DoorDash and Uber Eats launched a joint legal strike Thursday, filing suit in Manhattan federal court to stop two New York City laws they argue compel them to solicit tips before checkout — an act they say violates their constitutional rights and reshapes customer interactions in ways they never agreed to.

Companies Say NYC Forced Them to Deliver a Message They Reject

In their complaint, the rival food-delivery giants refer to the two statutes — Local Laws 107 and 108 of 2025 — as the “Tipping Law,” alleging the rules force them to communicate a “government-mandated message” about the “controversial subject” of tipping that the companies would not otherwise present.

They argue NYC commandeered their digital real estate and scripted their customer communications.

“By commandeering space on plaintiffs’ online platforms and dictating the content, timing, and manner of plaintiffs’ communications with their customers regarding the discretionary act of tipping, the law violates core constitutional protections,” the suit states.

Tip Fatigue, Higher Costs, and Fears of Fewer Orders

DoorDash and Uber describe the fallout as “concrete and compounding,” citing rising costs of living, elevated minimum-pay requirements, and growing consumer “tip fatigue.”

According to their filing, the laws require a predelivery 10% tip suggestion, a move the companies fear will cause customers to abandon orders at checkout.

“Fewer orders would cause reduced business opportunities and revenue,” they wrote, adding that fewer orders would also cut earnings for delivery workers and hurt merchant partnerships, damaging their goodwill.

What the NYC Laws Require

Local Law 107 (2025)

Requires apps to:

• Offer gratuity options chosen at their discretion

• Include an option to tip at least 10%

• Give customers the option to manually enter any amount

Local Law 108 (2025)

Requires platforms to:

• Present tipping opportunities in plain language

• Display them before or during order placement

• Clarify customers are not required to tip

• Allow post-order tip adjustments

Both laws take effect Jan. 26, 2026.

Companies Claim First Amendment Violations and Retaliation

DoorDash and Uber contend the laws deprive them of the right to choose whether, how, or when to discuss tipping with customers — and worse, that forced messages may appear as company-endorsed recommendations supporting 10% predelivery tipping, especially in a city where their fees have already risen due to minimum-earnings mandates.

They also accuse the city of retaliation, asserting NYC imposed these laws after the companies changed their tipping flow in response to the city’s December 2023 minimum-pay rule, shifting tipping prompts to appear only after an order was completed.

Property Rights Argument: A ‘Regulatory Taking’

The companies allege the law violates the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments by taking control over their platforms without compensation.

“The Tipping Law improperly nullifies plaintiffs’ prior value-enhancing product decisions, forecloses future product innovations, and diminishes plaintiffs’ platforms’ economic value,” they argued.

Connected Litigation: Instacart’s Own NYC Challenge

The suit follows a Dec. 2 filing from Instacart challenging NYC’s Local Law 124 and several related regulations, including the same Local Laws 107 and 108. Instacart argues the legal framework creates a new category of “third-party grocery delivery services” and mandates workers be paid the restaurant-delivery minimum wage.

DoorDash Says Mandated Prompts Are ‘Forced Taxation’

In a Thursday blog post, DoorDash accused NYC of turning tipping into an indirect tax.

“While tipping remains voluntary, the fact is city law requires DoorDash to ask consumers to tip prior to completing checkout and dictates the amounts of suggested tip displayed,” the company wrote. “A reminder to tip is a courtesy; a forced solicitation may as well be a tax.”

DoorDash stressed it supports fair pay for its “dashers” but opposes approaches that burden customers or limit product flexibility.

Representation

• DoorDash is represented by Gabriel Herrmann, Nicholaus C. Mills, Michael Holecek, Katie Townsend, and Connor P. Mui of Gibson Dunn & Crutcher LLP.

• Uber is represented by John C. Quinn, Trisha Anderson and Chloe Goodwin of Hecker Fink LLP.

• NYC counsel information was not immediately available.

A spokesperson for New York City Hall did not immediately respond to a request for comment.