Stein Seeks Delay in Maryland’s EV Mandate Penalties
Del. Dana Stein (D-Baltimore County) is attempting to delay the enforcement of penalties tied to Maryland’s electric vehicle (EV) sales mandates. The current law, which mandates an increasing percentage of new car sales be electric, is slated to begin with the 2027 model year.
Stein’s bill aims to postpone the application of penalties until the 2029 model year. He argues that the existing requirements may be unattainable, leading to potential harm for Maryland dealerships.
“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.”
This sentiment was echoed by representatives from the car dealership industry, contributing to the support for Stein’s bill.
Environmental Concerns
Environmental advocates, however, are against the bill, viewing it as a setback for the state’s clean air initiatives. They argue that delaying the regulations undermines public health and climate objectives.
“Moving towards cleaner vehicles saves lives. Delaying these regulations would harm our public health and our climate goals,” said Lindsey Mendelson, Maryland Sierra Club Senior Clean Transportation Representative.
Details of the Bill
Stein’s House Bill 1556 proposes adjustments to Maryland’s implementation of the Advanced Clean Cars II (ACC II) and Advanced Clean Trucks programs. These programs are modeled after similar policies in California.
ACC II requires that electric vehicles constitute 43% of new car sales in 2027, increasing to 51% in 2028. The program aims for 100% electric vehicle sales by 2035.
The truck program would have lower initial targets, reaching 75% electric for non-tractor trucks, 55% for pickups and vans, and 40% for tractor trucks.
The Maryland Department of the Environment views these programs as crucial to the state’s commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Support and Opposition
Stein’s bill received a major boost when it was unanimously advanced by the House Rules Committee, sending it to the House Environment and Transportation Committee for further review. Stein cites various economic factors such as reduced EV demand, insufficient charging infrastructure, and the end of a federal EV tax credit as reasons for needing the pause.
Peter Kitzmiller, head of the Maryland Automobile Dealers Association, supports the pause, indicating it wouldn’t greatly impact EV sales.
“The mandate is not going to determine how many EVs are sold,” Kitzmiller said. “The customers are going to decide how EVs are sold.”
Supporters of the original legislation dispute this, highlighting that the ACC II program includes flexibility, such as credits, where the target could be reduced to as low as 19%.
Sen. Steve Hershey (R-Upper Shore) also supports the bill, though his measures last year to push implementation back failed.
Del. Jesse Pippy (R-Frederick) also provided support, stating that his view is that the bill is a positive step in reducing the impact of the EV mandates.
