The Trump transition team has proposed eliminating a car-crash reporting requirement opposed by Elon Musk’s Tesla, raising concerns about the government’s ability to investigate and regulate automated driving systems. This recommendation, part of a broader strategy to ease regulations for the automotive industry, has sparked controversy, particularly among safety advocates and federal agencies.
The Reporting Rule and Its Impact
Established in 2021 by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the crash-reporting rule mandates automakers to disclose crashes involving advanced driver-assistance systems or autonomous-driving technologies. This data is critical for understanding the safety of emerging technologies and identifying patterns that could indicate systemic safety issues.
Since the rule’s inception, NHTSA has received data on more than 2,700 crashes, enabling 10 investigations and prompting nine safety recalls. For example, the rule was instrumental in scrutinizing Tesla’s “Autopilot” feature after fatal accidents, including one in Virginia where a Tesla collided with a tractor-trailer and another in California where a Tesla struck a firetruck, killing the driver and injuring four firefighters.
Former NHTSA employees emphasize that without such reporting, identifying recurring safety issues in advanced driver-assistance systems would be exceedingly difficult. The data has already led to significant actions, including a $1.5 million fine against General Motors’ Cruise subsidiary for failing to report a 2023 incident where a robotaxi dragged a pedestrian.
Tesla’s Opposition to the Rule
Tesla, one of the most prominent developers of advanced driver-assistance technologies, has been a major target of NHTSA investigations due to its frequent reporting of crashes. According to a Reuters analysis, Tesla accounted for 40 of 45 fatal crashes involving driver-assistance technologies reported to NHTSA by mid-October 2024.
The company argues that the reporting rule unfairly portrays it as having a disproportionate number of crashes, largely because Tesla collects and reports more comprehensive data than other automakers. Experts like University of South Carolina law professor Bryant Walker Smith agree that Tesla’s advanced data collection likely results in a higher proportion of reported incidents compared to its competitors.
Tesla also contends that its vehicles’ popularity and the frequent use of its driver-assistance features increase the likelihood of encountering situations where these systems may fail. Despite these arguments, NHTSA has cautioned that the crash data is not meant to compare automakers’ safety records directly, as each company’s reporting methods differ.
Trump Transition Team’s Proposal
The recommendation to scrap the reporting rule aligns with broader efforts by the Trump transition team to reduce what they consider excessive regulatory burdens. The team described the rule as a mandate for “excessive” data collection and suggested the administration adopt a more “liberalized” approach to autonomous-vehicle regulation.
Elon Musk, who has advocated for federal approval processes to replace state-by-state regulations, reportedly discussed the crash-reporting rule with Tesla executives. The company ultimately concluded that achieving such regulatory changes would require a new administration, given the Biden administration’s support for the program.
In addition to calling for the elimination of the reporting rule, the transition team’s recommendations include enacting basic regulations to accelerate the development of autonomous-driving technologies.
Safety vs. Innovation
Critics of the proposal argue that removing the reporting requirement could significantly undermine public safety. NHTSA has highlighted the importance of such data in ensuring that automated-driving systems are safe for public use. Without it, regulators could lose a vital tool for detecting and addressing safety issues.
Supporters of the recommendation, including the Alliance for Automotive Innovation, argue that the rule imposes unnecessary burdens on automakers, potentially stifling innovation in a rapidly evolving industry.
The Road Ahead
As the debate unfolds, the conflict highlights a fundamental tension between innovation and public safety in the autonomous vehicle industry. While easing regulations may foster technological advancements, maintaining robust oversight is crucial to ensuring that these technologies serve the public good without compromising safety. Whether the Trump administration adopts the transition team’s recommendations will have significant implications for the future of automotive policy in the United States.
