Consultation outcome

Phasing out sales of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 and supporting the ZEV transition: summary of responses and joint government response

Updated 7 April 2025

Ministerial foreword

Last year, over 381,000 electric cars were sold in the UK – more than any country in Europe, and the third highest number of any country in the world. The British public is embracing the move to electric vehicles, benefitting from the cheaper running costs, cleaner air and quieter neighbourhoods that these vehicles bring.

Our domestic vehicle manufacturing industry – an industry that is critical to the UK economy – is embracing this change and rising to the challenge. Collectively, since the announcement of the ZEV Mandate, manufacturers have committed to investing over £20 billion in UK vehicle manufacturing: designing new vehicles, developing new technologies, and ultimately pivoting facilities and supply chains away from fossil-fuelled cars to those running on technologies of the future.

The shift to electric vehicles represents a huge opportunity for this country, not solely because of the carbon saving potential of these vehicles. Allowing vehicles to run on electricity reduces our reliance on imported fossil fuel. This helps to shield the UK from global geopolitical shocks, as the energy used to power our vehicles can be produced domestically. And it places our domestic industry at the forefront of the global transition to electric vehicles, ensuring our manufacturers are ideally placed to grow and enter new markets as other countries also pivot to electric.

But, as we set out in our December consultation, none of this is easy, and it will not happen without a government that is willing to listen, to support industry, or to respond to global trends.

Vehicle manufacturers and indeed the wider electric vehicle transition continue to be impacted by the mixed messages of the previous government on this issue. Their decision to reverse the phase out of petrol and diesel cars from 2030 has done untold harm to the electric vehicle transition in the UK at a time when certainty is most needed, and when manufacturers need support in meeting their electric vehicle obligations.

Today, we correct the decisions of the past and provide the certainty and the support that manufacturers deserve.

In our manifesto, we promised to reimplement the phase out of all new cars powered solely by internal combustion engines from 2030, restoring the certainty that has been sorely lacking. This response finalises that intention, confirming that from 2030 all new cars will need to be hybridised in some manner – or be zero emission.

From 2035, all new cars and vans will be zero emission, and everything we do must now support manufacturers in reaching that end point. This response suggests a number of amendments to the Zero Emission Vehicle Mandate – the world’s most ambitious decarbonisation measure of its kind. While technical in nature, these amendments will have a significant impact on manufacturers’ ability to decarbonise in a manner that is sustainable for them – providing short-term flexibility to ensure that jobs and investment remain in the UK as we pivot towards electric vehicles.

This response today comes after a consultation in which over 600 formal responses were submitted, and after a significant programme of engagement that saw me and my colleagues speak to individuals and businesses from the across the electric vehicle transition. I would like to pay tribute to them, and to colleagues in the devolved governments, for the speed at which they have worked to bring these amendments to fruition, and to provide certainty to industry at the earliest possible opportunity.

We will continue to work in partnership both with industry and with governments across the UK to ensure that our domestic industry continues to thrive as we progress through this transition; to ensure that our Growth and Clean Energy missions progress in tandem as we build, sell, and ultimately drive zero emission vehicles; and to ensure that we lead the UK, and that the UK leads the world, as we step into a cleaner future.

Rt Hon Heidi Alexander MP
Secretary of State for Transport

Introduction

Transport remains the largest emitting sector of greenhouse gas emissions, producing 29% of the UK’s total emissions in 2023. Road transport accounts for 89% of domestic transport greenhouse gas emissions, with cars alone responsible for 54% of those emissions.

The transition to zero emission vehicles (ZEVs) will drive economic growth and make Britain a clean energy superpower, helping the UK meet its climate change obligations and improve air quality.

The government is committed to phasing out new cars that rely solely on internal combustion engines from 2030. In December 2024, we launched an eight-week public consultation to seek views on proposals to support the UK’s transition to zero emission vehicles.

In 2024, the first year of the Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) Mandate, vehicle manufacturers rose to the challenge, achieving a compliance rate of 24.3% for the year – exceeding the 22% target. We recognise the van market faced some challenges and fell slightly short of the ZEV Mandate trajectory, reaching a compliance rate of 9.3% – just below the 10% target.

The government recognises the need to be bold and ambitious to meet our climate change goals, while equally understanding the wider pressures that are being faced by industry. As such, this response contains policy decisions that carefully consider these challenges.

Stakeholder engagement

During the consultation, the Department for Transport (DfT), Department for Business and Trade (DBT), Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) and the devolved governments undertook wide-ranging stakeholder engagement at ministerial and official level to support stakeholders ahead of their responses, and to inform understanding of stakeholder perspectives. This included:

• ministerial roundtables with large volume vehicle manufacturers, smaller vehicle manufacturers, and charging infrastructure stakeholders
• official-led workshops to ensure industry stakeholders fully understood the consultation and to listen to their views, suggestions and concerns
• bilateral engagement with a diverse range of stakeholders, including vehicle manufacturers, chargepoint providers, environmental groups, and consumer organisations
• engagement with a significant proportion of vehicle manufacturers, including vehicle manufacturers accounting for 98% of new car sales, and 96.8% of new van sales

Who responded

This consultation received 605 responses in total: 411 from private individuals, and the remainder from organisations including:

• vehicle manufacturers
• chargepoint/infrastructure operators
• rental and leasing sector
• insurance companies
• investors
• local authorities
• non-governmental organisations (NGOs)
• political parties
• trade associations
• engineering companies
• consultancies
• health associations

Key announcements

Following consideration of the responses received to this consultation and views garnered from our extensive stakeholder engagement, the UK government remains committed to delivering the manifesto commitment to phase out the sale of new internal combustion engine (ICE) cars by 2030 in a sustainable manner, with all new cars and vans being fully zero emission by 2035. We remain fully committed to delivering the ZEV Mandate, in line with existing trajectories, complemented by a range of additional flexibilities to support manufacturer compliance.

A full set of the policy decisions and proposals made by the government to support the transition following this consultation, can be found below.

2030 phase out of new ICE cars and CO₂ requirements for vans

Reconfirmation of the commitment to end the sale of new purely ICE cars by 2030, with all new cars and vans being fully zero emission by 2035.

A technology definition to permit the sale of hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) and plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEVs) post-2030, alongside zero emission vehicles (ZEVs).

A non-ZEV fleet-wide average CO₂ cap for new cars sold post-2030, with a 10% improvement against the 2021 baseline, and no vehicle level cap.

No technology definition for new non-zero emission (ZE) vans after 2030. Therefore, allowing the continued sale of new Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) vans, HEV vans and PHEV vans post-2030, until 2035.

A non-ZEV fleet-wide average CO₂ cap for vans post-2030 with no further required improvements against the 2021 baseline and no vehicle level cap.

