Feds Decide to Cut Automakers Some Slack Over Fuel Economy Penalties

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

Government regulators have heard the auto industry’s plea for clemency pertaining to the United States’ corporate average fuel economy (CAFE).

Responding to a petition from industry groups, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is putting the brakes on a planned increase in penalties for not complying with CAFE standards. Automakers won’t have to worry about their 2015, 2016 and 2017 model-year vehicles anymore, as the penalties will now begin with 2019 models.

According to Automotive News, NHTSA states that the postponement reflects “the reality that manufacturers design their products far in advance.”

NHTSA will also craft a more rigid rule-making process that should assist in sorting out the differences between the greenhouse-gas emission standards imposed by the EPA and the fuel-economy standards defined by the NHTSA. Automakers, understandably, want to ensure that they will not be penalized under one set of rules for attempting to comply with another.

A law passed last year pushed federal agencies to update their civil penalties, or risk having the impact eroded by inflation. That ruling increased CAFE retribution from $5.50 to $14.00 for each 0.1 mpg that an manufacturer failed to meet, multiplied by the total number of vehicles sold that year. The figure could cost a major automaker millions, even if they fall short of the target by the 0.1 mpg minimum.

While automakers with thirsty fleets could buy credits from other companies to stay in compliance, the penalty increase applied to vehicles that were already available for purchase. Many of the vehicles were on the market before the fuel economy standard had even been established.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers wasn’t happy, calling the move “draconian” and suggesting that it that would make a 54.5 mpg corporate average by 2025 impossible to achieve. Meanwhile, environmental groups continued to demand hard-hitting penalties to make noncompliance less of an option.

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
2 of 17 comments
  • Whitworth Whitworth on Dec 22, 2016

    I'm thinking we just get rid of the whole thing instead of exceptions and delays. This was always about just making bureaucrats feel good, the standards were unrealistic which is why they are backtracking now.

  • DearS DearS on Dec 22, 2016

    Worldwide emissions have stayed flat for 3 years. Cars and SUVs are a bit more fuel efficient in the U.S. I think this has been a big success, I think they need to ease off a little and be realistic. 35 real work MPGs may be more doable by 2025 or at least 30MPGs. http://phys.org/news/2016-11-average-fuel-economy-high-mpg.html

  • SCE to AUX All that lift makes for an easy rollover of your $70k truck.
  • SCE to AUX My son cross-shopped the RAV4 and Model Y, then bought the Y. To their surprise, they hated the RAV4.
  • SCE to AUX I'm already driving the cheap EV (19 Ioniq EV).$30k MSRP in late 2018, $23k after subsidy at lease (no tax hassle)$549/year insurance$40 in electricity to drive 1000 miles/month66k miles, no range lossAffordable 16" tiresVirtually no maintenance expensesHyundai (for example) has dramatically cut prices on their EVs, so you can get a 361-mile Ioniq 6 in the high 30s right now.But ask me if I'd go to the Subaru brand if one was affordable, and the answer is no.
  • David Murilee Martin, These Toyota Vans were absolute garbage. As the labor even basic service cost 400% as much as servicing a VW Vanagon or American minivan. A skilled Toyota tech would take about 2.5 hours just to change the air cleaner. Also they also broke often, as they overheated and warped the engine and boiled the automatic transmission...
  • Marcr My wife and I mostly work from home (or use public transit), the kid is grown, and we no longer do road trips of more than 150 miles or so. Our one car mostly gets used for local errands and the occasional airport pickup. The first non-Tesla, non-Mini, non-Fiat, non-Kia/Hyundai, non-GM (I do have my biases) small fun-to-drive hatchback EV with 200+ mile range, instrument display behind the wheel where it belongs and actual knobs for oft-used functions for under $35K will get our money. What we really want is a proper 21st century equivalent of the original Honda Civic. The Volvo EX30 is close and may end up being the compromise choice.
Next