A Maryland law requiring that an increasingly large share of new car sales be electric is supposed to start wiht the 2027 model year, but one House leader wants to delay penalties in the law, which he fears may be out of reach. (Stock.adobe.com image by tongpatong)
Del. Dana Stein (D-Baltimore County) wants to pump the brakes on a state law that would require that more than 40% of all cars sold in the state be electric by the 2027 model year.
That law was supposed to take effect with the 2027 models, which will start rolling out next year, but a bill introduced this week by Stein would pause penalties on the law until the 2029 model year.
“There’s no bigger champion of the state taking action to deal with climate issues than me,” Stein, the House Speaker Pro Tem, said Thursday. “But I came to realize that these EV requirements were not going to get more EVs on the road in the short term.”
That was echoed by car dealers, who said lifting the penalties for two years would not reduce the sale of electric vehicles in the state.
But environmental advocates say the bill is unnecessary, and called it a step back in the state’s clean air efforts.
“Moving towards cleaner vehicles saves lives. Delaying these regulations would harm our public health and our climate goals,” Maryland Sierra Club Senior Clean Transportation Representative Lindsey Mendelson Thursday.
Stein’s House Bill 1556 would tweak the state’s implementation of the Advanced Clean Cars II (ACC II) and Advanced Clean Trucks programs, which are modeled after California policies.
ACC II requires that electric vehicles account for 43% of cars sold in the state by a manufacturer in the 2027 model year, growing to 51% in model year 2028, eventually reaching 100% by the 2035 model year. The truck program would also begin in model year 2027 but at a lower level, ultimately reaching 75% electric vehicles for non-tractor trucks, 55% for pickups and vans, and 40% for tractor trucks.
According to the Maryland Department of the Environment, the programs are part of Maryland’s commitment to reducing greenhouse gas emission, a commitment the department says is “the most aggressive near term” effort in the nation. Under Stein’s bill, penalties would be lifted until the 2029 model year. The sales percentages would be unchanged from the current law.
The bill got a major boost Thursday when it was unanimously passed by the House Rules Committee and sent to the House Environment and Transportation Committee for a hearing.
Stein said a pause is needed due to a variety of economic forces, including lower demand for EVs, insufficient charging infrastructure and President Donald Trump’s elimination of a federal EV tax credit.
Stein worries that manufacturers who can’t meet the mandates with their normal volume of vehicles sold may solve the problem by sending fewer cars and trucks to Maryland dealers, a move he said would “severely [hurt] car dealerships.”
Peter Kitzmiller, president of the Maryland Automobile Dealers Association, agreed that a pause is essential, saying it would not lower the number of EVs sold.
“The mandate is not going to determine how many EVs are sold,” Kitzmiller said. “The customers are going to decide how many EVs are sold.”
Supporters of the original legislation say that the reality is more complicated. For example, while the stated ACC II requirement in model year 2027 is 43%, there are flexibilities built into the program, such as in the form of credits, that can lower that number significantly.
A presentation from a January legislative briefing showed that the credits could lower the required percentage to as low as 19%.
Kitzmiller called the credits a “red herring,” saying that they won’t get manufacturers “anywhere close” to the required 43%. He said that neither buying nor banking credits are a realistic option.
Sen. Steve Hershey (R-Upper Shore) has twice introduced similar bills to Stein’s. The first, introduced last year, would have pushed implementation back to 2030, but it died in committee. This year’s version would push the implementation to 2031.
“House Bill 1556 appears to be headed in the right direction, if this truly means the manufacturers will not be deemed noncompliant for not achieving the production and delivery goals,” Hershey said in a text. “Overall it’s better we do something affirmatively than wait to see if changes are made [at] the federal level.”
Del. Jesse Pippy (R-Frederick) also commended the bill as a step in the right direction.
“It looks to be a positive step at not penalizing Marylanders that are not able to comply with the EV mandates that are kicking in,” Pippy said during the Rules Committee meeting.