Editing De minimis

{{short description|Latin phrase: 'about minimal things'}}
{{Italic title}}
[[File:0873 - Kaukasus 2014 - Georgien - Batumi (17349857412).jpg|thumb|The country of [[Georgia (country)|Georgia]] has no legally recognized [[freedom of panorama]], and a strict interpretation of copyright law makes commercial reproduction of a likeness of any modern Georgian building a likely copyright violation. However, a panorama of a Georgian city (here, [[Batumi]]), which does not focus on any building in detail, is likely allowed due to the ''de minimis'' principle.]]
'''''De minimis''''' is a legal doctrine by which a court refuses to consider trifling matters. The name of the doctrine is a [[Latin]] expression meaning "pertaining to minimal things" or "with trifles", normally in the terms {{lang|la|de minimis non curat [[praetor]]}} ("The praetor does not concern himself with trifles") or ''de minimis non curat lex'' ("The law does not concern itself with trifles").<ref>{{cite book |last=Ehrlich |first=Eugene |title=Amo, Amas, Amat and More |page=[https://archive.org/details/greatthinkersofw00ianp/page/100 100] |location=New York |publisher=Harper Row |year=1987 |orig-year=1985 |isbn=978-0-06-272017-7 |url=https://archive.org/details/greatthinkersofw00ianp/page/100 }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |editor-first1=Bryan A. |editor-last1=Garner |title=[[Black's Law Dictionary]] |edition=7th |place=St. Paul, Minnesota |publisher=[[West Publishing]] |date=1999 |page=443|isbn=0-314-22864-0}}</ref> [[Queen Christina of Sweden]] (r.&nbsp;1633–1654) favoured the similar Latin [[adage]], ''aquila non [[wikt:capio|capit]] [[wikt:musca|muscās]]'' (the eagle does not catch flies).<ref>{{citation |title=A Collection of the Proverbs of All Nations |author=Walter Keating Kelly |year=1869}}</ref>

The legal history of ''de minimis'' dates back to the 15th century in the civil law, although there are earlier antecedents.<ref>Max L. Veech & Charles R. Moon, "De Minimis Non Curat Lex", 45 ''[[Michigan Law Review]]''. 537, 538 (1947) (quoting [[Thomas Branch]], ''Principia Legis et Æquitatis'' 36 ([[William Waller Hening]] ed., T. H. White, 4th London ed. 1824) and citing Bracton, ''De Legibus'', for early English history)</ref> It was incorporated into [[David Dudley Field II |David Dudley Field's]] Maxims of Jurisprudence of New York by the 1800s which was later exported by migrants such as [[John Chilton Burch]] to newer states such as California<ref name="Cal. Civ. § 3533">{{cite web |title="California Civil Code — Maxims of Jurisprudence § 3533" |url=https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=3533. |work=State of California |quote="The law disregards trifles...(Enacted 1872.)"}}</ref><ref name="CA. Revised laws">{{cite book |first1=Creed |last1=Haymond |first2=John C. |last2=Burch |title="Revised laws of the State of California" |year=1871 |url=https://lawcat.berkeley.edu/record/221608 |publisher=State of California |quote=}} [https://www.lawbookexchange.com/pages/books/68809/california-creed-haymond-john-c-burch/revised-laws-of-the-state-of-california-in-four-codes-4-vols see also]: Based on David Dudley Field's New York Field Codes, these volumes comprise the proposed code of laws for the state of California</ref> by the 1870s and Montana<ref name="Montana Code 1-3-224">{{cite web |title="Montana Code — Maxims of Jurisprudence § 1-3-224|url=https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0010/chapter_0030/part_0020/section_0240/0010-0030-0020-0240.html |work=State of Montana |quote="Trifles. The law disregards trifles. History: En. Sec. 4624, Civ. C. 1895..."}}</ref> by the 1890s—as well as to other states such as North Dakota.<ref name="North Dakota Code 31-11-05(24)">{{cite web |title="North Dakota Code — Maxims of Jurisprudence § 31-11-05(24)|url=https://ndlegis.gov/cencode/t31c11.pdf#page=3 |work=State of North Dakota |quote="The law disregards trifles"}}</ref>  

The general term has come to have a variety of specialized meanings in various contexts as shown below, which indicate that beneath a certain low level a quantity is regarded as trivial, and treated commensurately.

== Examples of application ==

===Taxation===
Under [[Taxation in the United States|U.S. tax rules]], the ''de minimis'' rule governs the treatment of small amounts of market discount. Under the rule, if a bond is purchased with a small amount of market discount (an amount less than 0.25% of the face value of a bond times the number of complete years between the bond's acquisition date and its maturity date) the market discount is considered to be zero and the discount on the [[Bond (finance)|bond]] will be considered to be a [[capital gain]] upon the bond's disposition or redemption rather than [[ordinary income]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.investinginbonds.com/learnmore.asp?catid=8&subcatid=62|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210518183533/http://www.investinginbonds.com/learnmore.asp?catid=8&subcatid=62|url-status=dead|archive-date=18 May 2021|title=About Municipal Bonds|publisher=[[Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association]]|website=Investing in Bonds|year=2013}}</ref> Under [[Internal Revenue Service]] guidelines, the ''de minimis'' rule can also apply to any benefit, property, or service provided to an employee that has so little value that reporting for it would be unreasonable or administratively impracticable; for example, use of a company photocopier to copy personal documents – see [[de minimis fringe benefit|''de minimis'' fringe benefit]]. [[Cash]] is not excludable, regardless of the amount.<ref>Society for Human Resource Management [http://www.shrm.org/TemplatesTools/Glossaries/HRTerms/Pages/d.aspx ''De minimis'' rule] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120806013518/http://www.shrm.org/TemplatesTools/Glossaries/HRTerms/Pages/d.aspx |date=2012-08-06 }} Retrieved on 28 July 2007.</ref>

Specifically in U.S. [[State income tax]], ''de minimis'' refers to the point at which withholdings should be initiated for a [[U.S. State Non-resident Withholding Tax|nonresident]] working in a state that taxes personal income. Not all U.S. states levy income taxes, and there is little consistency among nonresident ''de minimis'' standards for those that do. Some states base ''de minimis'' on the number of days worked (although the definition of what counts as a workday has been controversial<ref>[http://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/eb_lf_guidanceon14daywithholdingthreshold_25july12 New York State Updates Guidance on 14-Day Withholding Threshold]. Retrieved on 25 July 2012.</ref>), others on the dollars earned or a percentage of total income derived from work in the state, and still others use a combination of methods. These inconsistencies have led to repeated attempts to pass the so-called Mobile Workforce State Income Tax Simplification Act<ref>[https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr2315 114th Congress: HR 2315 / S 386]. Retrieved on 14 September 2015.</ref> without success.

===European Union usage===
According to European Union regulations, ''de minimis'' "state aid" is any amount of [https://kpsfinanciallab.it/calcolo-de-minimis-2025/ aid up to the ''de minimis'' ceiling of €300,000] provided from state funds to a [[business]] enterprise over a rolling three-year period. For businesses in the land transport sector, the ''de minimis'' ceiling is €100,000. If a business receives more than the ''de minimis'' ceiling amount of aid, it is subject to a different set of regulations.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2006:379:0005:0010:en:PDF|title=Commission Regulation (EC) No 1998/2006 of 15 December 2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to de minimis aid|access-date=2019-11-20}}</ref>

Under [[European Union competition law]], some agreements infringing [[Article 101 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union|Article 101(1)]] of the [[Treaties of the European Union#Treaty on the functioning of the European Union|Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union]] (formerly Article 81(1) of the [[Treaties of the European Union|EC Treaty]]) are considered to be ''de minimis'' and therefore accepted. Horizontal agreement, that is one between competitors, will usually be ''de minimis'' where the parties' market share is 10% or less, and a vertical agreement, between undertakings operating at different levels of the market, where it is 15% or less.<ref name="OJEC">{{cite journal |date=2001-12-22 |title=Commission Notice on agreements of minor importance which do not appreciably restrict competition under Article 81(1) of the Treaty establishing the European Community (''de minimis'') |journal=Official Journal of the European Communities |volume=2001/C |issue=368/07 |pages=13–5 |oclc=52301298 |url=http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2001/c_368/c_36820011222en00130015.pdf |access-date=2008-08-20 }}</ref>

[[Government procurement in the European Union|Procurement]] of low value contracts is subject to limited regulation when their value falls below certain low thresholds.<ref>[[Cheshire East Council]], [https://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/business/procurement/doing_business/eu_procurement_thresholds.aspx EU Procurement thresholds as at 1 January 2018], accessed 29 May 2018</ref>

===Criminology and crime===
In [[criminology]], the ''de minimis'' or ''minimalist'' approach is an addition to a general [[harm principle]]. The general harm principle fails to consider the possibility of other sanctions to prevent harm, and the effectiveness of [[criminalization]] as a chosen option. Those other sanctions include civil courts, laws of [[tort]] and [[regulation]]. Having criminal remedies in place is seen as a "last resort" since such actions often infringe personal liberties &ndash; [[incarceration]], for example, prevents the freedom of movement. In this sense, law making that places a greater emphasis on [[human rights]], such as the [[European Convention on Human Rights]], falls into the ''de minimis'' category. Most crimes of direct action ([[murder]], [[rape]], [[assault]], for example) are generally not affected by such a stance, but do require greater justification in less clear cases.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Principles of Criminal Law |edition=3 |first=Andrew |last=Ashworth |publisher=Oxford University Press |year=1999 |location=Oxford |isbn=978-0-19-876557-8 |page=33}}{{Request quotation|date=August 2019}}</ref>

The ''de minimis'' rule in North American [[Drug prohibition law|drug law]] requires a ''usable'' quantity of the substance in question before charges can be brought, known as the ''minority rule''.<ref>{{cite book|last=MacFarlane|first=Bruce A.|title=Drug offences in Canada|year=1986|isbn=978-0-88804-032-9|page=565|chapter=De minimis non curat lex|publisher=Canada Law Book }}</ref>

In Canada, ''de minimis'' is often used as a standard of whether a criminal offence is made out at a preliminary stage. For a charge of second degree murder, the test being: "could the jury reasonably conclude that accused actions were a contributing cause, beyond ''de minimis'', of the victim's death."<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/2008/2008onca544/2008onca544.html|title=''R. v. J.S.R. (a young person)'', 2008 ONCA 544 |date=7 July 2008 |publisher= [[Canadian Legal Information Institute]] |website=canlii.org}}</ref>

===Risk assessment===
{{see also|materiality (auditing)}}
In [[risk assessment]], it refers to the highest level of risk that is still too small to be of concern. Therefore, only risk levels above this de minimis level must be addressed and managed. Some refer to this as a "virtually safe" level.<ref>{{cite web |publisher=National Library of Medicine |url=http://sis.nlm.nih.gov/enviro/glossaryr.html |title=Toxicology Glossary – Risk ''De minimis'' |access-date=14 July 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070827183144/http://sis.nlm.nih.gov/enviro/glossaryr.html |archive-date=2007-08-27}}</ref>
It has applications in the fields of auditing, modeling, and engineering, and may refer to situations of low (negligible) risk. It can be verified in ASA 1.{{clarify|date=July 2016}}

=== Charity tax deductions ===
In Australia donations to charities are tax deductible if they equal or exceed $2. The amount hasn't changed since decimal currency replaced pounds, shillings and pence in 1966. $2 is equivalent to £1. Inflation has since rendered $2 trivial.

=== Copyright ===
[[File:The Dark Knight movie poster - censored copyright.jpg|thumb|This movie poster is likely subject to copyright and strict interpretation of copyright could argue that the image focuses on the poster too much, hence it has been censored in this image]]
Courts will occasionally not uphold a claim to [[copyright]] on modified [[public domain]] material if the changes are deemed to be ''de minimis''.<ref>{{Cite journal | last1 = Webbink | first1 = M. | last2 = Johnny | first2 = O. | last3 = Miller | first3 = M. | title = Copyright in Open Source Software – Understanding the Boundaries | doi = 10.5033/ifosslr.v2i1.30 | journal = International Free and Open Source Software Law Review | volume = 2 | year = 2010 | issue = 1 | url = http://www.ifosslr.org/ifosslr/article/view/30 | doi-access = free }}</ref> Similarly, courts have dismissed [[copyright infringement]] cases on the grounds that the alleged infringer's use of the copyrighted work (such as [[Sampling (music)|sampling]]) was so insignificant as to be ''de minimis''. For example, the ''[[NBA 2K]]'' video games that included copyrighted tattoos in the recreation of the players' likenesses were found to be in ''de minimis'' and not copyright-violating.<ref>{{cite web | url = https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr-esq/nba-2k-publisher-beats-copyright-suit-lebron-james-tattoos-1286847 | title = 'NBA 2K' Publisher Beats Copyright Suit Over LeBron James' Tattoos | first = Eriq | last =Gardner | date = March 29, 2020 | access-date = March 29, 2020 | work = [[The Hollywood Reporter]] }}</ref> However, in ''[[Bridgeport Music, Inc. v. Dimension Films]]'', such a ruling was overturned on appeal, the US appeals court explicitly declining to recognize a ''de minimis'' standard for digital sampling.<ref>{{cite web|last=Heins|first=Marjorie|title=Trashing the Copyright Balance|url=http://www.fepproject.org/commentaries/bridgeport.html|work=The Free Expression Policy Project|date=2004-09-21}}</ref>
"De minimis" was also invoked in the ''James Newton v. [[Beastie Boys]]'' copyright infringement lawsuit, where a 6-second sample of Newton's piece ''Choir'' was used in ''[[Pass the Mic]]''; Newton lost the case.

==== In India ====
The principle of ''de minimis non curat lex'' can be used as a defense in India in cases of copyright infringement. The important issue is whether the de minimis principle could be used as a separate defence from fair use under section 52 of the Indian Copyright Act. In ''India TV Independent News Service Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. v Yashraj Films Pvt. Ltd.'', the court discussed the applicability of ''de minimis'' principle at length. Before this case the position was not very clear concerning the applicability. The facts of the case were that five words were copied from a song of five stanzas. After applying the five well-known factors commonly considered by courts in applying ''de minimis'', the court reached the conclusion that the infraction is trivial and attracts the defence of ''de minimis''.<ref>Andrew Inest, "A Theory of ''De Minimis'' and a Proposal for Its Application in Copyright", 21 ''[[Berkeley Technology Law Journal]]'', 945 (2006)</ref><ref>{{Cite web|date=2020-08-14|title=Is It Fair (Use)? De Minimis As Defense In Copyright Infringement|url=https://www.irglobal.com/article/is-it-fair-use-de-minimis-as-defense-in-copyright-infringement/|access-date=2021-04-08|website=IR Global|language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Interns|first=Intepat|date=2020-07-29|title=The Role of De Minimis in Copyright Law|url=https://www.intepat.com/blog/copyright/the-role-of-de-minimis-in-copyright-law/|access-date=2021-04-08|website=Intepat IP|language=en-US}}</ref>

=== Duties and taxes on imports ===
The ''de minimis'' threshold is the value of a shipment that can be imported without payment of customs duties (import [[Tariff|tariffs]]) or taxes (such as the [[value-added tax]] in the EU).  
In the United States, the ''de minimis'' import threshold was raised to $800 from $200 per person per day in 2016 to facilitate trade and to save on enforcement costs.<ref>{{ cite web |title=De Minimis Value Increases to $800 {{!}} U.S. Customs and Border Protection |url=https://www.cbp.gov/newsroom/national-media-release/de-minimis-value-increases-800 |access-date=2024-09-14 |website=www.cbp.gov |language=en}}</ref><ref name=Economist>{{cite news | url=https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2024/06/27/how-chinese-goods-dodge-american-tariffs | title=How Chinese goods dodge American tariffs: Policymakers are unsure what to do about a tricky loophole | date=27 June 2024 | work=The Economist }}</ref>
The change meant the U.S. had one of the highest ''de minimis'' levels in the world.  By comparison, in 2024 the duty-free threshold was $673 in Australia, $166 in the EU, and $71 in Japan (measured in U.S. dollars).<ref name=EIU/>