The exemption of all micro vehicle manufacturers (MVMs), small vehicle manufacturers (SVMs), special purpose and kit vehicles from the requirement to end the sale of pure ICE cars by 2030. SVMs will need to apply for a bespoke derogation to reduce their emissions across their fleets on the pathway to 2035. All new cars and vans must be zero emission by 2035.

ZEV Mandate

A series of flexibilities will be introduced to enable multiple pathways to support manufacturers in the transition, whilst maintaining the existing headline ZEV targets, including:

Existing borrowing mechanism will be extended out to 2029 with new caps proposed for 2027-2029. All borrowed allowances to be repaid by 2030 at the latest, for both cars and vans.

Ability to transfer CO₂ savings from non-ZEV to ZEVs will be extended to 2029, with caps for both cars and vans. The 2025 and 2026 caps will be increased to provide additional short-term flexibilities, with new caps following the same pathway.

Introduction of a new bidirectional car-van transfer mechanism, with an exchange rate for ZEV car to ZEV van of 0.4; for ZEV van to ZEV car of 2.

There will be no new bonus credits at this stage, but the government will consider extending credits to vehicles with ‘vehicle to grid’ charging capabilities in due course.

The creation of a Utility Factor flexibility, allowing PHEVs to use the current CO₂ value for the purpose of Vehicle Emissions Trading Scheme (VETS) compliance, for the duration of the ZEV Mandate.

Other issues

Reduce existing compliance payment levels to £12,000 for every zero emission car manufacturers fall short of the target after all other compliance routes have been followed, and £15,000 for every zero emission van they fall short of the target, again after all other compliance routes have been followed from 2025. This will be confirmed following engagement with stakeholders.

Regulations will be brought forward to allow UK derived or EU derived WLTP specific emission reference targets to apply from 2021-23 in the UK and in 2024 in Northern Ireland.

Part 1: 2030 phase out of new ICE cars and CO₂ requirements for vans – stakeholder views and government response

This section of the consultation was solely conducted by the UK government and sought views on the manifesto commitment to end the sale of new purely petrol and diesel cars by 2030. More specifically, views were sought on:

• options to end the sale of new cars with pure internal combustion engines from 2030
• potential requirements for new non-zero emission vans to be sold from 2030 to 2035
• consideration of the approach to micro and small volume manufacturers
• demand measures to support the uptake of zero emission vehicles

Question 1: Do you agree with the government’s view that full hybrid and plug-in hybrid technologies only should be considered? Please explain your answer.

Summary of views

Views on the post-2030 requirements

There was a mixed response to this proposal. There was strong support for the inclusion of PHEVs post-2030 across the spectrum of respondents given PHEVs’ value as a bridge technology to battery electric vehicles (BEVs), supporting further investment in charging infrastructure and encouraging charging behaviour in consumers. There was less, but still substantial support for HEVs from industry stakeholders given their technological maturity and relative affordability, including no requirement for consumers to install/source charging infrastructure. Several NGOs and private individuals argued that HEVs should be excluded since they cannot sustain propulsion without an ICE. A small portion went further and argued that only BEV technology should be considered post-2030 as CO₂ emissions are incurred with hybrid technology.

Other technologies

A significant portion of respondents preferred a technology neutral approach to post-2030 requirements, representing nearly a third of each type of respondent, apart from many in the charging sector, who were less supportive of a technology neutral approach. There were several references to the potential of hydrogen combustion and hydrogen fuel cell technology, as well as low carbon fuels. There were also mixed views on MHEV technology, with most industry and other respondents specifically agreeing that MHEVs should be excluded post-2030, while a minority of industry respondents preferred that MHEVs be included post-2030.

Implications for investment in BEV technology

A small portion of respondents were concerned that any new, time-limited technology requirements would create a niche market and cause a diversion of investment away from BEV technology. Several key industry, NGOs and local authority respondents argued that the level of investment required to comply with the proposed requirements would be disproportionate to the impacted market share.

Further measures to support hybrid technology uptake

Some industry and charging sector respondents were supportive of the inclusion of PHEVs post-2030 subject to further measures, including accelerated rollout of charging infrastructure (and including addressing national and regional inequalities in provision); implementation of complementary demand side measures; and implementation of a PHEV range requirement.

In limited instances others highlighted particular issues associated with hybrid technology including a lack of hybrid models suitable for wheelchair accessible vehicles, or with towing capability. Several private individuals mentioned limited product longevity and others cited concerns about vehicle safety, battery fires and subsequently inflated insurance costs.

Question 2: Do you prefer a technological definition that permits both HEVs and PHEVs, or a technological definition that permits PHEVs only? Please explain your answer.

Summary of views

Views on the post-2030 technology definition

Of the two technology definitions presented, a moderate portion of respondents were supportive of a PHEV and HEV definition, given its relative flexibility for both consumers and industry. Many individuals argued that charging infrastructure is currently insufficient to support a PHEV-only definition, while others argued that a PHEV-only definition would better facilitate further investment in charging infrastructure. A small portion of respondents argued for a PHEV-only definition given PHEVs’ lower nitrogen oxide emissions with positive implications for air quality, while some argued that HEVs should not be considered to have “significant zero emission capability”. Overall, the greatest support was for a HEV and PHEV definition.

Technology neutrality

A significant portion of respondents preferred a technology neutral approach to post-2030 requirements that would allow for technologies including hydrogen combustion, hydrogen fuel cell, and low carbon fuels.

Question 3: Do you support no further CO₂ requirements, a vehicle level CO₂ cap, or a fleetwide CO₂ requirement? Please explain your answer.

Summary of views

Views on further CO₂ requirements

Of the three options presented, the greatest preference was for a fleet-wide CO₂ requirement given the flexibility it would allow industry and consumers. A fleet-wide CO₂ requirement was welcomed on the basis that manufacturers could maintain a diverse product portfolio, providing choice to consumers and ensuring hybrid vehicles are accessible to a range of income groups. A very limited number of industry respondents supported a vehicle level CO₂ requirement. Other NGOs, investor and insurance stakeholders supported a vehicle level CO₂ requirement given the simplicity of administration, and to support consumer understanding of CO₂ regulation. These respondents also argued that a vehicle level CO₂ requirement would more reliably deliver carbon savings than a fleetwide CO₂ requirement.

Implications for investment in BEV technology

As with Question 1 of the consultation concerning technology definitions post-2030, a limited number of respondents, namely from the leasing sector and industry, cited concerns that new CO₂ requirements could risk diversion of investment from BEV technology necessary to meet the 100% zero emission target in 2035.

Question 4: Should a minimum range be required for new PHEVs and, if so, at what level should it be set? Please explain your answer.

Summary of views

Views on PHEV range requirements

There was no clear consensus from the responses received, with similar proportions supporting, opposing, or having no clear view/not responding to the question of whether to set a minimum range for new PHEVs.

