM
• 9.68A.101 – Promoting CSAM
• 9.68A.102 – Promoting travel for CSAM
Fee reductions, waivers and suspensions
While vehicle impound fines may not be reduced or waived, judges may reduce, waive or suspend the payment of
all or part of the other fees described above. If a court finds, on the record, that the adult offender cannot pay, it
may reduce the fee by an amount up to two-thirds of the maximum allowable fee.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 6
Fee assessments and crime rates
In state fiscal year 2025, 71 courts in Washington handed down convictions for crimes that bear the relevant
additional penalty fees. Of these, five courts — just 7% of the total — assessed these additional penalty fees
concerning convictions for applicable crimes. This discrepancy indicates that many courts in Washington are not
assessing the fees or only assessing a fraction of what they could. In addition, only eight courts received revenue
from these fees in this fiscal year, some of which was for crimes committed in previous years. Some examples of
court assessments and collections of the penalty fees include:
• The King County Superior Court assessed and collected the highest fees of all Washington courts in state
fiscal year 2025, assessing $75,580.65 and collecting $19,408.79.
• Seattle Municipal Court assessed the next highest fees, totaling $45,036 but collected the third highest,
totaling $1,900.
• The Pierce County Superior Court did not assess any relevant fees, but the court had 12 convictions for
relevant crimes in state fiscal year 2025: four for promoting prostitution, two for commercial sex abuse of a
minor, two for indecent exposure, two for patronizing a prostitute, one for trafficking in the first degree, and
one for trafficking in the second degree. Given all relevant convictions for the Pierce County Superior Court,
the maximum possible fees would total $43,100, assuming the convicted were first-time offenders.
• The Cowlitz County Superior Court had five convictions for relevant crimes, four of which were for
commercial sex abuse of a minor. Given all relevant convictions for the Cowlitz County Superior Court, the
maximum possible fees would total $20,000, assuming the convicted were first-time offenders. However, the
court did not assess any relevant fees in the state fiscal year 2025.
• The Clark County District Court had 26 convictions for relevant crimes, all of which were for indecent
exposure. Given all relevant convictions for the Clark County District Court, the maximum possible fees would
total $1,300, assuming the convicted were first-time offenders. However, the court did not assess any
relevant fees in the state fiscal year 2025.
Statewide, courts assessed 45% of the total possible fee amount — $134,883.65 out of a potential $294,800. As in
previous years, courts in King County both assessed and collected most of the fees. Excluding King County, other
Washington courts assessed just 10% of the total possible fee amount — $13,667 out of a potential $140,800. It is
beyond the scope of this report to investigate why many courts are not imposing these fees.
Table 1 lists the number of arrests and convictions for the relevant crimes, the maximum possible fees that courts
could assess based on conviction data, the actual fees assessed and the fees collected for each county in
Washington. Appendix B contains a complete list of all courts that imposed convictions for the applicable crimes
or assessed or collected relevant fees. It is important to note that an arrest made in one year can lead to a case
that takes more than a year to prosecute and resolve, explaining why the fees a court assessed may exceed the
maximum possible fees. It also explains why some of the fees collected by a court may be greater than fees that
the court assessed.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 7
Table 1: Arrests, convictions and fees by county for applicable charges — state fiscal
year 2025
Max possible
County Arrests Convictions Fees assessed Fees collected
fees*
Adams 17 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Asotin 4 1 $3,000.00 $0.00 $0.00
Benton 17 1 $5,000.00 $0.00 $0.00
Chelan 12 1 $3,000.00 $0.00 $0.00
Clallam 13 8 $400.00 $0.00 $0.00
Clark 110 35 $6,900.00 $0.00 $0.00
Columbia 0 2 $100.00 $0.00 $0.00
Cowlitz 22 10 $20,300.00 $0.00 $0.00
Douglas 0 2 $3,050.00 $0.00 $0.00
Ferry 0 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Franklin 13 5 $9,100.00 $0.00 $0.00
Garfield 0 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Grant 13 3 $5,100.00 $0.00 $0.00
Grays Harbor 5 2 $100.00 $0.00 $0.00
Island 5 4 $200.00 $0.00 $0.00
Jefferson 5 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
King 249 120 $154,000.00 $121,216.65 $21,863.03
Kitsap 29 10 $8,850.00 $12,000.00 $12,000.00
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 8
Max possible
County Arrests Convictions Fees assessed Fees collected
fees*
Kittitas 17 1 $50.00 $0.00 $0.00
