SG Singapore Driver
Knowledge base Fitness to drive 18 min read

Prescribed alcohol limit for driving

The Road Traffic Act 1961 prescribed limit is 35 microgrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of breath, or 80 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood, and driving above that limit is an offence under section 67.

alcohol drink-driving Road Traffic Act

Primary source: https://sso.agc.gov.sg/Act/RTA1961?Phrase=microgrammes&ProvIds=pr72-&ViewType=Within&WiAl=1

For the drink-driving provisions in the Road Traffic Act 1961, “prescribed limit” means (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 72):

  • 35 microgrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of breath; or
  • 80 milligrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of blood.

Those figures are the statutory definition in the current version of the Act (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 72). This article does not convert them into “number of drinks.”

The driving offence

Any person who, when driving or attempting to drive a motor vehicle on a road or other public place, has so much alcohol in his or her body that the proportion of it in breath or blood exceeds the prescribed limit, is guilty of an offence (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 67(1)(b)).

Separately, it is also an offence to drive or attempt to drive while unfit to drive through drink, a drug, a psychoactive substance, or an intoxicating substance to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the vehicle (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 67(1)(a)).

The Act defines the location terms used in sections 67 and 68. A “road” includes a public road and another road the public can access, as well as specified roads such as a road within Pulau Bukom, a declared Singapore Armed Forces installation, or a bridge carrying a road. A “public place” can include privately owned premises if the general public or a section of it is permitted to access them, whether freely or for payment (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 2).

Being in charge of a motor vehicle while over the prescribed limit or unfit through drink or drugs is a distinct offence under section 68 (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 68).

Being in charge without driving (s 68)

Section 68 applies when a person is in charge of a motor vehicle on a road or other public place but is not driving it, and is unfit to drive through drink or drugs or over the prescribed alcohol limit. On conviction, the ordinary penalty is a fine of $500–$2,000 or imprisonment of up to 3 months; for a second or subsequent conviction, it is a fine of $1,000–$5,000 and imprisonment of up to 6 months (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 68).

A person is deemed not to have been in charge if they prove both that there was no likelihood they would drive while still unfit or over the limit, and that they had not driven between becoming unfit or exceeding the limit and the material time (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 68).

On a second or subsequent s 68 conviction, the court must order disqualification for at least 12 months, starting on release from prison, unless it finds special reasons to make no order or a shorter one. A previous s 67 conviction counts as a previous s 68 conviction (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 68).

Enhanced punishment for repeat specified offences

Section 67A applies to a person convicted again of a specified offence after having been convicted of two or more specified offences. If the court considers an increased punishment expedient to protect the public or prevent further such offences, it may impose up to three times the otherwise applicable punishment, with imprisonment under this section capped at 10 years (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 67A). The current SSO text records an amendment to section 67A effective 17 August 2026; its specified offences include section 67(1), among other offences. Consult the provision's full list and conditions for any case (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 67A).

Penalties in section 67(1)

On conviction, the person is liable (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 67(1)):

  • to a fine of not less than $2,000 and not more than $10,000, or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 12 months, or to both; and
  • in the case of a second or subsequent conviction, to a fine of not less than $5,000 and not more than $20,000 and to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years.

The figures above are the ordinary penalties in s 67(1); s 67A can allow an increased punishment in the specified repeat-offender circumstances described above. SPF’s current traffic-penalty page lists driving under influence in its criminal-penalties table, with the first- and repeat-offender court penalties and disqualification periods, but does not list a drink-driving composition sum in its composition-fine table. MHA’s official explanation of the 2026 amendments says that all drink-driving cases are prosecuted, as under current practice (SPF, Penalties for Traffic Offences; MHA, Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2026). Companion vault articles cover drink-driving disqualification, being in charge while unfit, and preliminary breath tests.

Traffic Police learner guidance

SPF's Online Learning Portal links to the Basic Driving Theory Handbook. The handbook repeats the statutory limits: 80 mg of alcohol per 100 ml of blood or 35 microgrammes per 100 ml of breath. It also warns that a person may still be charged below those limits if alcohol intoxication leaves them unable to control the vehicle. The handbook advises, “If you drink, don’t drive” (SPF, Online Learning Portal; SPF, Basic Theory of Driving handbook, Alcohol, p. 58).