Opposition

Those that opposed the imposition of a minimum range cited a number of reasons, including: that this should be left to the industry and market forces to decide; concern over the impact this would have on vehicle weight; that this would make the vehicles too expensive; and a general opposition to further government regulation. Some respondents expressed concern that setting minimum PHEV ranges would divert attention away from both investment in developing battery technology and the adoption of BEVs generally.

Support

Respondents that supported the creation of a minimum range for PHEVs wanted improvements to the ratio between battery and ICE usage or thought that a minimum range would improve consumer appeal or reduce the frequency of needing to recharge vehicles. There was no clear view on what the minimum range should be with views ranging from 9 miles to 500 miles. The most common suggestions were between 50 miles and 100 miles on the basis that this would cover most common trips.

Other PHEV requirements

Some expressions of support were conditional on additional requirements such as the increased availability of charging infrastructure or rapid charging, improving battery life or the provision of tax incentives.

UK government response: questions 1, 2, 3, and 4

The government is committed to ending the sale of new cars powered solely by internal combustion engines from 2030, with all new cars and vans being fully zero emission by 2035.

A technological definition is necessary to deliver this, and we acknowledge that industry broadly called for minimally restrictive regulation of new non-ZEVs between 2030 and 2035. Additionally, the government recognises that there is a short lead time ahead of the 2030 phase out date and is keen to see any investment focussed into ZEV manufacturing. As such, the government will permit the sale of Hybrid Electric Vehicles (HEVs) and Plug in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEVs), alongside ZEVs in the 2030 to 2035 period.

Phasing out new petrol and diesel cars alone will not deliver the benefits we hope to realise. It is necessary to encourage the cleanest HEVs and PHEVs to secure carbon savings and to prevent these vehicles being less efficient than the cleanest ICE vehicles on the road today. Given the overwhelming support for a CO₂ fleet-wide requirement, alongside a technology definition for HEVs and PHEVs, the government will apply a non-ZEV fleet average CO₂ cap post-2030. This will require a 10% reduction of a manufacturer’s new non-ZEV CO₂ emissions compared to the 2021 baseline. Given purely petrol and diesel cars will no longer be part of a manufacturer’s fleet, a 10% reduction will reduce carbon emissions without placing excessive burdens on vehicle manufacturers.

We will consult further on the detailed regulatory approach for requirements post-2030.

Question 5: Do you agree with the government’s intention not to establish a technological definition for the specification of new non-ZE vans that may be sold from 2030? Please explain your answer.

Summary of views

The majority of respondents supported the government’s intention not to establish a technological definition for the specification of new non-ZE vans to be sold from 2030. Most respondents agreed that this approach was necessary due to the lack of technological options currently available within the van market. This reason was highlighted by several vehicle manufacturers, vehicle leasing operators and one environmental NGO. Other respondents in favour of the proposal also noted the need for flexibility to accommodate the large range of use cases and requirements for vans, the impracticality of implementing such a requirement for such a short time frame, the sufficiency of the ZEV Mandate’s existing requirements, and the need to keep efforts focused on the ZEV transition rather than incremental CO₂ emissions improvements. A few respondents also noted the importance of alternative propulsion technology (like hydrogen fuelled vehicles) and the possibility of e-fuels.

A small number of respondents disagreed with the government’s proposal. This view was shared by a few charging infrastructure operators. These respondents argued that a clear technology definition would drive investment and innovation to further the UK’s transition to cleaner transport. A few private individuals also suggested that all non-ZE vans should at least be hybrid or plug-in hybrid.

Other respondents indicated that they neither agreed nor disagreed with the government’s proposal. These respondents often noted that the question was not applicable to them (as was the case for a few car manufacturers).

Additional considerations raised by respondents included the need for more support measures for the ZEV transition, the suggestion that the 2030 ICE phase-out should be rescinded as well as general scepticism of regulations and BEVs.

Question 6: What are your views on establishing a CO₂ requirement for vans from 2030? What is your preferred measure, if any, and at what level should the target be set? Please explain your answer.

Summary of views

Some respondents opposed the introduction of any new CO₂ requirement for vans from 2030. This view was shared by most vehicle manufacturers and vehicle leasing companies. These respondents often noted that additional CO₂ emissions requirements were not necessary as this could divert resources away from the ZEV transition, restrict the use cases needed for vans and negatively impact businesses / economy. A few respondents also noted that the existing 2021 baseline was sufficient.

Other respondents agreed that new CO₂ requirements should be established for vans from 2030. This view was shared by a few vehicle manufacturers, some charging infrastructure operators, and a few environmental NGOs. The vast majority of respondents within this group preferred an average fleet-wide CO₂ requirement as opposed to a vehicle level cap, noting that a fleet-wide average would facilitate more flexibility. Some respondents also advocated for a graduated reduction requirement that increased overtime.

Other respondents indicated that they neither agreed nor disagreed with the proposal to establish a new CO₂ requirement for vans. These respondents often noted that the question was not applicable to them (as was the case for a few car manufacturers). Some respondents from this group speculated that if there was going to be a CO₂ requirement for cars then there should be a CO₂ requirement for vans too.

Additional considerations raised by respondents included the need for more support measures for the ZEV transition, the importance of alternative propulsion technology (like hydrogen fuelled vehicles) and e-fuels, as well as general scepticism of regulations and EVs.

Question 7: What would be the impact to the economy and to UK society of any new or additional non-ZEV CO₂ requirements in the van sector from 2030? Please explain your answer and provide evidence where possible.

Summary of views

The majority of respondents noted overall negative impacts for the introduction of any new or additional non-ZEV CO₂ requirements in the van sector from 2030. This view was shared by several vehicle manufacturers and vehicle leasing companies. These respondents often noted that such requirements would negatively affect businesses and the UK economy, exacerbate charging infrastructure issues, worsen EV affordability, worsen the cost-of-living, divert investment away from the ZEV transition as well as penalise vans that undertook specific use cases. A few respondents also raised issues related to EV safety and the potential for these requirements to worsen the position of disadvantaged communities (such as individuals who are disabled).

Other respondents noted overall positive impacts for the introduction of any new or additional non-ZEV CO₂ requirements in the van sector from 2030. This view was mainly shared by environmental NGOs and some charging infrastructure operators. Most respondents noted the positive impacts of improved air quality, creation of new jobs, acceleration of EV uptake / production, stimulation of infrastructure development, lower CO₂ emissions / more carbon savings and public health benefits.

Other respondents indicated that overall impacts would be neither positive nor negative. These respondents often noted that the question was not applicable to them (as was the case for a few car manufacturers).

Some respondents suggested that the government needed to conduct further analysis on the impacts of such a requirement if this was to be enforced.

UK government response: questions 5, 6, and 7

While the government remains committed to the ZEV Mandate trajectory for new vans and ensuring sales of all new cars and vans are fully zero emission by 2035, questions 5 to 7 were posed to seek views on whether a differential approach from the car market was appropriate for the van market.

