The federal affidavit for appealing without fees shrinks to two pages on December 1.

On December 1, 2026, the affidavit a federal appellant signs to seek in forma pauperis status will shrink to two pages and eight questions. The Supreme Court adopted the replacement for Form 4 on April 8, 2026, and Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. transmitted it to Congress that day.

The new Form 4 asks eight questions

Form 4 is the "Affidavit Accompanying Motion for Permission to Appeal in Forma Pauperis." It accompanies a motion to proceed on appeal without prepaying fees.

Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 24(a)(1) requires a party moving in the district court for IFP status on appeal to attach an affidavit showing, in the detail prescribed by Form 4, an inability to pay or give security for fees and costs. The affidavit also must claim an entitlement to redress and state the issues the party intends to present on appeal.

The revised form's first page contains the sworn statement. The applicant states, under penalty of perjury and citing 28 U.S.C. § 1746 and 18 U.S.C. § 1621, that poverty prevents payment of the appeal's filing fees or the posting of a bond for them. The applicant also states a belief that relief is warranted, then signs and dates the form.

A notice below the statement says the court may grant IFP status if the applicant shows both an inability to pay the filing fees and a non-frivolous issue on appeal. A lined box follows, headed "My issues on appeal are:"

The second page asks for:

1. Monthly take-home pay from work.
2. Monthly income from other sources, including unemployment benefits, alimony, child support, public assistance, pension and Social Security.
3. Monthly housing costs, including rent and utilities.
4. Monthly costs for necessary expenses, including food, medical care, childcare and transportation.
5. The total value of all assets, including bank accounts, investments and the market value of a car or house.
6. Total debt, including credit cards, a mortgage and student loans.
7. The number of people, including the applicant, whom the applicant supports.
8. Whether the applicant receives SNAP, Medicaid or SSI.

The form says those benefit programs may have different names in some states. It also provides an open box for anything else explaining why the applicant cannot pay.

A prisoner appealing a judgment in a civil action or proceeding must attach a statement certified by the appropriate institutional officer. The statement must show all receipts, expenditures and balances during the preceding six months in the prisoner's institutional accounts. A separate certified statement is required for each account held at multiple institutions.

The oath's wording also changes. The old form referred to "docket fees" and being "entitled to redress." The new form refers to "filing fees" and being "entitled to relief."

The revised form drops spouse and employment-history tables

The old Form 4 asked for income during the preceding 12 months and expected income for the next month. Its table listed employment, self-employment, rental income, interest and dividends, gifts, alimony, child support, retirement, disability, unemployment, public assistance and other sources. It had separate columns for the applicant and spouse.

It also sought two years of employment history for both the applicant and spouse, including employer, address, dates and gross monthly pay. Other sections asked for cash on hand, each bank account, home and other real estate, and up to two motor vehicles identified by make, year, model and registration number.

The form requested the identity of every person or business owing money to the applicant or spouse. It sought the name, relationship and age of every dependent. Its monthly expense table contained roughly two dozen categories for the applicant and spouse, including insurance, taxes, installment payments, department store accounts, laundry and dry-cleaning, and recreation.

The old form also asked whether major financial changes were expected during the next 12 months, whether the applicant had spent or expected to spend money on attorney fees for the lawsuit, the applicant's city and state of legal residence, a daytime phone number, age, years of schooling and the last four digits of the Social Security number. None of those questions appears in the revised form.

Before publishing, the Archivar editorial desk laid the Supreme Court's April 8 blackline of the old form beside the clean two-page version and counted what was struck through: the spouse columns, the two-year employment histories, the vehicle make-and-registration lines, and the last four digits of the Social Security number all appear only in strikethrough.

The committee traced the form's expansion to 1998

When the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure took effect in 1968, Form 4 contained five questions. Congress enacted the Prison Litigation Reform Act in 1996, amending 28 U.S.C. § 1915. In 1998, Form 4 became a much more detailed questionnaire, including numerous questions about the applicant's spouse.

The Advisory Committee on Appellate Rules wrote that the statute does not require an intrusive inquiry into a spouse's information. The pre-1998 form had no spouse questions, and nothing in the PLRA refers to spouses. The committee acknowledged that a spouse's income may sometimes be relevant, as may the income of other family members whom the old form never asked about.