MHA also says there is no safe number of alcoholic drinks before driving because alcohol affects people differently, including by sex, age, health, and body composition. It advises drivers not to drink if they plan to drive. MHA’s drink-equivalent illustration was given for the enacted lower limits that are awaiting commencement; it is not a safe allowance under the current limits (MHA, Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2026).

Driving-licence disqualification

For an offence under section 67, the court must disqualify a first offender for at least 2 years and a repeat offender for at least 5 years, unless the court for special reasons decides not to order disqualification or to order a shorter period. The period starts on conviction, or on release from prison if imprisonment is imposed (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 67(2)).

Where the person has at least 2 earlier convictions for an offence under section 67(1), section 68, or the former section 67(1) in force immediately before 1 November 2019, the court must order lifetime disqualification, unless for special reasons it orders a shorter period (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 67(2A)). A “repeat offender” for the 5-year minimum is someone with one earlier conviction for section 67(1), section 68, or former section 67(1) before 1 November 2019 (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 67(4)).

Enacted changes awaiting commencement

The Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2026 has been enacted. Its commencement clause says it will come into operation on a date appointed by the Minister by Gazette notification; the Act itself does not state that date. Until commencement, the current limits and offences described above remain the ones in the current Road Traffic Act (Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2026, s. 1; current Road Traffic Act 1961 s. 67; s. 72).

When the 2026 Act commences, it will change the prescribed limits to 15 microgrammes per 100 millilitres of breath and 30 milligrammes per 100 millilitres of blood. It will also change the section 67(1)(b) and section 68(1)(b) alcohol offences so that they apply when the proportion is equal to or above the prescribed limit, rather than only when it exceeds that limit. These are enacted future changes, not the current limits or offence thresholds before the appointed commencement date (Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2026, ss. 11, 13 and 19).

The Act will also change when a court-ordered disqualification for these drink-driving offences starts. Currently, section 67 disqualification starts on conviction, or on release from prison if imprisonment is imposed; a repeat section 68 disqualification starts on release from prison (current Road Traffic Act 1961, s. 67(2); s. 68(3)). Under the enacted amendments, the disqualification period for sections 67 and 68 will start on the later of conviction and the date the offender is released from prison and no longer serving any sentence of imprisonment. This includes a sentence for another offence imposed before or at the same hearing. The change awaits the Act’s appointed commencement date (Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2026, ss. 11 and 13; Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2026, s. 1).

The Act also changes how drink-driving checks and specimens work. MHA says the revised process will let Traffic Police use a portable Handheld Breath Evidential Analyser at the scene, giving an evidential-grade reading there instead of relying on a preliminary scene test followed by an evidential test at the lock-up. MHA says the subject will be shown the result; where a breath test is not practicable, Traffic Police can require a blood specimen. These are planned operational changes, not the current test process (Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2026, ss. 14–19; MHA, Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2026; MHA, Second Reading Wrap-Up Speech).

Under amended section 69, before requiring a breath specimen for a breath test, a police officer may first conduct a passive breath test for the prevention or detection of a section 67 or 68 offence. The required breath specimen may be provided at or near where the requirement is made or, if the officer thinks fit, at a police station specified by the officer. If a person is convicted of refusing to provide a required specimen without reasonable excuse, the future section 69(4A) penalty can be more serious than the ordinary refusal penalty: where the relevant accident or arrest circumstances show that the person was driving or attempting to drive, the person is liable as if convicted under section 67; if the person was in charge of the vehicle, the person is liable as if convicted under section 68. These are enacted future provisions and do not replace the current section 69 procedure or penalties before Act 18 commences (Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2026, ss. 1 and 14).

The future blood-specimen power will also apply to a person who is already at a hospital as a patient: a police officer may require a blood specimen for investigation if there is reasonable cause to suspect that the patient has alcohol in their body or is under the influence of a drug, psychoactive substance or intoxicating substance. This is a separate route from requiring a blood specimen from someone arrested under section 69(5), and it is not operative before Act 18 commences (Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2026, s. 15).

The amended section 69 will also allow a police officer, before requiring a breath specimen, to conduct a passive breath test: a contactless test that uses ambient-air samples to assess whether alcohol is present in a person’s breath. This is a screening test distinct from the evidential-grade breath test (Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2026, ss. 14 and 19).