Klickitat 2 1 $3,000.00 $0.00 $0.00
Lewis 10 7 $350.00 $0.00 $0.00
Lincoln 0 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Mason 0 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Okanogan 6 1 $50.00 $0.00 $0.00
Pacific 0 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Pend Oreille 8 5 $150.00 $0.00 $0.00
Pierce 89 39 $44,450.00 $0.00 $0.00
San Juan 0 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Skagit 30 5 $250.00 $0.00 $0.00
Skamania 1 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Snohomish 92 31 $1,550.00 $0.00 $133.94
Spokane 59 23 $9,050.00 $0.00 $245.76
Stevens 3 2 $10,000.00 $1,667.00 $0.00
Thurston 32 8 $400.00 $0.00 $0.00
Wahkiakum 0 0 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
Walla Walla 11 4 $200.00 $0.00 $0.00
Whatcom 24 3 $5,100.00 $0.00 $0.00
Whitman 1 1 $500.00 $0.00 $0.00
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 9
Max possible
County Arrests Convictions Fees assessed Fees collected
fees*
Yakima 39 12 $600.00 $0.00 $1,050.00
TOTAL 938 347 $294,800.00 $134,883.65 $35,292.73
* Data from the Administrative Office of the Courts does not differentiate whether a particular case is a first, second, third or subsequent
offense. Second, third and subsequent offenses have greater criminal penalty fee amounts. The calculations for maximum possible fees
assume that each case is a first offense for simplicity, but if any of these offenses is a second, third, or subsequent offense, the potential fee
revenue would be even greater.
Sources: The Administrative Office of the Courts, Washington State Patrol, King County Superior Court, King County District Court and Seattle
Municipal Court.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 10
Figure 1 provides a year-by-year comparison of criminal penalty fees assessed by Washington courts for sexual
exploitation convictions from 2015 through 2025. For each year, the chart shows the total in maximum possible
fees that Washington courts could have levied that year 3 beside the actual amounts courts levied. This comparison
highlights the gap between the potential and actual fees imposed over time.
• The Total Possible Fees column shows the maximum fees that courts could have assessed that year if each
conviction were treated as a first offense.
• The Amount of Fees Levied column shows the actual total dollar amount assessed by the courts that year for
those convictions.
Figure 1: Maximum possible fees statewide compared to total amounts levied — 2015 through
2025
$900,000
$800,000
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$0
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Total Possible Fees Amount of Fees Levied
Sources: The Administrative Office of the Courts, Washington State Patrol, King County Superior Court, King County District Court and Seattle
Municipal Court.
3 Maximum possible fees were calculated by multiplying the number of sexual exploitation convictions that occurred each state fiscal year
by each crime’s maximum additional penalty fee amount defined in statute. Calculations assume that each case is a first offense for
simplicity.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 11
Figure 2 illustrates the percentage of total potential fees Washington courts assessed in state fiscal years 2015
through 2025.
Figure 2: Percentage of potential fees assessed statewide — 2015 through 2025
80%
71%
70%
60% 57%
54% 52% 56%
57%
50%
45%
40% 41%
37%
30% 32%
31%
20%
10%
0%
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
% of Possible Fees
Sources: The Administrative Office of the Courts, Washington State Patrol, King County Superior Court, King County District Court and Seattle
Municipal Court.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 12
Background on fees and payments
Many individuals convicted of crimes do not pay fees all at once and enter a payment plan with the court. As they
pay off the fees, court clerks code them into the Judicial Information System (JIS) and Odyssey system used by
most courts in Washington. Therefore, revenue from fees can be greater during a given year than assessed fees as
offenders gradually pay off their penalties.
The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) establishes new codes in JIS and Odyssey. It informs courts about
which codes to use. AOC codes data in these systems to the fund account rather than the statute applicable to the
crime. As a result, separating the funds collected by the offense committed is impossible.
Once court clerks receive the revenue and assign a code, the city or county treasurer is responsible for establishing
an account for the funds. Some cities contract with their county to act as treasurer for the jurisdiction. Then, the
jurisdiction must decide which department, office or official is responsible for determining how to spend the funds,
allocating the amounts according to the legislative guidelines and ensuring that the quarterly reports are sent to
Commerce.
