Statute of Limitations Calculator

Calculates the operative limitations periods for PAGA claims and underlying Labor Code violations. Distinguishes between the one-year PAGA statute of limitations (from LWDA notice filing) and the varying limitations periods for underlying violations — three years for wage claims under section 338(a), four years under UCL section 17200, and the PAGA-specific lookback from the date of the LWDA notice.

All calculations run in your browser. No data is transmitted or stored.
Interactive · Statute of Limitations Calculator
Maps the PAGA lookback against the underlying limitations period for each violation, and dates every period from the notice you enter. The dated table below makes any overstated penalty-recoverable period visible.
PAGA Notice Date
Lookbacks run from the notice. Section 2699.3(e) excludes every period specified in that section from the time limited for commencing the action: agency review is roughly 65 days, extendable to no more than 120 calendar days from the notice under § 2699.3(c)(2)(B), and § 2699.3(c)(2)(C) keeps the clock tolled beyond that until agency review is complete. The dates below add none of it; treat tolling as a separate extension rather than part of the statutory lookback.
Demand Calculated Over
ViolationPAGA StartUnderlying SOLUCL StartNotes
§ 226.7
Meal/Rest Premiums
(3yr)Premium is a 'wage' (Murphy) — 3-year SOL. PAGA penalty limited to 1-year lookback.
§ 510
Overtime
(3yr)Unpaid OT is wages with 3-year SOL. PAGA penalty lookback is 1 year.
§ 226(a)
Wage Statements
(1yr)Both PAGA and underlying SOL are 1 year. UCL extends to 4.
§ 203
Waiting Time
(3yr)N/APenalty, not wage — but § 203(b) supplies its own 3-year period for the direct claim, whether or not unpaid wages are also sought (Pineda). PAGA penalty lookback is 1 year. Not recoverable as UCL restitution.
§ 2802
Expense Reimb.
(3yr)3-year SOL for underlying claim. PAGA penalty lookback is 1 year.
§ 1197.1
Minimum Wage
(3yr)Specific penalty: $100/$250. Underlying wage claim has 3-year SOL.
§ 201/202
Final Pay
(3yr)Underlying obligation has 3-year SOL. PAGA penalty lookback is 1 year.
§ 2751
Commission Agmt.
(3yr)Written commission agreement requirement. 3-year underlying SOL.
Plaintiff Overstatement Risk
If the demand calculates penalties across the full 3-year period:
67%
of their penalty demand covers non-PAGA periods
7 of 8 violations have longer underlying SOL
Defense Reduction Opportunity
Correcting the lookback period in a 3-year demand:
~67%
penalty exposure reduction
Does not apply to § 226(a), whose underlying SOL is also 1 year; § 203 carries its own 3-year period under Pineda
Why the Columns Split
One distinction drives every row. Code of Civil Procedure § 338(a) gives three years to “an action upon a liability created by statute, other than a penalty or forfeiture.” Section 340(a) gives one year to “an action upon a statute for a penalty or forfeiture, if the action is given to an individual, or to an individual and the state.” PAGA is an action given to an individual and the state to recover a penalty, so it sits in § 340(a); the unpaid wages underneath it are a statutory liability that is not a penalty, so they sit in § 338(a). That is the whole of the PAGA-versus-underlying spread in the table above.
Section 340(a) then carries its own exception — “except if the statute imposing it prescribes a different limitation” — and § 203(b) is such a statute: suit for waiting-time penalties may be filed “at any time before the expiration of the statute of limitations on an action for the wages from which the penalties arise.” That is why the § 203 row shows three years for the direct claim without being an anomaly. It is § 340(a) operating as written, not an exception to it.
Strategic Analysis: PAGA vs. Class Action Lookback
This is where PAGA and class action defense diverge most sharply. In a class action, the 3-year (or 4-year UCL) statute of limitations controls the damages period — every overtime underpayment, every missed meal premium, and every unreimbursed expense going back 3-4 years is potentially recoverable as wages. In a PAGA action, the penalty exposure is limited to one year — but plaintiff's counsel routinely conflates the two, demanding PAGA penalties for the full 3-4 year period.
The defense opportunity: when you receive a PAGA demand that calculates penalties across a 3-year period, respond with this analysis. Strip every penalty calculation back to the one-year PAGA period. The wage claims for years 2-3 survive as direct claims or UCL claims — but the per-employee-per-pay-period penalties (which are the bulk of PAGA exposure) apply only to the most recent year. On a 3-year demand, this correction alone reduces the penalty component by approximately 67%.
When both tracks are pending: the class action damages cover the full wage limitations period; the PAGA action covers 1 year of penalties. The exposure model must calculate these separately. A common defense error is presenting a single blended number that understates the wage damages while overstating the PAGA penalties. Separate the calculations to give the carrier an accurate picture of both tracks — and to identify which track drives the settlement value.
Read the AnalysisRecoverable vs. Non-Recoverable Penalties Under PAGA — see PAGA lookback vs. underlying SOL distinction →
For illustrative purposes only. CCP § 340(a) (one year for “an action upon a statute for a penalty or forfeiture, if the action is given to an individual, or to an individual and the state, except if the statute imposing it prescribes a different limitation” — the basis for PAGA's one-year period, and the clause that carves out § 203); CCP § 338(a) (three years for “a liability created by statute, other than a penalty or forfeiture” — the underlying wage claims); Lab. Code § 203(b) and Pineda v. Bank of America (2010) 50 Cal.4th 1389 (single 3-year period for waiting-time penalties, whether or not unpaid wages are also sought); Bus. & Prof. Code § 17208 (4-year UCL). Lab. Code § 2699.3(e) excludes the periods specified in that section from the time limited to commence the action, and § 2699.3(c)(2)(C) continues the tolling where agency review runs past the 65-day period — § 2699.3(d) is a different provision, the once-per-12-months limit on availing oneself of the notice-and-cure procedure. Further tolling, equitable estoppel, and continuing violation theories may extend applicable periods.
For illustrative purposes only. This tool does not constitute legal advice.