The hospital blood-specimen safeguard will also change. The current section 71 process requires authorisation from the practitioner in immediate charge of the patient; under the enacted amendment, the registered medical practitioner or nurse taking the specimen, and anyone instructing or overseeing it, must be satisfied that taking it will not endanger the patient. MHA says the amendment replaces a separate explicit authorisation step with this patient-safety requirement. It does not remove the duty to protect the patient, and it is not operative until commencement (Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2026, ss. 16–19; MHA, Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2026; MHA, Second Reading Wrap-Up Speech). The Act also provides for new specified-substance offences; those provisions likewise await commencement (Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2026, ss. 11–19).

For a breath specimen taken from a person already at a hospital as a patient, the future section 71(1) has a separate safety test: the police officer taking the specimen, the practitioner or nurse in immediate charge of the patient’s case, and anyone giving instructions or overseeing the procedure must each be satisfied that taking the specimen will not endanger the patient. This replaces the current hospital authorisation procedure only when Act 18 commences (Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2026, ss. 1 and 16).

The current Road Traffic Act still states the limits of 35 microgrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of breath and 80 milligrammes in 100 millilitres of blood. The 2026 commencement-notification listing includes a commencement notice for the separate Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2025, but no notice appointing commencement for Act 18 of 2026. Section 1 of Act 18 leaves its commencement to a date appointed by Gazette notification; re-check the listing before relying on this current-law status (SSO, current Road Traffic Act 1961, s. 72; SSO, 2026 commencement notifications; SSO, Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2026, s. 1; SSO, Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 2025 (Commencement) Notification 2026).

Preliminary breath tests (s 69)

A police officer with reasonable cause to suspect any of the specified circumstances may require a person to provide a preliminary breath-test specimen. These include driving, attempting to drive, or being in charge of a vehicle with alcohol in the body; still having alcohol after recently driving or being in charge; committing a traffic offence while the vehicle was moving; or an accident involving the vehicle and another vehicle, or causing injury or death. Separately, an immigration officer may require a person within or in the vicinity of an authorised checkpoint to provide a preliminary breath-test specimen when the officer considers it necessary to prevent or detect an offence under section 67 or 68. Failing without reasonable excuse to provide a required specimen is an offence with the same statutory penalty stated below (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 69).

Failing to provide the required specimen without reasonable excuse is an offence. The statutory penalty on conviction is a fine of $1,000–$5,000 or imprisonment up to 6 months; for a second or subsequent conviction, it is a fine of $3,000–$10,000 and imprisonment up to 12 months (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 69).

Evidential specimens after arrest (ss 70–71B)

After an arrest under section 69(5), a police officer investigating a possible section 67 or 68 offence may require a further breath specimen for analysis or, where the statutory conditions are met, a blood specimen for a laboratory test. A blood specimen may be required if medical reasons prevent or make a breath test unsuitable, a breath test is not practicable, or the officer reasonably suspects the person is under the influence of a drug or other specified substance. A person required to provide blood must be warned that refusal may lead to imprisonment, a fine, and disqualification (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 70).

If a person without reasonable excuse fails to provide a required specimen under section 70, the penalty depends on whether, at the time of the relevant accident or arrest, the person was driving or attempting to drive, or was in charge of the vehicle: the person is liable as if convicted under section 67 or section 68, respectively (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 70(4)).

In proceedings under section 67 or 68, the specimen result is taken into account and is generally presumed to reflect a proportion at the time of the alleged offence that was no lower than the proportion in the specimen. The Act provides an exception if the accused proves that they consumed alcohol after ceasing to drive or be in charge and that, without that later drinking, they would not have been unfit to drive or over the prescribed limit. Breath evidence may be given through an approved device’s statement and a police officer’s certificate; blood evidence may be given by an authorised analyst’s certificate (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 71A).

For a patient in hospital, a breath or blood specimen may be taken only at the hospital and with the authorisation of the practitioner in immediate charge; that practitioner must not authorise it if it would prejudice the patient’s proper care and treatment (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 71). Where a driver, attempted driver, or person in charge is unable because of accident injuries or another cause to provide a breath specimen or consent to a blood specimen, the Deputy Commissioner of Police may direct the treating practitioner to send a blood specimen already taken for treatment for laboratory analysis (SSO, Road Traffic Act 1961 s 71B).

Coverage debt

Sources