Is it legal to charge for song requests? PRS, ASCAP and BMI explained for DJs

Every DJ who has ever had a twenty pressed into their hand for a track has wondered, briefly, whether that was allowed.

Short answer: no UK or US music-licensing rule stops you. Charging for a song request does not create a new obligation to PRS for Music, PPL, ASCAP, BMI or SESAC, because those organisations license the public performance of music and that licence belongs to the venue or event organiser, not to the DJ in the booth — ASCAP and BMI both say so in writing, quoted below. What the money does change is your tax position, and possibly your contract with the venue. Those are the two things worth your attention. (This is general information, not legal advice — see the note at the end.)

The rest of this piece separates the licensing question from the money question, because almost every article online mashes them together.

Who actually pays for the music licence — the venue or the DJ?

The venue. Every major performing rights organisation says so in writing.

ASCAP answers the question head-on: "Some people mistakenly assume that musicians and entertainers must obtain licenses to perform copyrighted music, or that businesses where music is performed can shift their responsibility to musicians or entertainers. The law says all who participate in, or are responsible for, performances of music are legally responsible. Since it is the business owner who obtains the ultimate benefit from the performance, it is the business owner who obtains the license."

BMI is blunter. Asked whether DJs and entertainers are responsible for obtaining the necessary licences for their public performance, BMI's FAQ answers: "No." It adds that "since it's the business or organization that is authorizing the performance of music, BMI offers a license to the owner of the establishment."

SESAC draws the same line: paying a performer "is compensation for providing the service of entertainment," while the songwriters and publishers whose works get performed "still need to be compensated" separately by the business.

In the UK the structure is the same. PPL PRS puts it as: "If you play or perform music in your business or organisation, the chances are you need TheMusicLicence," on the basis that under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 "permission is needed from the relevant copyright holders." PRS for Music frames it around the business too: "If you play music to your customers, audiences or users — whether in-person or online — you'll most likely need a music licence."

Note the caveat buried in the ASCAP wording, because nobody quotes it: all who participate in a performance are legally responsible. By ASCAP's own account the licence sits with the venue because that is where the commercial benefit lands — not because a DJ is legally invisible. That is why NADJ tells its members: "As a DJ, you may not be the licence holder for the premises, but you still have a professional interest in checking the basics."

Does taking money for a request change what the venue owes its PRO?

Nothing published says it does.

Under US law the public performance right in 17 U.S.C. §106(4) does not turn on whether anyone made money. ASCAP's own definition is purely about place and audience: "a public performance of a musical work occurs when the work is played in, or transmitted to, a place open to the public, or to a group outside a normal circle of family and social acquaintances," and it explicitly includes "playing recorded music in businesses over speakers or by DJs."

The clearest corner of US law where paying the performer flips the outcome does not help you either: §110(4) exempts certain nonprofit performances only if there is no "purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage" and no "payment of any fee or other compensation for the performance to any of its performers, promoters, or organizers." A commercial bar or club will not qualify for that exemption anyway — but if you are DJing a genuine charity or community event that was relying on §110(4), taking paid requests is the kind of thing that could put the exemption in doubt. Ask the organiser.

In the UK, section 19 of the CDPA 1988 makes performance in public a restricted act, with no profit test attached to it either.

Tariffs are the other half of the question. BMI states that rates for nightclubs and bars "depend on whether the music is live or recorded, whether it's audio only or audio visual, the number of nights per week music is offered, whether admission is charged and several other factors." Money handed directly from a punter to a DJ is not in that list — but "several other factors" is doing real work in that sentence. No PRO publishes a position on paid song requests. If the request money is routed through the venue's till or booked as venue turnover, a revenue-based tariff could in principle be touched. That scenario is genuinely undocumented. Do not let a blog, including this one, be your answer on it.

What actually changes when a request is paid for?

Is there anything the DJ personally needs a licence for?

Yes, and it has nothing to do with requests. Copying music is a different restricted act from performing it. NADJ warns: "If you copy music from one format to another, store music for DJ use, or maintain multiple digital libraries, separate licensing considerations may arise."

A UK professional dubbing licence aimed at DJs and fitness instructors has been sold under the name ProDub. Be careful here: checked on 7 August 2026, every PRS for Music URL that used to describe it — including the DJ-mixes and ProDub pages still listed in search results — redirects to their general Get a music licence page, which does not mention it. Prices and tiers get quoted second-hand on forums and DJ blogs constantly; those numbers are not authoritative and this article will not repeat them. If copying matters to your setup, ask PRS for Music and PPL directly whether the licence still exists and what it now costs.

What about your contract with the venue?

This is where DJs actually get burnt, and it is contract, not copyright. Some residency and agency contracts claim a cut of anything you earn on the night; some promoters ban soliciting money from the crowd outright. None of that is a PRO question. Settle it with whoever books you, before the night, in writing.

How is this money taxed?

It is income, full stop. A card payment is no less declarable than a note in a bucket.

In the UK, HMRC's trading allowance is "a tax exemption of up to £1,000 a year for individuals with trading income." Above that gross figure you must register for Self Assessment by 5 October in the following tax year. Note that GOV.UK's guidance on tips is written for employed workers — "You still have to pay Income Tax on tips and may have to pay National Insurance" — and a self-employed DJ is on the self-employment track instead.

In the US, the IRS treats you as self-employed if you are "otherwise in business for yourself (including in a part-time business or as a gig worker)," and you must file "if your net earnings from self-employment were $400 or more." Self-employment tax generally applies on top of income tax.

How do request platforms handle the money?

Two technical patterns exist, and they behave very differently when a DJ says no.

The first charges the card immediately and refunds if the track is not played. The customer's money leaves their account and comes back days later. The second uses an authorisation hold: Stripe's documentation puts it as "Authorizing a payment guarantees the amount by holding it on the customer's payment method," with capture as a separate later step. Cancel instead of capturing and the hold is released. No charge, no refund object, nothing to chase. Stripe does flag one wrinkle: card statements from some issuers "don't always distinguish between authorizations and captured (settled) payments," so a pending line can still show up.

REQ is built on the second pattern. A clubber scans a QR code, lands on a web page with nothing to install, picks a track and an amount, and pays through Stripe Checkout with capture_method set to manual. The DJ gets a push notification and accepts or declines from their phone. Accept captures the authorisation. Decline, or let it time out, and the authorisation is cancelled — the card was never charged. A DJ can also accept for free: play the track and release the hold. REQ takes 20% and absorbs the Stripe fees; the DJ's 80% lands on their Stripe Connect balance at capture, and pays out on Stripe's normal schedule.

Being straight about the gaps: REQ is in beta, the DJ app is iOS-only with Android in progress, and there is no Serato, rekordbox or Traktor integration — requests land on your phone, not in your library.

Whatever platform you use, none of this touches the licensing analysis above. The venue still needs its licence, and you still declare the income.

This is not legal advice. Licensing law and PRO practice vary by country, and your specific position depends on the venue, the event and your contract. Confirm anything that matters with the relevant organisation — PRS for Music, PPL PRS, ASCAP, BMI, SESAC — or with a solicitor or attorney. For tax, speak to an accountant or check HMRC and the IRS directly.