EnglishEspañol
Arizona flag

Arizona

Arizona Debt Collection Laws: The 10% Garnishment Cap, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession

Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited August 12, 2026). · 9 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

Arizona Debt Collection Laws: The 10% Garnishment Cap, Statute of Limitations, and Repossession

Updates

Corrected the statutory source of Arizona's 5% extreme-economic-hardship garnishment reduction to ARS 12-1598.10(F), which the article had placed under ARS 33-1131, and clarified that Proposition 209 did amend ARS 12-1598.10 even though the legislature's website still posts the superseded pre-2022 version of that section alongside the current one.

Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources

Sources and References

  1. ARS 33-1131, Definition; wages; salary; compensation (Prop 209 10% garnishment cap)(azleg.gov).gov
  2. ARS 33-1126, Money benefits or proceeds; exemption (bank account exemption)(azleg.gov).gov
  3. ARS 12-548, Contract in writing for debt; six year limitation; credit card debt(azleg.gov).gov
  4. ARS 12-543, Oral debt; stated or open account; three year limitation(azleg.gov).gov
  5. ARS 12-508, Effect of acknowledgment or promise in writing(azleg.gov).gov
  6. ARS 47-9609, Secured party's right to take possession after default(azleg.gov).gov
  7. ARS 44-1201, Rate of interest for loan or indebtedness; medical debt interest cap(azleg.gov).gov
  8. Maricopa County Justice Courts, How to Garnish Earnings instructions (current 10%/5% computation)(justicecourts.maricopa.gov).gov
  9. 12 CFR 1006.26, Regulation F prohibition on suits and threats of suit on time-barred debt(ecfr.gov).gov
  10. ARS 12-1598.10, Continuing lien on earnings (2022 Prop. 209 version), subsection F extreme-economic-hardship reduction from ten percent to not less than five percent(azleg.gov)
  11. Maricopa County Justice Courts, Garnishment of Earnings supplemental instructions (10% max, reducible to 5% on extreme economic hardship, citing Silence v. Betts)(justicecourts.maricopa.gov)
Share: