South Carolina
South Carolina has no statute on deposits for services; its Supreme Court’s test decides. In Tate v. LeMaster, a $500 deposit on a land deal, the court held that a sum the parties meant as the measure of the loss from a broken agreement is liquidated damages, the law’s word for a sum agreed in advance, while one meant to punish, or plainly out of proportion to any probable damage, is a penalty whatever it is called. A deposit sized to what a no-show costs, agreed before the client pays, fits that test; one far above the loss risks being a penalty, and then the shop keeps only the loss it can prove.
Does a non-refundable deposit hold up in South Carolina?
The law’s word for a set sum agreed in advance is liquidated damages.
The South Carolina Supreme Court set the test in Tate v. LeMaster, where a seller kept a buyer’s $500 deposit on a land deal: a sum reasonably meant as the agreed measure of compensation for a breach is liquidated damages, and a sum meant to punish, or so large that it is plainly out of proportion to any probable damage, is a penalty whatever the contract calls it. The court added that the words “forfeit” and “forfeiture” have long suggested a penalty, though the parties’ intention governs. It restated the rule in Lewis v. Premium Investment Corp. and applied it in Foreign Academic & Cultural Exchange Services v. Tripon, striking a $36,000 clause because most of it was money already spent, a cost the breach did not cause; a party whose clause fails can still recover the actual damages it proves.
“where the sum stipulated is reasonably intended by the parties as the predetermined measure of compensation for actual damages that might be sustained by reason of nonperformance, the stipulation is for liquidated damages” Tate v. LeMaster, 231 S.C. 429, 99 S.E.2d 39 (1957) · Lewis v. Premium Investment Corp., 351 S.C. 167, 568 S.E.2d 361 (2002) · Foreign Academic & Cultural Exchange Services, Inc. v. Tripon, 394 S.C. 197, 715 S.E.2d 331 (2011)
Showing your refund policy
No refund-policy disclosure statute was found. The Unfair Trade Practices Act (Title 39, Chapter 5) was read in full for “refund,” along with the Uniform Commercial Code’s sales chapter (Title 36, Chapter 2); the Department of Consumer Affairs’ list of every law it enforces names no refund-posting law, and a search of the statehouse site for “refund policy” and “return policy” found none.
Body-art rules and money
S.C. Code Regs. 60-111 § 1003 requires a tattoo facility to state in writing the procedures it performs and what they cost, as a flat fee or an hourly rate, and the client signs to show they were made aware of them before the procedure; a facility that charges by the hour may write down the hourly rate instead of a total. Breaking it is a Class III violation. The rule says nothing about deposits, cancellations or refunds, and it governs tattooing only; the Tattoo Facility Act and the body piercing chapter mention money only as license, permit and inspection fees.
“Tattooing procedures performed by the facility and the charges for such procedures, whether a flat fee or hourly rate, shall be stated in writing, and the client shall be made aware of such charges and procedures as verified by his or her signature, prior to the procedure.” S.C. Code Regs. 60-111 § 1003 · Tattoo Facility Act, S.C. Code §§ 44-34-10 to -110
This page summarizes public law in plain language, with the source each point comes from, read at the source on 2026-09-23. It is not legal advice.