The Washington State Patrol maintains data by county on the number of arrests and convictions for all crimes in
Washington. Some cities, notably Seattle, have municipal codes for misdemeanor offenses that effectively replace
the applicable state statute in the city's data system. Therefore, the researchers for this report obtained data on
arrests, cases and convictions for crimes committed within Seattle from the Seattle Municipal Court.
Because the applicable crimes include both misdemeanors and felonies, the impacted courts include municipal
and district courts (courts of limited jurisdiction, or CLJs) and superior courts, which hear cases involving serious
felonies.
Certain courts, including the Seattle Municipal Court, King County District and Superior courts, do not use JIS or
Odyssey. Additionally, some municipal courts contract with their county district courts to collect fees on their
behalf. For instance, the King County District Court contracts with Auburn, Beaux Arts, Bellevue, Burien, Carnation,
Covington, Duvall, Kenmore, Redmond, Sammamish, Shoreline, Skykomish and Woodinville. The information on
fees collected and assessed by those cities is merged with the King County District Court data.
Crime rates
In the state fiscal year 2025, law enforcement officers made 450 more arrests for sexual exploitation crimes than
in state fiscal year 2024, an increase of 92%. In state fiscal year 2025, there were more than eight times as many
convictions for sexual exploitation crimes (347 convictions) as in the prior year (42 convictions).There were 260
more convictions for indecent exposure in state fiscal year 2025 than in state fiscal year 2024, an 8,667% increase
that represented the single greatest percentage increase in convictions for any of the crimes specified under RCW
9.68A.105, RCW 9A.88.120 and RCW 9A.88.140.
Table 2 lists the number of arrests, cases and convictions for these crimes. The table also includes the crime of
trafficking, which carries an additional $10,000 penalty fee. However, the fee for trafficking is not subject to the
same dispersal requirements as the crimes specified under RCW 9.68A.105, RCW 9A.88.120 and RCW 9A.88.140.
Table 2: Statewide arrests and convictions by crime — state fiscal year 2025
Statute Charge Arrests Convictions
9.68A.100 Commercial Sexual Abuse of a Minor (CSAM) 67 17
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 13
Statute Charge Arrests Convictions
9.68A.101 Promoting CSAM 7 0
9.68A.102 Promoting Travel for CSAM 0 0
9.68A.103 Permitting CSAM 0 0
9A.40.100 Trafficking 27 3
9A.88.010 Indecent Exposure 692 263
9A.88.030 Prostitution 17 1
9A.88.070 Promoting Prostitution in the First Degree 13 8
9A.88.080 Promoting Prostitution in the Second Degree 20 46
Promoting Travel for Prostitution (Vehicle 0 0
9A.88.085
Impoundment)
9A.88.090 Permitting Prostitution 2 0
9A.88.110 Patronizing a Prostitute 93 9
TOTAL 938 347
Source: The Washington State Patrol provided data on statewide arrests and convictions.
It is important to note that an arrest in one year can lead to a case that takes more than a year to prosecute and
resolve. This explains why some charges have fewer arrests than convictions in the state fiscal year 2025.
Over the past eleven years, the numbers of arrests and convictions for these crimes have generally declined since
Commerce began tracking the data in 2014. However, state fiscal years 2023 and 2025 stand out as exceptions to
this trend, showing increases in both arrests and convictions compared to the previous year.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 14
Figure 3: Statewide arrests and convictions totals — 2015 through 2025
1,600
1439
1,400 1294
1243
1187
1,200 1131
1011
1,000 938
800 749
660 622
600 490 488
418 418
363 358 347
400
239 198 218
166
200
42
0
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025
Number of arrests Number of convictions
Source: The Washington State Patrol provided data on statewide arrests and convictions
Legal financial obligations
The criminal penalty fees that are the focus of this report are a subset of all the costs, fees, fines or restitutions
that Washington courts may impose on people convicted of a criminal offense. These court-mandated payments
are collectively called legal financial obligations (LFOs), which have been the subject of several studies in
Washington in recent years.
In January 2022, the Washington Supreme Court's Minority and Justice Commission released a report titled, "The
Price of Justice," 4 which assessed local and statewide policies and practices concerning LFO assessment and
collection, among other topics. While it is outside the scope of this report to examine in detail why Washington
courts are not assessing the maximum possible criminal penalty fees for certain sexual exploitation crimes,
several findings from "The Price of Justice" may help explain why fee assessments fall short of the maximum
allowed.