As summarised above, respondents, including vehicle manufacturers, broadly agreed with the approach that the government sought views on. Stakeholders agreed with government’s proposal not to establish a technical definition for the specification of new non-ZE vans that may be sold alongside ZEVs from 2030. They also expressed that a CO₂ requirement post 2030 was not desirable and that there would possibly be a negative impact to the economy and to UK society if there were new or additional non-ZEV CO₂ requirements in the van sector from 2030.

Given the views above and considering the current and future van products that will be available, there will be no technology requirements for new non-ZE vans, from 2030 to 2035, with ICE vans able to be sold alongside ZEVs and hybridised vehicles. The government will retain the existing CO₂ requirements for new non-ZE vans, as per the existing Vehicle Emissions Trading Scheme. No additional CO₂ reduction requirements for vans will apply from 2030.

Question 8: What are your views on current measures to support demand for zero emission vehicles? What additional measures could further support the transition?

Summary of views

Existing demand incentives were acknowledged by respondents, including favourable Benefit in Kind rates and the success of salary sacrifice schemes, as well as the continued support of the Plug-in Vehicle Grants. However, a lack of support for private car buyers was regularly raised. As such, the reintroduction of a Plug-in Car Grant (PiCG) was a regular suggestion from industry stakeholders, especially in the leasing sector, NGOs, and by vehicle manufacturers.

Overall, responses from industry stakeholders suggested that further measures to incentivise demand would be welcomed. However, a clear consensus on a preferred demand measure did not emerge. Two of the most popular measures recommended by respondents were direct purchase subsidies – reintroducing the PiCG to support the purchase of private EVs – and introducing a social leasing scheme or targeted grant support for lower income households to tackle the perceived imbalance in the equity of the EV transition.

A significant number of industry respondents raised concerns around recent changes to taxation, especially the introduction of the Expensive Car Supplement (ECS) and Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) for EVs from 1 April 2025.

Concerns around charging availability were common across all types of respondents. A large portion had broad concerns that covered the public availability of chargepoints; the cost of charging (predominantly in public); 20% VAT rate on public charging; and a lack of access to home charging for people without off-street parking and those who live in flats. Almost a fifth of respondents indicated that further investment in the deployment of charging infrastructure was required, with some manufacturers seeking binding targets for charging infrastructure in line with the ZEV Mandate trajectory.

Other suggestions included improving road signage to highlight installed EV chargepoints; industry development of skills to support EV maintenance and repair; support for the second-hand market; and introduction of battery health certificates or battery testing to increase consumer confidence.

Similarly, a moderate selection of respondents suggested the government needed to help combat the negative press and consumer perceptions around EVs and decarbonisation.

A limited number of individual respondents opposed all forms of support and called for current measures to cease immediately. Most of these respondents fundamentally disagreed with both the viability of EVs as a means of mass private transport and the need to reduce the UK’s transport emissions. Themes around the cost of EVs being too high, the lack of available charging facilities and the overall cost to the UK economy of both the ZEV Mandate and net zero goals were common in these responses.

UK government response: question 8

The UK government acknowledges the scale of the challenges faced by industry in transitioning to ZEVs and is committed to supporting manufacturers and drivers to make the switch. The Plug-in Vehicle Grants have played a key role in supporting this transition. It has been confirmed that Plug-in Vehicle Grants for vans, trucks, motorcycles, taxis, and wheelchair accessible vehicles will continue into the 2025/26 financial year.

The government also recognises the continued importance of taxation to the transition to ZEVs, which is why favourable Benefit in Kind rates have been confirmed out to 2029-2030.

The government is also committed to developing the skills needed for the transition to ZEVs. That is why we are helping to develop the green skills needed for the net zero economy through initiatives like Skills Bootcamps, as well as the Electrification Skills Boost and apprenticeships.

Some measures to improve battery standards are already in place. This includes warranty requirements in the Plug-in Vehicle Grants and ZEV Mandate. The UK Government has worked with international partners at the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) to develop a Global Technical Regulation on EV batteries (GTR No.22), which requires EVs have easily accessible, accurate, and comparable information on the battery’s state of health. The government is currently analysing options for the implementation of GTR No.22 regulations in the UK. The Department for Transport has not seen any evidence to suggest EV battery degradation is impacting road worthiness and therefore requires testing during the MOT. In fact, recent studies suggest battery degradation occurs at a much lower rate, particularly for newer EVs, than previously thought.

Consultation responses highlighted that the government should do more to counter the often-erroneous negative coverage ZEVs receive. The government is actively working in partnership with industry to ensure drivers have access to accurate and consistent information about EVs to inform their decisions.

The government recognises that a buoyant second-hand EV market is necessary to advance our ambitions to increase ZEV uptake. The government will continue to monitor the health of the used market and keep all policies under review.

The government understands that a visible and reliable charging infrastructure is crucial for the transition to zero emission vehicles. As of 1 March 2025, the government and industry have together supported the installation of 75,305 publicly available charging devices. This includes 15,082 rapid and ultra-rapid charging devices.

We continue to work with Ofgem and others on measures to keep the cost of EV charging affordable for consumers wherever they live and charge. The government continues to incentivise renters, leaseholders, and landlords to install charging infrastructure through our domestic chargepoint grants, which have supported over 13,000 sockets since 2022.

Substantial government investment has been made in the charging network to date. For example, the £381 million Local EV Infrastructure (LEVI) Fund supports local authorities in England to work with industry and transform the availability of EV charging for drivers without off-street parking. The funding, alongside substantial private investment, will support at least 100,000 local on-street chargepoints ensuring the rollout continues at pace.

The government is actively working with industry to ensure drivers have access to accurate and consistent information about EVs and charging infrastructure. We recognise that road signage to EV chargepoints is an important part of improving driver confidence. The government is keen to hear feedback from industry on the use of signage on the Strategic Road Network (motorways and major A-roads) to direct drivers to EV charging.

The government remains committed to the transition to ZEVs and, as global conditions evolve, the government will work closely with the British automotive industry to ensure that the economic opportunities of ZEV manufacturing are felt across the whole of the United Kingdom for generations to come. The UK government will make further announcements in due course, including our modern industrial strategy that will deliver the certainty and stability businesses need to invest.

Question 9: What are your views on whether small volume manufacturers (between 1,000 and 2,499 registrations) should be subject to the 2030 requirements for cars and/or vans?

Summary of views

The majority of respondents considered that small volume manufacturers (SVMs) (between 1,000 and 2,499 registrations) should not be subject to the 2030 commitment to end the sale of pure ICE vehicles. These respondents noted that SVMs should be exempt as such requirements would be too burdensome and would likely lead to job losses and negative economic impacts. This view was shared by many small vehicle manufacturers and some vehicle leasing operators. These respondents also noted that the carbon emissions from SVMs were minimal (therefore a CO₂ requirement would be disproportionate), that SVMs needed flexibility, and that there would be insufficient time to prepare for such a requirement given the product cycles of SVMs.

