Arizona

For Arizona, performance bond threshold is Both a performance bond and a payment bond must equal the full contract amount; bond amount is One hundred percent of the contract price; claim deadline is suit must be actually filed within one year of the date on which the last of the claimant’s labor was performed or the claimant’s materials were furnished; preliminary notice required is must actually serve the prime contractor with written notice of a bond claim, with confirmed receipt, not later than ninety (90) days following the last date that labor was performed or materials were supplied; statutory citation is Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 34, Chapter 2, Article 2, §§ 34-222-223, verified against its source on 2026-08-17.

Values marked our reading are our classification of what the source says — the source does not print them in those words. The quote below is the evidence for each one; judge it yourself.

What the source says

ARIZONA PUBLIC PROJECTS Arizona’s “Little Miller Act” is set forth in Arizona Revised Statutes § 34-221 (“Surety bond required; suit on bond; limitations”), through A.R.S. § 34-227. It applies to most Arizona public projects at the city, county or state level. Both a performance bond and a payment bond must equal the full contract amount. A.R.S. § 34-222.A.1 and 2. A performance bond is obtained by a subcontractor or general contractor for the protection of the public body awarding the contract A.R.S. § 34-222.A.1, in order to ensure the completion of the contract. By comparison, a payment bond is obtained by the prime contractor for the benefit of subcontractors and suppliers furnishing materials or labor to the project, who may then make a claim against the payment body if they are not paid, as long as they properly served a preliminary notice and bond claim letter. A.R.S. § 34-222.A.2. Required Amount of Bond: One hundred percent of the contract price solely for the protection of claimants supplying labor or material to the contractor or his subcontractors in the prosecution of the work provided for in contracts for the construction, alteration, or repair of the public work. A.R.S. § 34-222.A.1. Labor and Material Covered: Labor or material furnished in the prosecution of the work provided for in such contract, for which the contractor or supplier has not been paid in full. A.R.S. § 34-223.A. Notice Required: Preliminary Twenty (20) Day Notice or a “Ninety (90) Day Bond Claim Letter: None for a subcontractor or a materials supplier having a direct contract with the prime contractor, i.e., the highest tier contractor that is in direct contract with the public entity. A.RS. § 34-223.A. Otherwise, in order to make a claim on the payment bond, a subcontractor or materials supplier must have served a written preliminary 20-day notice in compliance with A.R.S. § 33.992.01(C), (E), (F) and (H); see A.R.S. §34-223(A)(1). Further, the subcontractor or materials supplier, in addition to serving a preliminary notice, must actually serve the prime contractor with written notice of a bond claim, with confirmed receipt, not later than ninety (90) days following the last date that labor was performed or materials were supplied. A.R.S. § 34-223.A(2). That notice must state with substantial accuracy the amount claimed and the name of the party to whom the material was furnished or for whom the labor was supplied. A.R.S. § 34-223.A(2). The notice can be served by any means that provides written, third-party verification of delivery to the contractor at any place the contractor maintains an office or conducts business. Id. The claimant may then file suit on the payment bond against (i) the bond surety, (ii) the prime contractor as the principal on the bond, and (iii) the party with whom the claimant directly contracted, only in the county in which the labor was performed or materials supplied, within one year of the last date of supplying contractually conforming labor or materials. A.R.S. § 34-223.B. By amending A.R.S. § 34-223, the Arizona Legislature overruled the Arizona Court of Appeals in the decision of Cemex Construction Materials South, LLC v. Falcone Brothers & Associates, Inc ., 237 Ariz. 236 (App. 2015). The Court of Appeals ruled in that decision that, under the Arizona Little Miller Act, a prime contractor must receive its preliminary notice by certified mail in order for a ninety (90) day Little Miller Act bond claim notice to be effective, and before the bond claimant may possess a right to foreclose that bond claim. Id. The Court of Appeals had also ruled that if the prime contractor actually receives the preliminary notice within twenty (20) days of the supply date of the amount a subcontractor or supplier claims on its bond claim, those bond claim rights are not rendered invalid by the claimant’s failure to send the preliminary notice by certified mail. Id. Accordingly, if a bond claimant could prove that the general contractor actually received the preliminary notice, the bond claim rights would still be valid. The recently amended version of A.R.S. § 34-223 overrules the appellate opinion and clarifies the confusion that the opinion created, permitting service of the preliminary notice on an Arizona Miller Act project by the same preliminary notice service manner required of lien claimants: first-class mail with a certificate of mailing, registered mail, or certified mail. A.R.S. § 34-223.A(1). Further, the amendment eliminates the requirement for the Miller Act bond claim letter to be served by certified mail, and allows it to be served by any verified form of service. A.R.S. § 34-223.A(2). Practice tip 1 : If up against the ninety-day service deadline, transmit the bond claim letter by all available means, including email with a receipt notice requested, by facsimile without a transmittal cover page so as to allow the fax confirmation to appear on the first page of the notice, by hand delivery, and by overnight delivery initiated not later than the second to last day of the ninety-day period where the ninetieth day falls on a business day, i.e., the eighty-ninth (89th) day, if the 90th day falls on a business-open Friday. Practice tip 2 : There is no certainty that there is forgiveness for the ninetieth day falling on a weekend or judicial holiday. Accordingly, the last business day within the ninety-day period should be considered the last day for the prime contractor to receive the bond claim letter. Practice tip 3 : While only the prime contractor must receive the copy of the bond claim letter, the strategy of also copying the owner (the government office in charge of issuing contracts on the project), any management company making payment, and the customer if the claimant is a materials supplier, is more likely to generate payment than serving only the prime contractor. Time for Suit: No Arizona Miller Act bond claim suit can be commenced within the first ninety (90) days following the date on which the last of the bond claimant’s labor was performed or materials were furnished; under the statute, such suit rights do not even commence for 90 days. A.R.S. § 34-223(A). However, suit must be actually filed within one year of the date on which the last of the claimant’s labor was performed or the claimant’s materials were furnished for which the claim is being made. A.R.S. § 34-223.B. Penalty for Contractor’s Failure to Obtain the Required Miller Act Payment Bond: No statutory provision. Statutory Citation: Arizona Revised Statutes, Title 34, Chapter 2, Article 2, §§ 34-222-223.

— fullertonlaw.com, retrieved 2026-08-17

Source

• fullertonlaw.comhttps://fullertonlaw.com/50-state-summary-payment-bond-law

Last verified against source: 2026-08-17. Due for re-check by 2027-08-17. This page as Markdown · OKF bundle · full dataset as JSON.