U.S. House subcommittee hears testimony on REPAIR Act

A hearing held Tuesday by the U.S. House Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade addressed several transportation-related bills, including the Right to Equitable and Professional Auto Industry Repair (REPAIR) Act, to “strengthen motor vehicle safety.”

Automotive industry organizations and associations have expressed opposition to the bill, saying it would disrupt the vehicle sector, increase consumer risk, weaken safety protections, and expand commercial access to sensitive driver data. They have proposed an alternative framework to ensure repair parity for the independent market with the Safety as First Emphasis (SAFE) Repair Act.

Organizations and associations supported by aftermarket and insurance companies argue in favor of the REPAIR Act, claiming the aftermarket will cease to meaningfully exist due to restrictive access to repair and maintenance data, ultimately causing increased costs and delays in repairs.

Ahead of the hearing, a coalition of 15 automotive industry organizations and associations — including the Society of Collision Repair Specialists (SCRS), the Alliance for Automotive Innovation (Auto Innovators), and the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) — sent a letter to the Committee on Energy and Commerce and the subcommittee in opposition to the REPAIR Act.

The coalition said they’re opposed to it because they “support a competitive repair marketplace and share a common goal of ensuring consumers can keep their vehicles safely and affordably maintained,” according to the letter.

“The United States already has one of the most open and competitive repair ecosystems in the world,” the letter states. “For passenger cars, independent repairers perform 74% of out-of-warranty repairs, and every piece of information needed to diagnose and repair today’s vehicles is available through existing service information tools, scan solutions, and established industry data-sharing programs.”

It adds that previous federal analyses have recognized the motor vehicle sector as the model for self-regulation to expand repair access and consumer choice.

“Unfortunately, the REPAIR Act would not strengthen that system,” the letter states. “Instead, it would disrupt it in ways that increase consumer risk, weaken safety protections, expand commercial access to sensitive driver data, and expose vehicle systems to cyber vulnerabilities.”

Listed in the letter as their “most serious concerns” are that the bill:

• • “Mandates broad access to full streams of vehicle telematics data, far beyond what is necessary for repair;
  • “Gives insurers and large commercial enterprises new avenues to harvest vehicle data for non-repair purposes;
  • “Creates significant safety and cybersecurity vulnerabilities;
  • “Attempts to federalize issues far outside right-to-repair and would give the FTC [Federal Trade Commission] authority to expand access to even more categories of data;
  • “Jeopardizes consumer trust in the rapidly evolving connected vehicle ecosystem;
  • “Not limited to passenger vehicles or individual consumers, but would also disrupt the heavy-duty industry; and
  • “Ignores existing voluntary solutions that are already working and that respect safety, privacy, and security.”

Hilary Cain, Auto Innovators’ senior vice president of policy, testified to the subcommittee that the alliance is committed to working with legislators to enact a comprehensive federal right-to-repair law.

“One that doesn’t force automakers to provide aftermarket parts manufacturers or auto parts retailers with data that isn’t necessary to diagnose or repair a vehicle,” she said. “One that properly protects the intellectual property of automakers. And one that addresses some of the key challenges that remain in the vehicle repair space, including the power of insurance companies to dictate where and how a consumer’s vehicle is repaired.”

Cain submitted written testimony that provides more detail about Auto Innovators’ REPAIR Act views, as well as other bills discussed during the hearing.

A separate letter, written by SCRS, was also sent to the committee and subcommittee ahead of the hearing, opposing the REPAIR Act.”

“While the stated intent of that proposal is to expand access to repair information, SCRS agrees with our members that the REPAIR Act does not accurately reflect or resolve the real-world challenges facing consumers or repair professionals who work to restore safety to America’s roadways,” the letter states.

“Independent collision repairers already have access to original equipment manufacturer (OEM) repair information and instructions, diagnostic tools, and training resources. The primary obstacles to safe and proper repairs are not access-related but rather economic and systemic pressures that incentivize cost-cutting at the expense of OEM-required repair procedures. The REPAIR Act increases accessibility to vehicle data, not to repair information, but provides no added accountability that the already-available repair information will be utilized to effectuate a proper repair for the consumer.”

Instead, SCRS supports the SAFE Repair Act, which it calls “a collaborative legislative framework,” and notes it was developed jointly between repairers and Auto Innovators.

“This proposal reflects extensive industry engagement and is narrowly focused on protecting consumer safety while preserving competition and consumer choice,” the letter states. “The SAFE Repair Act recognizes that vehicle repair today is fundamentally different from vehicle repair of the past. Modern vehicles require precise repair procedures, system initializations and calibrations, and specialized environments and equipment all ensure that safety systems function as designed.

“The SAFE Repair Act proposal safeguards continued access to necessary information and tools while reinforcing the importance of performing repairs in a manner consistent with manufacturer requirements.”

Central Florida Paint & Body also voiced opposition to the REPAIR Act, as outlined in a letter to Rep. Darren Soto (FL-09).

“The REPAIR Act does not provide independent repair facilities like mine with any additional access or capability beyond what already exists to properly and safely repair vehicles,” wrote Nader Akbari, managing partner. “I am increasingly frustrated by organizations claiming to represent independent repairers when their business models and realities bear little resemblance to shops like ours. The claim that independent repair shops are being ‘locked out’ by automakers is inaccurate. That narrative is being driven by parties who stand to benefit most from the REPAIR Act — namely large insurance carriers and corporate entities that profit when consumers are steered, or effectively forced, toward non-OEM or alternative parts instead of the parts vehicle owners actually prefer.