Some respondents thought that SVMs (between 1,000 and 2,499 registrations) should be subject to the 2030 requirements for cars and/or vans. This view was shared by a few larger volume manufacturers, a few charging infrastructure operators and environmental NGOs. These respondents often argued that all manufacturers should have the same requirements and that many SVMs had the capability to transition to EVs. Other respondents noted that this could result in market distortion or the ability for manufacturers to find loopholes to avoid targets. A few respondents suggested there should also be temporary grace period/extended support to help SVMs achieve the CO₂ requirement.

Other respondents indicated that they neither agreed nor disagreed with the idea that that SVMs (between 1,000 and 2,499 registrations) should be subject to the 2030 requirements for cars and/or vans. These respondents often noted that the question was not applicable to them (as was the case for a few larger volume manufacturers).

Additional considerations raised by respondents included the need for more support measures for SVMs, the potential for derogations (from ZEV targets) to continue post-2030, the need for government to review the criteria for SVMs – including the threshold and the ability of larger manufacturers to potentially game the definition by setting up many smaller subsidiaries.

Question 10: What are your views on whether micro-volume manufacturers (fewer than 1,000 annual registrations) should be subject to the 2030 requirements for cars and/or vans?

Summary of views

The majority of respondents thought that micro-volume manufacturers (fewer than 1,000 annual registrations) should not be subject to the 2030 requirements for cars and/or vans. These respondents noted that micro volume manufacturers should be exempt as such requirements would be too burdensome and would likely lead to job losses and negative economic impacts. This view was shared by many micro vehicle manufacturers and some larger volume vehicle manufacturers. These respondents also noted that the carbon emissions from micro-volume manufacturers were minimal (therefore a CO₂ requirement would be disproportionate), micro-volume manufacturers needed flexibility and that there would be insufficient time to prepare for such a requirement given the product cycles of micro-volume manufacturers.

Some respondents considered that that micro-volume manufacturers (fewer than 1,000 annual registrations) should be subject to the 2030 requirements for cars and/or vans. This view was shared by a few larger volume manufacturers, some charging infrastructure operators, and environmental NGOs. These respondents often argued that all manufacturers should have the same requirements and that many micro-volume manufacturers had the capability to transition to EVs. Other respondents noted that this approach would prevent unintended consequences on the ICE market (i.e. market distortion) or the ability for manufacturers to find loopholes to avoid targets. A few respondents suggested there should also be a temporary grace period/extended support to help micro-volume manufacturers achieve the CO₂ requirement.

Other respondents indicated that they neither agreed nor disagreed with the idea that micro-volume manufacturers (fewer than 1,000 annual registrations) should be subject to the 2030 requirements for cars and/or vans. These respondents often noted that the question was not applicable to them (as was the case for a few larger volume manufacturers).

Additional considerations raised by respondents included the need for more support measures for micro-volume manufacturers, the potential for derogations (from ZEV targets) to continue post-2030, the need for government to review the criteria for micro-volume manufacturers – including the threshold and the ability of larger manufacturers to potentially game the definition by setting up many smaller subsidiaries.

Question 11: What is your opinion on exemptions for Special Purpose Vehicles from the 2030 requirements for cars and vans?

Summary of views

A large number of respondents supported exemptions for special purpose vehicles (SPVs) from the 2030 requirements for cars and vans, with the importance of fossil fuel-dependent SPVs for society (e.g. emergency vehicles) the reason most commonly cited. Large volume vehicle manufacturers tended to support the exemptions, with some suggesting the definition of an SPV should be broadened. The most common reason small volume vehicle manufacturers provided in support of the exemptions was that SPVs do not emit enough CO₂ to merit the requirements including them, as well as the impracticality of SPVs complying with the requirements due to present technological/infrastructural challenges.

Fewer respondents opposed exemptions for SPVs from the 2030 requirements for cars and vans. Among those who did, the most common reasons included that the requirements should capture all cars and vans, regardless of the purpose of the vehicle, or any car/van that emits CO₂. Large volume vehicle manufacturers rarely opposed the exemptions. No small volume vehicle manufacturers opposed the exemptions.

A substantial number of respondents had no opinion on exemptions for SPVs from the 2030 requirements for cars and vans.

Question 12: What is your opinion on exemptions for kit cars from the 2030 requirements for cars and vans?

Summary of views

A large number of respondents supported exemptions for kit cars from the 2030 requirements for cars and vans, with low environmental impact and low production volume the reasons they most commonly cited. Some respondents supported exempting kit cars on the grounds that not doing so would damage the kit car industry and the wider economy. Some of the small volume vehicle manufacturers who supported the exemptions commented that these would help preserve the cultural heritage and community around kit cars. Large volume vehicle manufacturers who supported the exemptions generally limited their support to low production/niche use cases. Some of the large volume vehicle manufacturers who supported the exemptions suggested the definition of a kit car should be reviewed.

Some large volume vehicle manufacturers who opposed the exemptions viewed kit car manufacturers as having had sufficient time to prepare for the 2030 requirements. No small volume vehicle manufacturers opposed the exemptions.

A substantial number of respondents had no opinion on exemptions for kit cars from the 2030 requirements for cars and vans.

UK government response: questions 9, 10, 11, and 12

It is important that all manufacturers, including low volume manufacturers, decarbonise according to the ambitious timetable for all new cars and vans to be zero emission by 2035. The government acknowledges that this must be achieved sustainably.

The majority of respondents held the view that requiring micro and small vehicle manufacturers to decarbonise at the same rate as the wider market would be too burdensome, with some suggesting there could be negative economic impacts.

The government recognises that small and micro volume manufacturers face additional challenges in decarbonising according to the same timetables as major volume manufacturers. They do not have the same financial or technical capabilities to develop and deploy new technologies and have far fewer model runs through which to make incremental improvements over time. The government will therefore exempt micro volume manufacturers from the commitment to end sale of all solely ICE vehicles by 2030 and from any additional CO₂ reduction from all non-ZEVs between 2030 and 2035.

The government will also exempt SVMs from the commitment to phase out pure ICE vehicles by 2030. However, many SVMs already offer hybrid vehicles and intend to do so in their future product plans. With this in mind, the government will instead bring forward a CO₂ reduction requirement for SVMs post-2030. This will be subject to a bespoke derogation on a case-by-case basis to ensure SVMs are taking steps to reduce emissions across their fleets on the pathway to ending the sale of all non-ZEVs by 2035. The government will work with the devolved governments to ensure that appropriate obligations are brought forward and consulted on in due course.

All new cars and vans must be zero emission by 2035, including those registered by MVMs and SVMs.

Stakeholders held similar views about special purpose vehicles and kit cars and their need to be exempted, as proposed in the consultation. These vehicles are significantly harder to decarbonise owing to their special use cases and have a lower carbon footprint compared to conventional vehicles owing to lower mileages. The government will therefore also exempt these vehicles from the requirement to end the sale of pure ICE cars by 2030.