One such finding is among judges surveyed as part of the report, "a majority indicated that between 80%-100% of
the defendants that appear before them are indigent." 5 Another is that among judges surveyed, 44% indicated that
4 Washington State Supreme Court Minority and Justice Commission, "The Price of Justice," (2022),
5 RCW 10.101.010 defines "indigent" as, "a person who, at any stage of a court proceeding, is: (a) Receiving one of the following types of
public assistance: Temporary assistance for needy families, aged, blind, or disabled assistance benefits, medical care services under
RCW 74.09.035, pregnant women assistance benefits, poverty-related veterans' benefits, food stamps or food stamp benefits transferred
electronically, refugee resettlement benefits, Medicaid, or supplemental security income; or (b) Involuntarily committed to a public mental
health facility; or (c) Receiving an annual income, after taxes, of one hundred twenty-five percent or less of the current federally established
poverty level; or (d) Unable to pay the anticipated cost of counsel for the matter before the court because his or her available funds are
insufficient to pay any amount for the retention of counsel."
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 15
they do not believe that LFOs are essential to the criminal justice process. Defense attorneys surveyed also
reported that "courts' LFO practices varied widely from judge to judge and from jurisdiction to jurisdiction,"
including differences in which LFOs judges understood to be mandatory.
Lastly, "The Price of Justice" also noted LFO-related reductions in courts of limited jurisdiction. For example,
between 2014 and 2018, courts of limited jurisdiction saw a 23% decrease in cases with LFOs imposed, a 12%
decrease in the average LFO assessed per case, and a 3% decrease in the total annual amount of LFOs imposed
statewide.
According to the Minority and Justice Commission, another possible factor contributing to the wide variation in the
percentage of possible fees that Washington courts assess is the changing statutory landscape governing the
assessment of LFOs. These changes include requiring courts to account for a person's willingness to pay before
assessing discretionary LFOs, and Chapter 449, Laws of 2023, which eliminated the crime victim penalty
assessment for juveniles or, upon motion, for adults found to be indigent. However, it is important to note that the
fees detailed in this report are mandatory and distinct from the crime victim penalty assessment.
Finally, the non-unified structure of Washington courts means that judicial education concerning LFOs happens at
the court level. While the Administrative Office of the Courts provides resources like an LFO calculator and an LFO
bench card that judicial officers can reference to guide LFO assessment, the state does not provide any statewide
LFO educational programs.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 16
How jurisdictions reported spending the funds
In the state fiscal year 2025, 71 courts in Washington handed down convictions for crimes that bear the additional
penalty fees, and seven courts collected revenue toward the payment of these additional penalty fees. Of the seven
courts that collected revenue, four both assessed new fees and collected revenue toward payment of previously
assessed fees. The three remaining courts collected revenue but did not assess new fees, which indicates the
revenue was from people convicted of crimes paying off fees assessed in past years.
Researchers annually survey courts that collected fees greater than $100 to determine how cities and counties
used the funds. All courts that collected additional penalty fees in the state fiscal year 2025 reported collecting
more than $100; therefore, all seven courts were surveyed. In most cases, it was necessary to speak with another
department (for instance, the city or county treasurer, the police department or the prosecutor's office) to learn
whether the funds had been allocated and, if so, how they had been spent.
Reports by jurisdiction
King County District Court
King County District Court (KCDC) collected $554.24 on behalf of its partner organizations, Bellevue, Covington and
King County. The clerk's office then disbursed the following amounts to the following local jurisdictions:
• Bellevue: $500
Bellevue Police Department spent $124.70 on transportation and food related to victim interviews.
• Covington: $4.24
Covington was not surveyed because they did not receive more than $100 in the state fiscal year 2025.
• King County: $50
King County reported spending 50% of the funds on staffing for the King County Sheriff’s Office, focusing on
investigations related to human trafficking and the commercial sexual exploitation of minors. The other 50%
was directed toward the Commercially Sexually Exploited Children program, providing support for survivors.6
King County Superior Court
King County Superior Court (KCSC) collected $19,408.79 on behalf of its partner organizations. The clerk's office
then disbursed the following amounts to the following local jurisdictions:
• Bellevue: $2,851.14
Bellevue Police Department spent $124.70 on transportation and food related to victim interviews.
• Bothell: $43.40
The city of Bothell collected less than $100 during the state fiscal year 2025 and therefore was not surveyed.