In September 2024, the U.S. took executive action following an "exponential" increase in the number of ''de minimis'' shipments over the previous decade, from approximately 140 million to over one billion a year.<ref name=WH>{{Cite web |author=The White House |date=13 September 2024 |title=FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces New Actions to Protect American Consumers, Workers, and Businesses by Cracking Down on De Minimis Shipments with Unsafe, Unfairly Traded Products |url=https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/09/13/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-new-actions-to-protect-american-consumers-workers-and-businesses-by-cracking-down-on-de-minimis-shipments-with-unsafe-unfairly-traded-products/ |access-date=14 October 2024 |website=The White House |language=en-US}}</ref>
New regulations require additional data (such as the identity of the person claiming the exemption, and the 10-digit tariff classification number), and exclude products subject to tariffs under Sections 201 (mostly solar panels), 232 (steel/aluminum), and 301 (includes textiles, apparel and footwear).<ref name=EIU/><ref name=Nova>{{Cite web | first1=Annie |last1= Nova | first2=Gabrielle | last2=Fonrouge |date=13 September 2024 |title=Biden targets Shein, Temu with new rules to curb alleged 'abuse' of U.S. trade loophole |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2024/09/13/de-minimis-shein-temu-biden-china-rules.html |access-date=14 September 2024 |website=CNBC |language=en}}</ref><ref name=WH/>
The surge in ''de minimis'' shipments was largely attributed to e-commerce platforms, particularly those based in China such as [[Shein]] and [[Temu]], which ship directly to U.S. consumers.<ref name=WH/><ref>{{Cite web |last=askstraight |date=2024-09-14 |title=Biden Targets Shein and Temu to Close Trade Loophole Abuse |url=https://askstraight.com/2024/09/14/biden-administration-targets-chinese-retailers-shein-and-temu-to-curb-trade-loophole-abuse/ |access-date=2024-09-14 |website=askstraight.com |language=en-US}}</ref>
Shein and Temu are likely responsible for more than 30% of all packages shipped to the U.S. daily under the ''de minimis'' provision, and their shipments could be greatly reduced since Section 301 tariffs cover approximately 70% of textile and apparel imports from China.<ref name=WH/><ref name=Nova/>
According to a congressional report, Shein and Temu paid no import duties in 2022, while bricks-and-mortar rivals [[H&M]] and [[Gap Inc.|Gap]] paid $205 million and $700 million, respectively.<ref name=Economist/><ref name=Nova/>
In April 2025, the U.S. announced it would close the ''de minimis'' duty exemption for China beginning May 2 and for all countries at a future date.<ref name=":40">{{Cite web |title=De minimis shipping from China ending in May, other countries at risk |url=https://www.supplychaindive.com/news/de-minimis-china-trump-elimination-tariffs/744313/ |access-date=April 9, 2025 |website=Supply Chain Dive |language=en-US}}</ref> The measure was taken at the urging of senior counselor for trade and manufacturing [[Peter Navarro]], who successfully overcame objections from [[FedEx]] and [[United Parcel Service]].<ref name=":37">{{Cite news |last=Kranish |first=Michael |last2=Stein |first2=Jeff |last3=Svitek |first3=Patrick |last4=Tucker |first4=Brianna |last5=Vazquez |first5=Maegan |last6=Morse |first6=Clara Ence |last7=Zakrzewski |first7=Cat |last8=Schaffer |first8=Aaron |last9=Melgar |first9=Luis |date=2025-04-26 |title=How Peter Navarro went from Democrat to inmate to Trump’s tariff guru |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/04/26/peter-navarro-tariffs-trump-china/ |access-date=2025-04-26 |work=[[The Washington Post]] |language=en-US |issn=0190-8286}}</ref>

Other countries are reviewing their tax and duty-free exemptions so as to avoid providing an advantage to low-value imports.  For example, the European Union and South Africa have proposed the elimination of duty-free ''de minimis'' exemptions.<ref name=EIU>{{cite news | work=Economist Intelligence Unit | title=US moves to crack down on de minimis shipments | url=https://www.eiu.com/n/us-moves-to-crack-down-on-de-minimis-shipments/  | date=19 September 2024 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-07-03/eu-to-consider-closing-off-duty-exemption-that-aids-shein-temu 
 | first=Alberto | last=Nardelli | date=3 July 2024 | title=EU to Consider Closing Off Duty Exemption That Aids Shein, Temu | work=Bloomberg }}</ref>
Since 2021, there has been no ''de minimis'' exemption for imports from value-added tax in the EU.<ref>{{cite web | url=https://www.loyensloeff.com/l-l_e-commerce-en.pdf | title=New VAT e-commerce rules as of 1 July 2021 | access-date=31 October 2024 | publisher= Loyens & Loeff }}</ref>{{rp|2}} <ref>{{cite web | url=https://taxation-customs.ec.europa.eu/customs-4/customs-procedures-import-and-export/customs-procedures/customs-formalities-low-value-consignments_en#:~:text=Customs%20implications&text=They%20abolish%20the%20VAT%20exemption,IOSS)%20and%20the%20special%20arrangements. | publisher=European Commission: Business, Economy, Euro; Taxation and Customs Union | title=Customs formalities for low value consignments: New VAT and customs e-commerce rules for the import of low value consignments as of 1 July 2021 | access-date=31 October 2024 }}</ref>

===Planning===
In environmental planning in New Zealand,  the use of the term 'de minimis' is common in the legal and planning professions. While not defined under the Resource Management Act 1991, it is commonly used in  case law concerning an assessment of environmental effect, e.g. "the potential adverse effect of one additional road user on the crossing is considered to be ''de minimis''." It is used when an actual or potential effect may exist, but is so minor that it is close to negligible or zero in nature.

