Policy Overview

The “Light and Medium-Duty Multipollutant Standards for Model Years 2027 and Later,” proposed in April 2023 and finalized in March 2024, are a set of emissions standards aiming to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) and criteria pollutant emissions from light and medium-duty vehicles sold in the US starting in 2027. Following the EPA’s original proposal, significant advocacy from automakers and the oil and gas sector appears to have reduced the policy's stringency.

EPA’s final rule delays the most significant emissions cuts to 2030-2032 as opposed to a stronger start previously proposed, and also extends the role of off-cycle and AC credits for another three years, a flexibility in the program that has been criticized for reducing the efficacy of emissions standards. Furthermore, although the EPA has stated it plans to revise the rate at which PHEVs contribute to fleet compliance (Fleet Utility Factor), EPA will maintain a value that will likely significantly reward PHEVs until 2031.

A vehicle is considered light duty if it is rated to carry less than 10,000 pounds. In practice, this applies to sedans, most large SUVs, and small pickup trucks. The standards limit the amount of greenhouse gases that new automobiles are allowed to emit. They do not apply to vehicles that were already on the road when the standards took effect, meaning older vehicles will continue to emit higher levels of greenhouse gases than the updated standards would allow for a new vehicle.

Policy Status

This policy was finalized March 20st, 2024 and will regulate new vehicles sold between 2027-2032.

Negative engagement from industry groups appears to have slightly impacted the stringency of this policy, particularly in the initial years in which multiple flexibilities are included.

Policy Status

Finalized March 2024, facing repeal

Evidence Profile

Key

opposing not supporting mixed/unclear
supporting strongly supporting

Policy Engagement Overview

The current state of corporate engagement on this regulation is summarized below. The "Evidence Profile" at right indicates InfluenceMap's capture of corporate positions on the regulation, ranging from strong opposition to strong support. Both this page and the graph were last updated March 2025

Advocacy on Transportation Freedom Act

The automobile industry has largely supported the Transportation Freedom Act, which would repeal the existing GHG emissions standards for light-duty vehicles finalized during the Biden administration. General Motors, Stellantis, and Toyota Motor all supported the Transportation Freedom Act in March 2025 statements issued in a press release on US Senator Moreno’s website. The CEO of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, John Bozzella, also supported the bill in statements on the same press release.

The Alliance for Automotive Innovation strongly opposed the proposed standards. The Alliance advocated to significantly reduce the ambition of the proposed standards and challenged the EPA’s legal authority to enact the rule. The group also pushed to maintain numerous flexibilities that would weaken the program’s stringency, such as off-cycle and multiplier credits.

Japanese and Korean automakers opposed the proposed standards. Particularly negative advocacy came from Korean and Japanese manufacturers Hyundai, Toyota, Nissan, and Mitsubishi, which all advocated to significantly reduce the ambition of the proposed rule, supported numerous flexibilities that would weaken the proposal’s stringency, and pushed to weaken zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) adoption targets to also include plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEVs) . Honda opposed all proposed alternatives in favor of a weaker regulation with more flexibilities, but did not explicitly advocate for PHEVs to be included in targets for the regulation. Mazda advocated to reduce the stringency of the regulation and for ZEV adoption targets to include plug-in hybrid vehicle sales in its comments. All six automakers explicitly supported comments from the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, where they are members.

US automakers had mixed advocacy on EPA’s proposed standards. Tesla supported the more ambitious Alternative 1 proposal, which increases EV share beyond the EPA’s proposed rule, and advocated for further increases in the rule’s stringency beyond this. Ford supported the 2032 endpoint on EPA’s proposal, while favoring the less ambitious stringency curve represented by Alternative 3. General Motors advocated for a significantly less ambitious rule that would achieve 50% EV sales by 2030, a 10% reduction from EPA’s preferred 60% alternative. Neither GM nor Ford explicitly endorsed the Alliance’s comments in their responses.

Advocacy from other automakers was mostly negative. Advocacy from BMW, Mercedes-Benz, Stellantis, and Volkswagen Group (and its subsidiary Porsche) was negative, advocating for electrification targets of 40-50% by 2030, a significant reduction from the proposed standards projected 60% BEV penetration rate by 2030. Only Mercedes-Benz did not state explicit support for the statements of the Alliance for Automotive Innovation. Volvo Cars supported flexibilities that may reduce the stringency of the program such as off-cycle and A/C credits, and Jaguar Land Rover (Tata Motors) advocated for a reduction in stringency earlier in the program, and requested monitoring points in which the program could be adjusted every two years.

The petroleum and ethanol industry strongly opposed the rule, advocating to include liquid fuels and a longer-term role for ICE-powered hybrid vehicles. The American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) argued that EPA does not have congressional authority to enact its proposed standards, stating that they were “unachievable”. The American Petroleum Institute (API) opposed the rule, citing concerns about its legality, and pushed for pre- and mid-program assessments in which the stringency of the standards could be adjusted. ExxonMobil, Marathon Petroleum, Valero, and Chevron advocated to weaken zero-emission vehicle targets through the inclusion of “renewable liquid fuels” and ICE-powered hybrid vehicles. The Renewable Fuels Association took a similar position and refuted the legality of the rule, while also advocating to adjust the program to better accommodate ICE-powered vehicles.