• Kent: $1,905.00
The city of Kent could not determine use of funds before this report was published due to city staff absences.
• King County: $13,036
King County reported spending 50% of the funds on staffing for the King County Sheriff’s Office, focusing on
investigations related to human trafficking and the commercial sexual exploitation of minors. The other 50%
was directed toward the Commercially Sexually Exploited Children program, providing support for survivors.
• Kirkland: $6.18
6 Although King County received less than $100 from King County District Court, they were surveyed because they received more than $100
from the King County Superior Court in the state fiscal year 2025.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 17
The city of Kirkland collected less than $100 during the state fiscal year 2025 and therefore was not
surveyed.
• Renton: $1,566.67
The city of Renton transferred the 2% of funds that it collected in the state fiscal year 2025 to the Washington
State Department of Commerce. It has not yet spent any of the remaining revenue.
• Seattle: $0.40
The City of Seattle has not yet spent the funds it collected in the state fiscal year 2025. 7
Kitsap County Superior Court
Kitsap County collected $12,000. The county was unable to report if or how collected funds were spent in the state
fiscal year 2025 because the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) and Kitsap County had a discrepancy in the
amounts collected. Although the county and AOC were working to resolve the discrepancy, agreement was not
reached before this report was published.
Seattle Municipal Court
Seattle Municipal Court collected $1,900. The clerk's office disbursed $1,900.00 to the City of Seattle's Human
Services Department. The City of Seattle's Human Services Department reported that it has not yet spent the funds
it collected in the state fiscal year 2025.
Snohomish County Superior Court
Snohomish County Superior Court collected $133.94. The county clerk's office transferred the funds it collected in
the state fiscal year 2025 to the County General Fund and they have not yet been spent.
Spokane County Superior Court
Spokane County Superior Court collected $245.76. The county reported that all funds were used to pay for criminal
case costs incurred while moving the case through the system to adjudication.
Yakima County Superior Court
Yakima County Superior Court collected $1,050.00. The county has not yet spent the funds it collected in the state
fiscal year 2025.
7 Although Seattle received less than $100 from KCSC, they were surveyed because they received more than $100 from the Seattle Municipal
Court in the state fiscal year 2025.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 18
Appendix A: Distribution of criminal penalty fees
Trafficking, prostitution and commercial sexual exploitation crimes
Dispersal of penalty fines and revenue from seized property under Washington state statutes, effective January 1,
2026.
Additional penalty fees for sexual exploitation crimes go toward:
Minimum 50% Up to 48% 2%
Local prevention efforts and Local law enforcement Prostitution Prevention and
victims’ services Intervention Account (PPIA)
Statutes and additional penalties
9A.40.100: $10,000 – Trafficking (not deposited into PPIA) – Additional penalty statute: 9A.40.100
9.68A.100: $5,000 – Commercial sexual abuse of a minor (CSAM) – Additional penalty statute: 9.68A.105
9.68A.101: $5,000 – Promoting CSAM – Additional penalty statute: 9.68A.105
9.68A.102: $5,000 – Promoting travel for CSAM – Additional penalty statute: 9.68A.105
9.68A.106: $5,000 (all deposited to PPIA) – Internet advertisement related to CSAM – Additional penalty statute: 9.68A.106
9A.88.010: $50 – Indecent exposure – Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.120
9A.88.030: $50 – Prostitution – Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.120
9A.88.090: 1st offense: $1,500 – Permitting prostitution – Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.120
9A.88.090: 2nd offense: $2,500 – Permitting prostitution – Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.120
9A.88.090: 3rd or greater offense: $5,000 – Permitting prostitution – Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.120
9A.88.110: 1st offense: $1,500 – Patronizing a prostitute – Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.120
9A.88.110: 2nd offense: $2,500 – Patronizing a prostitute – Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.120
9A.88.110: 3rd or greater offense: $3,500 – Patronizing a prostitute – Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.120
9A.88.070: 1st offense: $3,000 – Promoting prostitution in the 1st degree – Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.120
9A.88.070: 2nd offense: $6,000 – Promoting prostitution in the 1st degree – Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.120
9A.88.070: 3rd or greater offense: $10,000 – Promoting prostitution in the 1st degree – Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.120
9A.88.080: 1st offense: $3,000 – Promoting prostitution in the 2nd degree – Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.120
9A.88.080: 2nd offense: $6,000 – Promoting prostitution in the 2nd degree – Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.120
9A.88.080: 3rd or greater offense: $10,000 – Promoting prostitution in the 2nd degree – Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.120
9A.88.140: $500 – Vehicle impoundment fine for patronizing a prostitute (9A.88.110), promoting prostitution in the 1st degree
(9A.88.070), promoting prostitution in the 2nd degree (9A.88.080) and promoting travel for prostitution (9A.88.085) –
Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.140
9A.88.080: $2,500 – Vehicle impoundment fine for Commercial Sexual Abuse of a Minor (CSAM) (9.68A.100), promoting
CSAM (9.68A.101) and promoting travel for CSAM (9.68A.102) – Additional penalty statute: 9A.88.140
How fines must be used
Local prevention efforts and victims’ services:
At least 50% of the revenue must be spent on prevention efforts, including education programs for offenders (such as John
school) and rehabilitative services for victims (such as mental health and substance abuse counseling, parenting skills,
training, housing relief, education, vocational training, drop-in centers and employment counseling).