===Education===
In ''Endrew v. Douglas County School District'', the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled, on March 22, 2017, that the [[Individuals with Disabilities Education Act]] (IDEA) requires more than ''de minimis'' efforts to provide equivalent educational opportunity to students with disabilities.<ref>''[https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/16pdf/15-827_0pm1.pdf Endrew vs. Douglas County School District]''</ref> The decision reversed a previous decision by the [[U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit]].

===Logistics===
A de minimis threshold is a value set by a country to apply customs [[Duty (tax)|duty]] and tax rates on imported goods. De minimis refers to the minimum value of the goods below which no duties and taxes are collected by the [[Customs]]. The low value of such items makes it counterproductive to apply normal customs procedures. The threshold varies from country to country. In addition, some countries do not have a de minimis rule, so everything gets taxed; other countries do not have customs duties, so nothing gets taxed.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Brief understanding of Deminimis values |url=https://forwardvia.com/deminimis-values |access-date=2022-07-12 |website=Forwardvia |language=en}}</ref>

=== Christian theology ===
The principle of ''de minimis non curat Lex'' has been commonly used in defence of the [[historical reliability of the Gospels]]. F. W. Upham used the term when speaking of "the [...] minor differences that make up the larger part of the current argument against the [[Gospel|Gospels]]."<ref>{{Cite book |last=Upham |first=Francis William |title=Thoughts on the Holy Gospels: How They Came to be in Manner and Form as They are |publisher=Phillips & Hunt |year=1881 |pages=139–140 |language=English}}</ref> [[Simon Greenleaf|Simon Greenleaf's]] ''[[Testimony of the Evangelists]]'' is perhaps the most famous application of legal rules to the Christian Gospels.

===Miscellaneous examples===
Following [[bus deregulation in Great Britain]] in 1986, small contracts for supplementary local bus services could be let by local authorities without competitive tendering. The Department for Transport's "Guidance on New De Minimis Rules for Bus Subsidy Contracts" (2005) notes that "The [[Transport Act 1985]] (as amended by the [[Transport Act 2000|2000 Transport Act]]) introduced the provisions which govern the duties of local passenger transport authorities to secure local bus services where these would not otherwise be met. In the majority of cases these services have to be secured through competitive tender. The Service Subsidy Agreements (Tendering) Regulations provided local authorities with the scope to let any individual bus subsidy contract in any one year up to a certain maximum value without the need to competitively tender (the ''de minimis'' limits). There was also a maximum value that ''de minimis'' contracts could be let with any one operator in any one year."<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://dft.gov.uk/pgr/regional/buses/gen/guidanceonnewdeminimisrulesf3568.html|title=Guidance on New De Minimis Rules for Bus Subsidy Contracts|publisher=Department for Transport|date=22 June 2005|archive-url=http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20121107103953/http://dft.gov.uk/pgr/regional/buses/gen/guidanceonnewdeminimisrulesf3568.html|archive-date=7 November 2012}}</ref>

Under the ''de minimis'' provision of the [[World Trade Organization]]'s [[Agreement on Agriculture]] there is no requirement to cap trade-distorting domestic support in any year during which the value of support does not exceed a certain percentage (5–10%) of the national production value per product or of all products taken together if the support is not attributable to any specific product category.{{citation needed|date=August 2019}}

== See also ==
* [[List of Latin phrases]]
* [[Small claims court]]
* [[Sugar bowl (legal maxim)]]

== References ==
{{Reflist}}

==External links==
* {{Wiktionary inline|de minimis|de minimis non curat lex}}
* {{Commons category-inline}}
* {{cite book|last=Wilde|first=Larry|author-link=Larry Wilde|title=The Official Lawyers Joke Book|page=20|publisher=Bantam|year=1982|isbn=9780553201116|quote=[[Limerick (poetry)|Limerick]]: There was a young lawyer named Rex / Who was sadly deficient in sex. / Arraigned for exposure / He said with composure, / 'De minimis non curat lex.'}}

[[Category:Brocards (law)]]
[[Category:Copyright law]]
[[Category:Latin legal terminology]]
[[Category:Legal doctrines and principles]]