“Independent repair businesses already have access to the data, diagnostic information, and tools required to perform safe and proper vehicle repairs. What we need from lawmakers is not intervention against automakers, but protection from legislation that weakens accountability, lowers repair standards, and compromises vehicle safety in favor of speed, convenience, or corporate cost-cutting.”

He added that instead of advancing the REPAIR Act, legislators should review and support the SAFE Repair Act.

During the hearing on Tuesday, Bill Hanvey, Auto Care Association (ACA) president and CEO, testified that ACA’s top priority, on behalf of its members and all vehicle owners, is the inclusion of the REPAIR Act in the safety title of the Surface Transportation Reauthorization Act.

“The REPAIR Act represents the most complete and thoroughly reviewed bill that will immediately enhance safety for vehicle owners,” he said.

Hanvey added that the REPAIR Act incorporates the priorities of the committee, automakers, the aftermarket, and consumer groups.

“Our industry performs more than 70% of the out-of-warranty repairs,” he said. “But over the last 10 years, with the introduction of wirelessly transmitted vehicle data or telematics, owners have seen threats to their repair choices. Vehicle manufacturers are increasingly restricting access to repair and maintenance data. forcing vehicle owners into franchise dealers where costs are, on average, 36% higher and repair wait times are significantly longer. The need for the REPAIR Act is critical and real.

“A survey of independent repair shops concluded that they send, on average, one to five vehicles each month back to the dealership due to data restrictions, costing consumers millions in added repair expenses. This problem will only get exponentially worse if Congress does not act now.”

The sample-based nationwide survey, fielded by ACA in 2024, found 84% of the 407 individuals who participated view vehicle repair and maintenance data access as the top issue for their businesses. However, it’s unclear how many unique businesses were represented by the survey. ACA didn’t share whether they included individuals from collision repair businesses.

ACA said responses were collected nationwide from individuals without providing their specific business affiliations. The study has a margin of error of 5%, according to the ACA.

The CAR Coalition, American Property Casualty Insurance Association (APCIA), and National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) also voiced support for the REPAIR Act in press releases published on Tuesday.

“Access to the data that vehicles collect is required for an increasing number of repairs, even for common parts, such as windshields,” CAR Coalition wrote. “Automakers want to restrict access to that data so consumers will be forced to use manufacturer parts and automaker-affiliated dealerships for repairs, where prices are higher, and choices are fewer. The REPAIR Act would ensure that vehicle owners and the independent repair shops they choose would have access to the data needed to fix their cars and trucks.”

Justin Rzepka, CAR Coalition executive director, added, “The numbers don’t lie; vehicle owners believe they should be in the driver’s seat when it comes to repairing their own vehicles and accessing their vehicle data, not the auto manufacturers. As bipartisan support for a national vehicle right-to-repair law continues to grow, we applaud our champions in the House and Senate for supporting the REPAIR Act and look forward to returning consumers the right to repair their own vehicles once and for all.”

According to the NFIB, driving to dealerships or waiting for repairs negatively affects small business growth.

“For a small business operating on tight margins, this time is money pulled from their livelihood,” said Louis Bertolotti, NFIB principal of federal government relations, in the release. “As technological advances have increased in vehicles, some auto manufacturers have found ways to restrict access to data critical to conducting even the simplest of repairs. As a result, small businesses are forced to rely on vehicle repair options that can have longer wait times, higher costs, and require further travel. In today’s fast-paced economy, small businesses simply cannot afford to waste these resources.”

Other bills discussed during the hearing included:

• • H.R. ____, Motor Vehicle Modernization Act (Chairman Guthrie)
  • H.R. ____, Safety Is Not for Sale Act of 2026 (Ranking Member Pallone)
  • H.R. ____, Safely Ensuring Lives Future Deployment and Research In Vehicle Evolution (SELF DRIVE) Act of 2026 (Reps. Latta and Dingell)
  • H.R. 1566, Right to Equitable and Professional Auto Industry Repair (REPAIR) Act (Reps. Dunn and Perez)
  • H.R. 4376, AV Safety Data Act (Rep. Mullin)
  • H.R. 3360, Driver Technology and Pedestrian Safety Act (Rep. Mullin)
  • H.R. 6687, DRIVER Act (Rep. Harshbarger)
  • H.R. 6688, ADAS Functionality and Integrity Act (Reps. Harshbarger, Obernolte, Vazquez, and Torres)
  • H.R. 6850, DRIVE to HALT Drunk Driving Act (Rep. Dingell)
  • H.R. 1137, No Kill Switches in Cars Act (Rep. Perry)
  • H.R. 3385, To direct the Secretary of Transportation to issue certain regulations to update the definition of motorcycle, and for other purposes. (Rep. Van Orden)
  • H.R. 5221, PART Act (Reps. Baird and McCollum)
  • H.R. 2110, Safe Vehicle Access for Survivors Act (Reps. Dingell and Crenshaw)
  • H.R. ____, Know Before You Drive Act (Rep. Schrier)
  • H.R. ____, Securing Accessible Functional Emergency (SAFE) Exit Act (Rep. Kelly-IL)
  • H.R. ____, Safe Streets for Everyone Act of 2026 (Rep. Clarke)

REPAIR Act co-sponsor and House Committee on Energy and Commerce Vice Chair Rep. Dr. Neal Dunn (FL-02) announced Tuesday he would not seek re-election following the end of his fifth term.

“The time has come to pass the torch to new conservative leaders, return home to Panama City, and spend more precious time with my family and our beloved grandchildren,” said Dunn in a statement announcing his retirement.

Images

Featured image credit: Jeremy Poland/iStock