Local law enforcement:
Up to 48% must be used for local efforts to reduce the commercial sale of sex including, but not limited to, increasing
enforcement of commercial sex laws.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 19
Prostitution Prevention and Intervention Account (PPIA):
Two percent of the revenue shall be remitted quarterly to the Washington State Department of Commerce, together with a
report detailing the fines assessed, the revenue received and how that revenue was spent. (Does not apply to RCW 9A.40.100,
Trafficking.)
Criminal Penalty Fines Report:
The PPIA account funds an annual report to the Legislature on the amount of revenue collected under RCW 9.68A.105,
9A.88.120 and 9A.88.140.
Proceeds from seized property related to sexual exploitation convictions go toward:
90% 10%
Investigation and seizure expenses; enforcement of State General Fund (effective January 1, 2026)
prostitution and sexual exploitation laws
Statutes
9.68A.120: – Child pornography
9.68A.100: – Commercial Sexual Abuse of a Minor (CSAM)
9.68A.101: – Promoting CSAM
9A.88.070: – Promoting prostitution in the 1st degree
How proceeds must be used (effective January 1, 2026)
Disposal of proceeds from seized property:
90% shall be used by the seizing law enforcement agency for the expenses of the investigation and seizure. Remaining funds
shall be used to enforce the provisions of 9A.88 RCW or 9.68A RCW.
Prostitution Prevention and Intervention Account:
By January 31st of each year, each seizing agency shall remit to the state treasurer 10% of the net proceeds of any property
forfeited during the preceding calendar year. Money remitted shall be deposited in the State General Fund.
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 20
Appendix B: Courts with convictions for applicable charges
Table 3: Convictions, fees assessed and fees collected by court - state fiscal year 2025
Court County Convictions Fees assessed Fees collected
Asotin County Superior Court Asotin 1 $0.00 $0.00
Bellingham Municipal Court Whatcom 2 $0.00 $0.00
Benton County Superior Court Benton 1 $0.00 $0.00
Bothell Municipal Court King 1 $0.00 $0.00
Bremerton Municipal Court Kitsap 3 $0.00 $0.00
Buckley Municipal Court Pierce 11 $0.00 $0.00
Burlington Municipal Court Skagit 1 $0.00 $0.00
Camas Washougal Municipal Court Clark 2 $0.00 $0.00
Centralia Municipal Court Lewis 1 $0.00 $0.00
Chehalis Municipal Court Lewis 1 $0.00 $0.00
Clallam County District Court No 1 Clallam 5 $0.00 $0.00
Clallam County Superior Court Clallam 3 $0.00 $0.00
Clark County District Court Clark 26 $0.00 $0.00
Clark County Superior Court Clark 7 $0.00 $0.00
Columbia County District Court Columbia 2 $0.00 $0.00
Cowlitz County District Court Cowlitz 5 $0.00 $0.00
Cowlitz County Superior Court Cowlitz 5 $0.00 $0.00
Des Moines Municipal Court King 2 $0.00 $0.00
Douglas County Superior Court Douglas 2 $0.00 $0.00
Enumclaw Municipal Court King 1 $0.00 $0.00
Everett Municipal Court Snohomish 14 $0.00 $0.00
Federal Way Municipal Court King 6 $0.00 $0.00
Franklin County District Court Franklin 1 $0.00 $0.00
Franklin County Superior Court Franklin 4 $0.00 $0.00
Grant County District Court Grant 2 $0.00 $0.00
Grant County Superior Court Grant 1 $0.00 $0.00
Grays Harbor County Superior Court Grays Harbor 2 $0.00 $0.00
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 21
Court County Convictions Fees assessed Fees collected
Island County District Court Island 2 $0.00 $0.00
Island County Superior Court Island 2 $0.00 $0.00
Issaquah Municipal Court King 1 $0.00 $0.00
Kent Municipal Court King 4 $0.00 $0.00
