Browse Topic: Legislation
Over the past few Supplier Eye columns, we have explored the impact of weakened U.S. emissions legislation and the loss of global scale economies. In isolation, suppliers could devise a gameplan to accommodate either of these shifts. Together, though, a completely revised approach is necessary. The combination demands that suppliers re-evaluate all facets of market strategies. Given this increased U.S. isolation, is there a possibility that the next five years could be the golden age of our industry? A period where the U.S. takes a pause from the speed and technical requirements of the rest of the world's markets to focus on our internal market? Leave global considerations on the doorstep? It is not only a possibility but a likely reality into the next decade.
Autonomous vehicle (AV) regulatory frameworks vary significantly across global regions, with the United States, European Union (EU), and China exemplifying distinct approaches. The US adopts a decentralized model, allowing state-level regulation with federal guidance, fostering testing and commercial deployment of Level 4 automation. The EU enforces a harmonized, safety-focused framework under legislation like Regulation (EU) 2019/2144 and (EU) 2022/1426, emphasizing structured validation within defined operational domains. China employs a centralized regulatory hierarchy, integrating national standards with localized pilot programs and connected infrastructure. While the US leads in commercial deployment and China advances through coordinated efforts, the EU’s cautious framework is often perceived as a barrier to rapid AV adoption. This paper critically analyzes these regulatory models, emphasizing the need for a robust, harmonized framework that ensures safety and public trust without imposing unnecessary barriers by evaluating the current landscape and future perspectives for effective AV adoption.
September is unofficially known in the industry as a key forecasting month. It's when several suppliers lock in their revenue forecasts for the next year. As we approach 2026, there are still several balls in the air with respect to the trajectory of the light vehicle market. Looming U.S. tariffs, negative economic and geo-political shifts, and the impact of changes to U.S. vehicle emission legislation have all brought with them a cloud of uncertainty that hovers over the industry. An industry that requires greater planning clarity, not less. Let's start with the tariffs. As of this writing, the major vehicle and parts importers outside of North America have agreed to 15% U.S. tariffs for vehicles and parts. In the case of Japan and the European Union, this is 12.5 percentage points higher than 2024 levels. In the case of South Korea, it's 15 points more, as there was a free trade agreement in force. While these framework agreements drive some level of certainty, the final details still need to be hashed out.
Those of us who read - or, even worse, work at - a magazine that puts power electronics on the cover know we're strange folk. Some of the incredible technologies discussed in our cover story this month are not only making real-world efficiency and cost impacts today, they can also help us understand the current moment a bit better. One of the reasons that we have overall better devices today is a governmental program called U.S. DRIVE. That government-industry partnership set power electronic efficiency targets in 2017 that have not only been met but, as you can read starting on page 16, far exceeded.
Suppliers are learning several new and unwelcome lessons as the dynamics surrounding U.S. light vehicle trade and emissions legislation quickly shifts. Two major issues are at play here. As the industry continues to feel the impact of reduced or eliminated battery electric vehicle incentives in several North American and European jurisdictions and governments are retrenching on light vehicle emissions legislation - OEMs are questioning the size of the near- and mid-term market. Similarly, as of this writing, the saga surrounding future vehicle and parts tariffs between the U.S. and its major automotive trading partners continues. This unfortunate combination has driven OEMs to delay, extend and rescope future product programs. This jams a stick in the financial spokes of the supply base. Some context is in order. Like clockwork, in the highly competitive global light vehicle market, our industry was trained to expect a regular cadence for product renewals and product cycles. The combination of strong competition, emissions and safety regulations driving a constant stream of innovative technologies, and the need to improve fuel economy led the industry to adopt a regimented product cycle for most light vehicle segments. OEMs and suppliers alike assumed a 2.5-5-7.5-10-year cadence for future product revisions. This outlined that once an all-new vehicle was launched, one should expect a mid-cycle enhancement (MCE) at year 2.5 and a major revision at year 5. At year 7.5 another mid-cycle enhancement, then an all-new structure would follow for year 10. This sequence allowed for a healthy dose of new technology and styling to attract new/repeat customers and improve efficiency and an ever-stringent regulatory environment. While some vehicles strayed from this timing, most OEMs adopted it.
For my nearly 60-year lifetime, I have had the benefit of being part of a North American Automotive Industry that was, from a production perspective, completely rationalized and optimized. Given the unprecedented political events of the last couple of months, maybe we should all consider ourselves fortunate. Strong competition and a free market allowed for components, systems and vehicles to be produced in the optimal location with an optimized supply chain, all structured to serve markets in the U.S., Canada and Mexico with some exports mixed in. Consumers, dealers, suppliers and vehicle manufacturers all benefit from this optimized structure.
It is a fool's errand to make timely comments - in print! - about our current political turmoil. Even so, it feels important to place a marker in the sand to note the ongoing political reign of tariff threats, the upheaval potential of a demolished regulatory state affecting road and vehicle safety, and the damage that cuts to electric vehicle support might do to American automakers attempting to keep technological pace with their global automaker peers. It's a lot. The mainstream press is reporting the broad strokes of the industry's reaction to the new president. Ford CEO Jim Farley said Trump's erratic threats and changes are adding “a lot of cost and a lot of chaos” to the automotive industry and that a 25% tariff would “blow a hole in the U.S. industry that we've never seen.” Volvo Cars CEO Jim Rowan said that profitability would suffer under any tariffs, whether those are the general 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico (now seemingly canceled after Trump backed down), just-announced 10% tariffs on steel and aluminum or some yet-to-be-spoken-aloud new tariff concept. Industry analyst Sam Fiorani told The Independent the obvious truth that “raising the price of what is among the most important components of the vehicle is only going to raise the prices of an already expensive product.”
