The producing party ordinarily bears the cost of production, and courts have discretion to shift costs in defined circumstances.
The presumption. Each party bears its own discovery costs, reflecting the allocation built into the rules.
Proportionality as the primary control. Rather than shifting cost, courts more often limit the discovery — narrowing custodians, date ranges and sources — which achieves the same result more cleanly.
Inaccessible sources. A party need not provide discovery from sources it identifies as not reasonably accessible because of undue burden or cost. The requesting party may still obtain it on a showing of good cause, and cost shifting is commonly ordered as a condition.
Factors. The specificity of the request, the availability of the information from other sources, the total cost compared with the amount in controversy and with the parties’ resources, the relative ability to control costs, the importance of the issues, and the relative benefit to the parties.
Non-parties are entitled to protection from significant expense, and courts order requesting parties to pay non-party production costs more readily than between parties.
Practical approach. Offer a phased production from accessible sources first, with any further phase conditioned on cost sharing. Courts respond well to it.