King County District Court King 11 $600.00 $554.24
King County Superior Court King 72 $75,580.65 $19,408.79
Kitsap County Superior Court Kitsap 4 $12,000.00 $12,000.00
Klickitat County Superior Court Klickitat 1 $0.00 $0.00
Lakewood Municipal Court Pierce 2 $0.00 $0.00
Lewis County Superior Court Lewis 5 $0.00 $0.00
Lower Kittitas County District Court Kittitas 1 $0.00 $0.00
Lynnwood Municipal Court Snohomish 3 $0.00 $0.00
Marysville Municipal Court Snohomish 4 $0.00 $0.00
Mercer Island Municipal Court King 2 $0.00 $0.00
Okanogan County District Court Okanogan 1 $0.00 $0.00
Olympia Municipal Court Thurston 2 $0.00 $0.00
Pend Oreille County District Court Pend Oreille 5 $0.00 $0.00
Pierce County District Court Pierce 6 $0.00 $0.00
Pierce County Superior Court Pierce 12 $0.00 $0.00
Poulsbo Municipal Court Kitsap 1 $0.00 $0.00
Puyallup Municipal Court Pierce 3 $0.00 $0.00
Renton Municipal Court King 2 $0.00 $0.00
SeaTac Municipal Court King 2 $0.00 $0.00
Seattle Municipal Court King 14 $45,036.00 $1,900.00
Skagit County Superior Court Skagit 4 $0.00 $0.00
Snohomish County District Court Snohomish 1 $0.00 $0.00
Snohomish County South District Court Snohomish 2 $0.00 $0.00
Snohomish County Superior Court Snohomish 7 $0.00 $133.94
Spokane County District Court Spokane 8 $0.00 $245.76
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 22
Court County Convictions Fees assessed Fees collected
Spokane County Superior Court Spokane 7 $0.00 $0.00
Spokane Municipal Court Spokane 8 $0.00 $0.00
Stevens Superior Court Stevens 2 $1,667.00 $0.00
Sumner Municipal Court Pierce 1 $0.00 $0.00
Tacoma Municipal Court Pierce 4 $0.00 $0.00
Thurston County District Court Thurston 5 $0.00 $0.00
Walla Wall County District Court Walla Walla 2 $0.00 $0.00
Walla Walla County Superior Court Walla Walla 2 $0.00 $0.00
Wenatchee County Superior Court Wenatchee 1 $0.00 $0.00
West Klickitat County District Court Klickitat 2 $0.00 $0.00
Whatcom County Superior Court Whatcom 3 $0.00 $0.00
Whitman County District Court Whitman 1 $0.00 $0.00
Yakima County Superior Court Yakima 5 $0.00 $1,050.00
Yakima Municipal Court Yakima 7 $0.00 $0.00
Yelm Municipal Court Thurston 1 $0.00 $0.00
TOTAL 71 courts 347 $134,883.65 $35,292.73
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 23
Appendix C: King County's approach
Most arrests and convictions for the crime of patronizing a prostitute (RCW 9A.88.110) and commercial sexual
abuse of a minor (RCW 9.68A.100) occur in King County. Several law enforcement agencies in King County,
including the City of Seattle, Kent, Bellevue, Des Moines and Renton police departments, have policies to actively
pursue those who provide anything of value in exchange for an adult or child engaging in sexual conduct with them.
In 2014, King County launched a new approach to reduce the demand for prostitution by working to change the
attitudes and behaviors of people arrested for patronization. Several law enforcement and prosecuting agencies
within King County have altered their emphasis to both pursue the buyers of commercial sex and the people who
facilitate sex trafficking. They based their approach on the reality that the past practice of arresting and
prosecuting people in prostitution did not make the community any safer. Rather, punishing commercially sexually
exploited people resulted in the cycle of prostitution-related crime and sex trafficking persisting. Presently, law
enforcement and prosecuting agencies are instead focusing on punishing those who seek out and facilitate illegal
interactions — the sex buyers, promoters and traffickers.