Industry associations representing electric utilities and ZEV manufacturers mostly supported the rule. The Zero Emission Transportation Association (ZETA) supported standards more stringent than those proposed by the EPA, arguing that California’s target of 100% zero emission vehicle sales by 2035 would be feasible nationwide. Advanced Energy United supported the proposed targets, and promoted the economic and grid stability benefits of the program. The Edison Electric Institute appeared supportive of the rule.

Other industry associations pushed back or took unclear positions on the rule. The US Chamber of Commerce stated the rule was “going too fast”, and advocated for the standards to instead use a stringency based on 40-50% EV sales by 2030, which the organization also considers a “stretch goal.” The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) expressed concern about EV infrastructure, but took an unclear position on the rule.

Policy Status

Finalized March 2024, facing repeal

Evidence Profile

Key

opposing not supporting mixed/unclear
supporting strongly supporting

Live Lobbying Alerts

The Transport Project applauds proposed repeal of US GHG Endangerment Finding

07/08/2025

The Transport Project (TPP), an industry association representing Volvo Group, Cummins, Amazon, Chevron, Shell, PepsiCo, and others, has applauded the EPA's new proposal to repeal the 2009 Endangerment Finding and GHG emissions standards for motor vehicles in a statement issued 29 July.

The EPA's proposed rule would prevent the government from regulating the emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, hydrofluorocarbons, and other greenhouse gases.

Auto industry supports aggressive regulatory rollbacks in the US

06/03/2025

General Motors, Stellantis, Toyota, and the CEO of Alliance for Automotive Innovation issued statements on 1 March supporting the Transportation Freedom Act. The bill would repeal existing emissions standards for light-, medium-, and heavy-duty transport in the US, and also remove California and other states' authority to enforce zero-emission vehicle sales targets.

Specifically, Title II of the Transportation Freedom Act would repeal existing light- and medium duty GHG emissions standards for passenger cars and trucks MY2027+, phase 3 GHG emissions standards for heavy-duty motor vehicles MY2030+, and corporate average fuel economy standards for passenger cars and light trucks MY2027+ and heavy duty trucks MY2030-2035. New, less stringent GHG emissions standards would be drafted by the current EPA. Title III would remove the waivers granted to California to enforce its own emissions standards and zero-emission vehicle sales targets, and also repeal Section 177 of the Clean Air Act, which enables other US states to follow California's emissions standards. These actions would prevent California and all other participating US states from enforcing the Advanced Clean Trucks rule, Advanced Clean Cars II rule, Advanced Clean Fleet rule, and other California-led policies.

Toyota pushes to weaken US electric vehicle tax credit and other climate rules

28/11/2024

On 27 November, E&E News reported that Toyota is pushing the Trump administration to weaken electric vehicle tax credits by extending them to ICE-powered hybrids run on fossil fuels. A 23 November Op-Ed from Toyota's North American COO in the Wall Street Journal further opposed both US state-level ZEV mandates as part of the Advanced Clean Car rule and US federal GHG emissions standards for vehicles, alongside criticizing US climate regulations prioritizing zero-emission vehicles.

Ford backs US Environmental Protection Agency's light-duty greenhouse gas rule

29/05/2024

On 20th May, Ford publicly supported the US Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) recently finalized emissions standards for light-duty cars. The company advocated against rolling back the rules in the future, stating maintaining the rules provides needed regulatory stability.

American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers launch further advertising campaigns against the US EPA’s passenger vehicle standards

04/04/2024

In an April 3rd press release, the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) announced that it had launched a further advertising campaign across nine battleground states to raise opposition to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s passenger vehicle standards. This follows AFPM’s last advertising campaign against the policy in March 2024 across seven states.

American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers opposes action to phase out gas and diesel vehicles

30/06/2023

In a June 22nd testimony by the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) CEO Chet Thompson to the House of Representatives Energy and Commerce Subcommittee, the AFPM opposed Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) action to phase out gas and diesel vehicles, as well as its inclusion of Electric Vehicles (EVs) in the Renewable Fuel Standard program. Thompson also called the EPA’s light-, medium-, and heavy-duty vehicle standards “unlawful” in his testimony.

Companies push EPA for stronger federal vehicle emission standards in the US

30/06/2023

In a June 2023 joint letter to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), companies including Enel, IKEA, Nestle, Siemens and Unilever appeared to strongly support the highest proposed federal GHG emission standards for light- and medium- duty vehicles, and called for stronger standards than those proposed for heavy-duty vehicles. They called for an acceleration of the ZEV transition, as well as supporting incentives in the Inflation Reduction Act and Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.

Entities Engaged on Policy

Influencemap Performance BandOrganizationPolicy PositionPolicy Engagement Intensity