The committee also examined the statute's reference in 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1) to an affidavit containing "a statement of all assets such prisoner possesses." It noted that the statutory text switches between "person" and "such prisoner," while courts have generally read it to require every person seeking IFP status to state their assets. The new question asking for "the total value of all your assets" was therefore consistent with that requirement, even though it does not enumerate each asset.

The revised form leaves courts free to seek more information in a particular case. The committee gave as an example an applicant reporting little income and few assets but substantial expenses.

The committee learned from the circuits that IFP status is denied much more often for failure to present a non-frivolous issue on appeal than for failure to show indigency. The revised form places the issues box on page one and identifies the non-frivolous-issue requirement before the financial questions.

Question 8 asks about SNAP, Medicaid and SSI because receipt of those benefits reflects a means test already conducted by another government agency. That information may provide a shorter path to assessing eligibility.

The committee circulated an early draft to each circuit's senior staff attorney, receiving an "overwhelmingly positive" response. Written comments and hearing testimony after publication were mostly positive, and the committee adopted some ease-of-use suggestions. It declined to add provisions for cases involving Criminal Justice Act counsel, reasoning that the form should remain simple for people without counsel and that applicants with appointed counsel can rely on counsel.

The Standing Committee approved the proposal unanimously in June 2025. The Judicial Conference approved it at its September 2025 session, and the package went to the Supreme Court on October 16, 2025.

The statute and IFP standard do not change

The amendment does not change 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1), which requires the affidavit. Section 1915(a)(2) still requires a prisoner appealing a civil judgment to submit a certified trust fund account statement covering the six months before the notice of appeal.

Section 1915(e)(2)(A) still requires dismissal at any time if the court determines that the allegation of poverty is untrue. The affidavit remains sworn under penalty of perjury.

The standard for granting IFP status also remains unchanged. The committee noted that no rules committee is seeking to establish IFP standards through rulemaking.

FRAP 24(a)(3) is unchanged as well. A party already permitted to proceed IFP in the district court, or found financially unable to obtain an adequate defense in a criminal case, may generally proceed on appeal without further authorization. The exceptions remain a district court certification that the appeal is not taken in good faith, a finding that the party is otherwise not entitled to proceed IFP, or a statute providing otherwise.

The amendment applies to new and pending appellate proceedings

The Supreme Court's order provides that the amendment takes effect December 1, 2026. It governs all proceedings in appellate cases commenced after that date and, "insofar as just and practicable," all proceedings then pending.

That language leaves the treatment of pending appeals to the courts. The revised form may therefore affect a pending matter when its use is just and practicable, but the order does not establish one transition procedure for every circuit.

The revised Form 4 was the only appellate change in the Court's December 1, 2026 package. Proposed amendments to Appellate Rules 29 and 32 concerning amicus curiae disclosures, and to the Appendix on Length Limits, were withdrawn at the rules committee's March 10, 2026 request. Secondary reporting says those proposals are now slated for December 1, 2027. (The Docket covered the Evidence Rule 801 change taking effect the same day separately.)

Firms will need to replace saved forms and intake tables

Firms and legal clinics that keep a saved or pre-filled version of the old multi-page Form 4 will have a superseded form for filings governed by the amendment after December 1, 2026.

Intake worksheets built around the old form's spouse information, employment histories and itemized expense tables will collect information that the revised form does not request. The issues on appeal now appear before the financial questions, reflecting the committee's finding that non-frivolous-issue problems account for more IFP denials than indigency problems.

Archivar, which publishes The Docket, is an operating system for law firms that answers every call 24/7 in English and Spanish, runs intake, manages matters, and remembers everything the firm does. The questions a firm asks at intake are the ones this form now narrows, including for a fee-waiver applicant who calls in Spanish and is answered in Spanish.

On December 1, 2026, Form 4 goes from a multi-page questionnaire to two pages.

The spouse, employment-history and itemized questions are gone; the issues on appeal come first.

The statute, the oath and the court's power to ask for more all stay where they were.