As a curious aside: In some scandanavian countries, the penalties are directly tied to wealth (e.g. the $103,000 speeding ticket [1]). The idea is to make the punishment proportional to each individual so that wealth cannot simply grant you a free pass to violate "minor" laws.

[1] https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/03/finland...

I think there is a reasonable argument that it should be proportional to finance. Let's say two people both get speeding tickets, one of whom is making $10 an hour the other makes $100 an hour. There is an argument that you should fine them based on their income as a proportional punishment, otherwise the fine may be excessive for the person with a small income, but negligible and not a deterrant for a person with a large income.

> But why it matters at all? Penalty should be proportional to the deed, not to the person's finances.

I would argue the opposite, why do you think this is the case?

no, individualized sentences are part of the justice procedure.

It matters because fixed fees mean a % of the population will be unscathed by those consequences, and a % will be unable to afford the fine.