Part 2: Vehicle Emissions Trading Schemes Updates

The second part of the consultation concerned the ZEV Mandate, delivered through the Vehicle Emissions Trading Scheme. It was conducted jointly by the UK government, Scottish Government, Welsh Government and the Department for Infrastructure (Northern Ireland) and sought views on:

• the existing flexibilities within the ZEV Mandate, and consideration of further flexibilities
• other technical updates to the ZEV Mandate to ensure its efficiency

All legislative amendments required to implement the proposals in this part of the consultation are subject to legal and Ministerial agreement across the Scottish Government, the Welsh Government, the Department for Infrastructure (Northern Ireland), and the UK government as required by the Climate Change Act 2008.

Question 13: Are the time limits on the current flexibilities in the ZEV Mandate for cars and for vans still appropriate? Please explain your answer.

Summary of views

Most respondents viewed that the current flexibilities were not sufficient and were in favour of the need for more flexibilities in the ZEV Mandate for cars and vans, beyond the initial years. The highest percentage came from the car and van rental and leasing sector, local authorities and investors in the sector. Many vehicle manufacturers were in favour of extending the scope and scale of existing flexibilities through to 2028 or 2029 (currently limited to the first three years) and making the caps more generous or removing them entirely.

Specifically, respondents sought to extend the ability to transfer between ZEV and non-ZEV requirements (currently limited to the first three years) to allow manufacturers to balance non-ZEV CO₂ reduction over-achievement with ZEV Mandate under-achievement, rewarding decarbonisation efforts across manufacturers’ fleets utilising different technologies.

In addition, many respondents sought to extend the existing borrowing flexibility (currently limited to the first three years) and to make the cap more generous, or remove it entirely, to allow greater flexibility to comply over the ZEV Mandate period.

Extended flexibilities were supported by a number of small volume vehicle manufacturers. Some SVMs recommended that we should completely remove all time limits from the mandate. There was also a suggestion from some manufacturers for additional changes, including removing the 3.5% compounding interest rates or reducing the exchange rate for allowance transfers.

Some respondents sought periodic reviews of the flexibilities due to market trends and changes, especially in the earlier years of the mandate, with some manufacturers calling for a specific review points, suggesting 2026, and again in 2029 to consider the entire ZEV transition.

The highest percentage of respondents that agreed with the current flexibilities were non-profit organisations and the charging infrastructure sector, with the lowest percentage that agreed coming from vehicle manufacturers. Charging companies and NGOs were largely opposed to the extensions of flexibilities, citing potential delays to the roll out of ZEVs and impacts on investment in charging infrastructure and the overall credibility of the UK as an investment destination.

Several respondents indicated that they did not know or had neutral or other views

Question 14: What are your views on the proposal to implement a van-car transfer in VETS? Please explain your answer.

Summary of views

The response to the proposal to implement a van-car transfer in VETS was positive with the vast majority of vehicle manufacturers agreeing with this suggestion given additional flexibility to manage the mandate’s targets, and to help manage demand challenges in the van sector.

This was largely supported by NGOs and the car and van rental and leasing sector. NGOs and charging infrastructure providers noted that we should explore this mechanism by assessing the carbon savings that it could deliver.

The proposal for a 1:1 credit transfer between vans and cars was welcomed by vehicle manufacturers, however there was strong support that any transfers should be bi-directional, allowing transfers also from car-to-van, with acknowledgement of the different carbon considerations of cars and vans.

A smaller number of respondents disagreed with the proposal to implement a van-car transfer in VETS, including some vehicle manufacturers who commented that it would give an unfair advantage to manufacturers who only produce vans.

A high percentage of respondents indicated that they did not know or had neutral or other views. These responses mainly came from outside of the manufacturing sector and from SVMs who do not manufacture vans.

Question 15: Are there other flexibilities that should be considered within VETS for cars and vans?

Summary of views

Around three-quarters of total respondents to this consultation had no views on this question. Some respondents noted that more flexibility is needed but failed to give further explanation.

Some respondents from the car and van leasing sector, manufacturers, charging infrastructure and environmental NGOs suggested UK manufacturers should be given more flexibility by providing credits for manufacturing or sourcing resources within the country.

The vehicle manufacturing and car and van leasing sectors suggested: removing caps on borrowing and the ability to transfer non-ZEV CO₂ savings to ZEVs; reducing the conversion rates for transferring non-ZEV CO₂ savings to ZEVs; reducing interest rates on borrowed allowances; reducing penalties for non-compliance and extending flexibilities to 2030. They also called for a bidirectional ZEV car-ZEV van transfer mechanism.

Around half of the environmental NGOs and charging infrastructure providers who responded viewed current flexibilities to be sufficient.

Joint government response: questions 13, 14, and 15

Industry has largely risen to the challenge of meeting the requirements in 2024, ensuring more BEVs are supplied to the UK market, at more attractive prices for consumers.

We are committed to maintaining the headline trajectories for both the car and van mandates, as well as our 2030 and 2035 commitments. However, we recognise the challenges faced by vehicle manufacturers, the lower than anticipated demand, and the strong sentiment from the consultation that we must go further to support manufacturers through the transition. Recognising this, we will introduce a series of targeted amendments to provide additional flexibility and compliance pathways including:

• an increase and extension to non-ZEV to ZEV CO₂ transfer, finishing in 2029, with increased 2025 and 2026 caps to provide additional short-term flexibility subject to further engagement with industry on detailed legislation
• an increase and extension borrowing for cars and vans, finishing in 2029, with increased 2025 and 2026 caps to provide additional short-term flexibility subject to further engagement with industry on detailed legislation
• implementation of a bidirectional car-van transfer mechanism from 2025, at an exchange rate for ZEV car-ZEV van of 0.4, and for ZEV van-ZEV car of 2 subject to further engagement with industry on detailed legislation
• a reduction to non-compliance payments from £15,000 to £12,000 per car allowance, and from £18,000 to £15,000 per van allowance, subject to further engagement with industry on detailed legislation

The proposed changes provide vehicle manufacturers with increased short-term flexibility and additional pathways to compliance without compromising the headline car and van mandate trajectories or the UK government’s 2030 and 2035 commitments.

The non-ZEV to ZEV CO₂ transfer for cars and vans are proposed as follows:

Cars	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030
Current	65%	45%	25%	0%	0%	0%	0%
Proposed	65%	90%	80%	70%	60%	50%	0%

Vans	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030
Current	65%	45%	25%	0%	0%	0%	0%
Proposed	65%	90%	80%	70%	60%	50%	0%

The borrowing caps for cars and vans are proposed as follows:

Cars	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030
Current	75%	50%	25%	0%	0%	0%	0%
Proposed	75%	50%	25%	20%	15%	10%	0%

Vans	2024	2025	2026	2027	2028	2029	2030
Current	75%	50%	25%	0%	0%	0%	0%
Proposed	90.0%	50.0%	25.0%	20%	15%	10%	0%

In the longer term, we will explore and seek views on more innovative credit models. For example, we will consider models that seek to incentivise vehicles with bidirectional charging capabilities, allowing the vehicle to be used as a battery pack for domestic energy use, either directly to home or as part of wider grid balancing.