Sex trafficking is a crime that disproportionately affects young people, people experiencing poverty, people of
color, people with previous trauma history and people who identify as LGBTQIA2S+. Youth in the Child Welfare
System are at high risk. Traffickers target adults and youth who are impacted by systemic inequities. Systemic
inequities result in racism, discrimination, poverty and other vulnerabilities. Traffickers exploit the vulnerabilities of
youth and adults and use them to make money. Across the U.S., the typical age of entry for youth coerced into the
sex trade is between 13 and 15. In 2018, over 470 youth between the ages of 11 and 24 were engaged with
services for youth experiencing commercial sexual exploitation in King County. A demographic analysis of a
sample of those youth found that 73% were between 12 and 17. 8 These children and young adults experience
repeated rapes, abuse and other forms of violence at the hands of sex buyers and traffickers.
All through the process, these trafficking victims face many barriers to escaping prostitution. Therefore, King
County's approach emphasizes the prosecution of sex buyers and traffickers and connecting prostituted people to
services. Program leaders assert that a reduction in demand will decrease harm to prostituted people, reduce the
self-destructive behaviors of buyers and curb sex trafficking.
While it no longer exists, over the past several years, the Ending Exploitation Collaborative (EEC) in King County
marshaled a cross-sector transformation toward diverting victims of sexual exploitation to services and holding
sex buyers accountable. The EEC was a partnership of the Organization for Prostitution Survivors, the Washington
State Attorney General's Office, the King County Prosecuting Attorney's Office, Seattle Against Slavery, Businesses
Ending Slavery and Trafficking and the Center for Child and Youth Justice.
The EEC changed norms and practices across sectors to confront the demand for commercial sex. For example,
traffickers and sex buyers in King County are being arrested and prosecuted through trailblazing approaches that
have been recognized nationwide. Following conviction, sex buyers in King County must complete an innovative
and successful education program called "Stopping Sexual Exploitation." This program is based on principles of
social justice and personal transformation and is designed to help men understand their behavior and promote
their own decisions not to buy sex. A significant portion of the fees for the buyer education program and the
statutorily mandated fines assessed from buyers are directed to increase services that help victims of sex
trafficking and sexual exploitation, including housing, treatment and employment training.
8 Boyer, Debra, "Commercially Sexually Exploited Children in Seattle/King County 2019 Update," (2023),
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 24
The EEC also sought to shift norms and practices by youth and adults through education and targeted
interventions because of its belief that broader cultural and institutional norms influence the individual choice to
buy sex. The EEC provided prevention education for youth in schools and adults at work. Because research
indicates that 13% of calls to solicit sex originate from local businesses, and a peak time to solicit sex online is 2
p.m., employers played an important role in educating employees and preventing illegal activity through the
workplace.
Additionally, since April 2013, King County has had the Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children (CSEC) Task
Force, which aims to "ensure the safety and support of commercially sexually exploited children and to prevent
further exploitation." 9 This task force collects and shares a variety of resources, including data, prevention
resources, recommended reading, toolkits and training opportunities.
Figures 4 and 5 illustrate how King County's arrests and convictions, respectively, compare to the numbers in the
rest of the state.
9 King County CSEC Task Force, "Home," (2025),
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 25
Figure 4: Arrests for patronization, promotion and prostitution crimes — state fiscal year 2025
80
72
70
60 55
50
40
30
20 16
10
1
0
King County Arrests Remainder of WA
Prostitution Patronizing, Permitting or Promoting Prostitution
Figure 5: Convictions for patronization, promotion and prostitution— state fiscal year 2025
50 46
45
40
35
30
25
20
14
15
10
5 1 0
0
King County Convictions Remainder of WA
Prostitution Patronizing, Permitting or Promoting Prostitution
CRIMINAL PENALTY FEES RELATED TO SEXUAL EXPLOITATION CRIMES 26
File and source
- File
- 2026_2025-criminal-penalty-fees-report-final-4547db6d-13c5-4443-8359-9d51b4.pdf
- Size
- 471,813 bytes
- SHA-256
- 38991ec1e7e1e8e9aa84db71b7591b1a2b49e5a87f3aa399b36b7802b711567c
- Original
- app.leg.wa.gov