As per the existing regulations, should unprecedented circumstances arise in which compliance is beyond the control of manufacturers, we may exercise discretion in pursuing enforcement action or amend legislation to reduce or disapply payment provisions in this narrow set of circumstances. Such decisions will be communicated as far in advance as is reasonably practicable.

Question 16: Do you agree that VETS should be amended to account for the UF change? If so, do you agree with the proposal set out? Please explain your answer.

Summary of views

The majority of stakeholders responded to this question supporting our proposal to amend VETS to account for Utility Factor (UF) changes, noting that this would make the compliance assessment fairer. These respondents mainly consisted of vehicle manufacturers, though a few leasing companies, an environmental NGO and some energy providers also agreed.

Most respondents agreed with the our proposal to achieve this by amending VETS by changing the PHEV CO₂ values to the pre-UF change values. Several vehicle manufacturers and one vehicle manufacturing body, however, noted a preference for the VETS 2021 baseline to be uplifted rather than PHEV CO₂ values amended as this would be administratively easier to deliver. Respondents in favour of this proposal also viewed that the amendment would have no impact on real-world CO₂ emissions and would mitigate several potential negative economic impacts on vehicle manufacturers. Some respondents suggested that the timeframe for the amendment should cover the full duration of the VETS. An environmental NGO thought that the time frame should be reduced from the proposed 2028.

Approximately a tenth of respondents disagreed with our intention to amend the VETS to account for the UF change and noted that manufacturers should be assessed against the real-world CO₂ emission of PHEVs and that a pivot away from PHEVs was necessary. This view was shared by some environmental NGOs and one vehicle manufacturer. Some respondents also thought that such a proposal was unnecessarily complicated.

Additional considerations raised by respondents included the need for more engagement on whatever approach was determined, consideration of the impact of UF change on other schemes (such as the benefit in kind tax and other tax incentives), the need for additional measures to improve consumer charging behaviours for PHEVs, and clarity on when the UK government’s consultation on Euro 6e type-approval would be launched to provide industry with clarity.

Joint government response: question 16

Considering the views presented during the consultation and that most respondents were content with the proposal to amend the VETS Order to account for the new CO₂ values for compliance purposes, we will proceed with the suggested proposal. This maintains the original policy intention of requiring manufacturers to ensure their non-ZEV emissions do not worsen compared to their 2021 performance.

As per the consultation, we will seek to implement this on an “opt-in” basis, with vehicle manufacturers that wish to have their PHEV CO₂ considered with the old UF required to submit an application. For ease of administration, for vehicles type approved prior to 1 January 2025, manufacturers that wish to opt-in would supply a valid test report or emissions certificate from a recognised technical services provider (for the purposes of this application, a recognised technical services provider is one recognised by the Vehicle Certification Agency or, for the time being, the European Commission) that meets the Euro 6d-ISC-FCM emission standard.

For vehicles type approved after 1 January 2025 (including extensions of type approvals granted prior to 1 January) or for vehicles type approved prior to 1 January but the manufacturer is unable to attest the Euro 6d-ISC-FCM emissions, vehicle manufacturers would be allowed to submit an additional PHEV CO₂ emissions figure that has been calculated using the Euro 6e emissions equation with the EA utility factor as calculated using the theoretical phase distances. DfT would publish a lookup table of the EA UF using each theoretical distance for manufacturers to use when calculating EA emissions. So that this figure can be validated, the manufacturer would be required to submit the following:

• individual vehicle charge sustaining CO₂ (not required to be from documentation)
• individual vehicle charge-depleting CO₂ (not required to be from documentation)
• number of phases driven up to the end of the transition cycle for vehicle low from the test report covering the vehicle’s IP family
• if the vehicle follows a Class 3a or 3b WLTC cycle (given on the certificate of conformity, point 47.2.1.)
• if a Capped-speed WLTC was applied (given on the certificate of conformity, point 47.2.3.)

The UK government will bring forward a further consultation seeking views on whether to implement the change for GB type approval routes.

Question 17: Do you agree with the proposal to allow UK derived or EU derived WLTP specific emission reference targets to apply from 2021-2023 in the United Kingdom, and in 2024 in Northern Ireland? If not, why?

Summary of views

This question attracted limited responses, relative to the other questions posed in the consultation.

A significant portion of industry respondents agreed with the proposal set out in the consultation to permit both an EU and UK baseline for the purposes of calculating CO₂ targets under assimilated EU law. Both industry and individual stakeholders stated the our preferred approach would result in a fair outcome for all manufacturers and would precipitate the publishing of long-awaited baseline targets.

Some industry stakeholders noted that certainty on the proposal should be provided in advance of the November 2025 trading window under the VETS Order. An industry respondent noted that the outcome of this proposal should not jeopardise the compliance, or commercial arrangements of manufacturers complying with the regulation as a pool participant.

Joint government response: question 17

We will bring forward regulations to implement our proposal to allow UK derived or EU derived WLTP specific emission reference targets to apply from 2021-23 in the UK and in 2024 in Northern Ireland. As set out during the consultation, this approach to resolving the discrepancy between Regulation (EU) 2019/631 and the New Car and Van CO₂ Regulations Guidance 2022 V3, provides a pragmatic way forward without causing detrimental impact on vehicle manufacturers. Our analysis demonstrates that this approach will also have a minimal carbon impact.

We note the call from stakeholders to bring forward the implementing regulations as soon as possible. We will, therefore, bring these forward promptly, ahead of the November trading window.

Next steps

We want to restore much-needed certainty and stability to the automotive sector. We will bring forward regulations to implement the policy changes proposed to the ZEV mandate promptly and will engage relevant stakeholders on the draft regulations as soon as possible.

We will continue to work to define regulatory mechanisms for the continued ZEV transition post-2030, including technology definitions for non-ZEV cars and vans, and non-ZEV fleet CO₂ reduction requirements. These will be subject to further consultation prior to implementation.

Carbon impacts analysis

The consultation response sets out preferred options for achieving the government’s manifesto commitment to phase-out new internal combustion engine car sales from 2030 (part 1). It also considers preferred options to update the VETS Order (part 2).

This analysis has been conducted by the UK government without the input of devolved administrations. Devolved administrations may separately conduct and publish their own assessments of the impact.

The analysis set out here utilises the same analytical approach as laid out in Phasing out sales of new petrol and diesel cars from 2030 and supporting the ZEV transition (PDF, 941 KB). It estimates the carbon impacts of the following proposed amendments to regulations:

Part 1 – deliver the government’s manifesto commitment to phase-out new internal combustion engine cars from 2030:

• cars must meet technology definition of at least ‘hybrid’ electric vehicle
• apply a 10% reduction to fleet-wide manufacturer CO₂ limits for cars

Part 2 – modify the existing VETS Order:

• extend time limits and modify caps applied to CO₂ to ZEV transfers for cars and vans
• enable transfers between car and van credit schemes
• the disapplication of any updates to PHEV utility factors associated with the adoption of Euro 6e regulation for GB type approval
• implement baseline adjustment Interpretation of assimilated EU law Regulation (EU) 2019/631 in the UK

This assessment uses a baseline which assumes moderate utilisation of the flexibilities currently allowed by the VETS order (i.e. the use of CO₂ to ZEV credit transfers). This takes into account market performance data in 2024 to project forward manufacturer behaviour in response to flexibilities in future years.

The combined carbon impact of the package proposed in this document is an increase in emissions against the baseline. Within this, changes related to part 1 result in an increase in savings, and changes related to part 2 result in a reduction in savings. To contextualise the carbon savings, the overall impacts of the entire package are compared to the carbon savings reported in the ZEV Mandate cost benefit analysis (PDF, 2.94 MB).

Wherever changes to carbon savings are presented as negative, this implies lower carbon savings, or alternatively, higher emissions than those expected under the current VETS order.

See Table 1 for the overall assessment of the change in carbon savings associated with the proposed changes to the VETS order.

Table 1: Estimated average annual change in carbon savings by Carbon Budget (CB) period and total savings

	Annual average Mt CO2 CB4 (2023-27)	Annual average Mt CO2 CB5 (2028-32)	Annual average Mt CO2 CB6 (2033-37)	Total Mt CO2 2024-50
Part 1	0	0.1	0.1	1.9
Part 2	0	-0.5	-0.4	-6.2
Total	0	-0.4	-0.2	-4.2
Savings estimated in the VETS order cost benefit analysis	0	5.8	15.8	420
Change compared to VETS order savings	0%	-7%	-1%	-1%

It should be noted that there is substantial uncertainty around the use of VETS Order flexibilities. As a central assumption, we assume that manufacturers continue to over comply in reducing CO₂ emissions from the non-ZEV fleet enabling them to transfer this overcompliance into ZEV credits. It is assumed that the rate of over compliance is the same as that observed in 2024.

However, the decision to update the VETS Order to adjust for any future utility factor changes could present an opportunity for manufacturers to make use of these flexibilities for longer and in greater scale. This may lead to increased PHEV sales shares beyond 2024 levels, and greater CO₂ savings losses.

There is also a credible scenario where manufacturers fully meet the ZEV target or over comply against the regulation, which would result in increased carbon savings.

List of respondents

• 428 private respondents
• AA
• AESC
• Alliance Healthcare UK
• Ariel Motors
• Association of British Insurers
• Aston Martin
• Auto Trader
• Autocar
• Aviva Investors
• AXA
• Be.EV
• BEAMA
• Bentley
• Birmingham City Council
• BMW
• BP
• Briggs Automotive Company
• Bristol Cars
• BVRLA
• C40 Cities
• CALSTART
• Caravan and Motorhome Club
• Carwow
• Caterham Cars
• Cenex
• char.gy
• ChargeUK
• CIHT
• Clean Air Fund
• Climate Group
• CoMoUK
• Consumer Scotland
• Cornwall Council
• Coryton
• Dynamic Metals
• Easee
• EDF Energy
• Electric Vehicles UK
• Element 2
• Energy Networks Association
• Energy Saving Trust
• Energy UK
• England’s Economic Heartland
• Enterprise Mobility
• EO Charging
• European Small Volume Car Manufacturers Alliance
• EVA England
• ExxonMobil
• Faculty of Public Health
• FairCharge
• Fastned
• Ferrari
• FEVER
• Finance & Leasing Association
• Ford
• Fuels Industry UK
• Furlong Energy
• Gfleet Services
• Great Wall Motors
• Greater London Authority and Transport for London
• Green Alliance
• GRIDSERVE
• Halfords
• Hamblin Group
• Harris MAXUS UK
• Healthy Air Coalition
• Honda
• Hyundai
• IAAF
• IAAPS/University of Bath
• ICCT
• Ilika Technologies
• INA
• INEOS
• Instavolt
• Institute of the Motor Industry
• Institution of Mechanical Engineers
• Isuzu (UK)
• Isuzu Truck
• Jaguar Land Rover
• JAMA
• JCB
• Johnson Matthey
• KGM Motors
• Kia Motors
• Lamborghini
• Leeds Commercial
• LEVC
• Lister Motor Company
• Lloyds Banking Group
• Logistics UK
• London Borough of Hackney
• Lotus Cars
• MAHLE Powertrain
• Make UK
• Mazda
• McLaren
• Mercedes-Benz
• MG
• Micro Mobility Systems AG
• Midlands Connect
• Morgan Motor Company
• Motability Operations
• Motor Fuel Group
• Motorsport UK
• MotorSport Vision Group
• myenergi
• Mykos
• National Energy System Operator
• National Hub for Decarbonised, Adaptable and Resilient Transport Infrastructures
• National Police Chiefs Council
• National Police Estates Environment & Sustainability Group
• New AutoMotive
• NFDA
• Nissan
• Nodum
• Northern Automotive Alliance
• Octopus Electric Vehicles
• Operation Noah
• Osprey Charging Network
• Perth and Kinross Branch of the Scottish Green Party
• Petrol Retailers Association
• PHM
• Pod Point
• Polestar
• Professional Driver Magazine
• Pupils 2 Parliament
• RAA
• Ralph Hosier Engineering Ltd
• REA
• Rear Wheel Drive
• Renault Trucks
• RHA
• Roadchef
• Royal College of Physicians of Edinburgh’s Air Quality working group
• Royal Mail
• RTFA
• SAIC MAXUS
• Sainsbury’s Smart Charge
• Scot Group
• Scottish Power
• Shell
• SMMT
• Stellantis
• Subaru
• Surrey & Sussex Police
• Suzuki
• Sysco
• T&E
• Tesla
• Thatcham Research
• The Association for Decentralised Energy
• The Consumer Council for Northern Ireland
• The Electric Car Scheme
• The Electric Vehicle Network
• Toyota
• Transition Tavistock
• Transport for the South East
• Trojan Energy
• Uber
• UK Health Alliance on Climate Change
• UKSIF
• Unite the Union
• United Kingdom Lubricants Association
• UTAC
• Valero Energy
• VERTU Motors
• Volkswagen
• Volvo
• Wales & West Utilities
• Warwickshire County Council
• WAVCA
• Wells Motor Cars
• West Yorkshire Police
• Winterton Brothers Speed Shop
• WM-Net Zero
• ZapMap
• Zenith
• Zest