Sensata Technologies' booth at this year's IAA Transportation tradeshow included two of the company's Precor radar sensors. The PreView STA79 is a heavy-duty vehicle side-monitoring system launched in May 2024 and designed to comply with Europe-wide blind spot monitoring legislation introduced in June 2024. The PreView Sentry 79 is a front- and rear-monitoring system. Both systems operate on the 79-GHz band as the nomenclature suggests. PreView STA79 can cover up to three vehicle zones: a configurable center zone, which can monitor the length of the vehicle, and two further zones that can be independently set to align with individual customer needs. The system offers a 180-degree field of view to eliminate blind spots along the vehicle sides and a built-in measurement unit that will increase the alert level when turning toward an object even when the turn indicator is not used. The system also features trailer mitigation to reduce false positive alerts on the trailer when turning. The system is UN 151 compliant.
R-1234yf is used in almost every new car sold in the U.S., but the EU is discussing a ban and the industry is investigating alternatives like CO2 and propane. According to its manufacturer, Chemours, use of R-1234yf has grown so much since the refrigerant replaced the long-established R-134a that it's now used in 95% of new cars sold in the U.S. An estimated 220 million cars on global roads are also using it. The problem with R-134a, which came in cars and trucks in the 1990s, is that it's a gas with “a global warming potential (GWP) that is 1,430 times that of CO2,” according to the EPA. Since 2017, EU legislation has banned the use of any refrigerant in new vehicles with a GWP higher than 150. That rule doomed R-134a but opened the door for R-1234yf, which has a GWP of only four. The EU is currently revisiting R-1234yf emissions rules and may ban the substance in a few years. In the U.S., the EPA stands by its use.
You've got regulations, cost and personal preferences all getting in the way of the next generation of automated vehicles. Oh, and those pesky legal issues about who's at fault should something happen. Under all these big issues lie the many small sensors that today's AVs and ADAS packages require. This big/small world is one topic we're investigating in this issue. I won't pretend I know exactly which combination of cameras and radar and lidar sensors works best for a given AV, or whether thermal cameras and new point cloud technologies should be part of the mix. But the world is clearly ready to spend a lot of money figuring these problems out.
Advanced Autonomous Vehicles (AV) for SAE Level 3 and Level 4 functions will lead to a new understanding of the operation phase in the overall product lifecycle. Regulations such as the EU Implementing Act and the German L4 Act (AFGBV) request a continuous field surveillance, the handling of critical E/E faults and software updates during operation. This is required to enhance the Operational Design Domain (ODD) during operation, offering Functions on Demand (FoD), by increasing software features within these autonomous vehicle systems over the entire digital product lifecycle, and to avoid and reduce downtime by a malfunction of the Autonomous Driving (AD) software stack. Supported by implemented effective management systems for Cyber Security (R155), Software Update Management System (R156) and a Safety Management System (SMS) (in compliance to Automated Lane Keeping System (ALKS) (R157)), the organizations have to ensure safe and secure development, deployment and operation to fulfill legal requirements. Based on senior expert interviews from relevant AD stakeholders, a blueprint is developed to support the deployment and scalability of AD systems. Relevant roles for the operation will be presented and current gaps in the industry, regulation and academia are highlighted.
Design innovation and an exclusive new tool for measuring carbon footprint have made Adient a sustainability leader among Tier-1s. Sustainability no longer is a vague aspiration for OEMs and suppliers looking for a ‘green’ veil. It's rapidly become a guiding tenet of product innovation, and ESG progress, as the industry pushes toward net-zero carbon goals in most major markets. “Currently, it's coming mainly from the European OEMs and the European legislature,” explained Mike Maddelein, VP engineering, Americas, at seating systems Tier 1 Adient. “They're driving carbon-footprint reduction and the industry is getting very, very serious about it. The European OEMs are starting to specify sustainability targets in their RFQs.” North America is probably two years behind, he believes, but will follow Europe's sustainability plan - if not through direct legislation, then by the OEMs themselves.
In a surprising move that paves the way for the European Union's adoption of a mandate to eliminate vehicle CO2 emissions, on March 25 the EU reached an agreement with Germany to step back from a complete ban of combustion-engine vehicles starting in 2035. The EU agreed to permit sales and registration of IC-engine models after the 2035 deadline - provided those vehicles operate only on carbon-neutral fuels, often generically referred to as ‘e-fuels.’ With a significant portion of its economy related to the historically ICE-based automotive industry, Germany had resisted the EU's total ban, although its Parliament's Green Party supported the forced sunsetting of ICE passenger vehicles. Reuters reported German Transport Minister Volker Wissing as tweeting, “We secure opportunities for Europe by preserving important options for climate-neutral and affordable mobility.” In another Twitter post, Wissing reportedly added, “Vehicles with internal combustion engines can still be newly registered after 2035 if they fill up exclusively with CO2-neutral fuels.”
This standard applies to the aerospace and defense industries and their supply chains.
Facial recognition software (FRS) is a form of biometric security that detects a face, analyzes it, converts it to data, and then matches it with images in a database. This technology is currently being used in vehicles for safety and convenience features, such as detecting driver fatigue, ensuring ride share drivers are wearing a face covering, or unlocking the vehicle. Public transportation hubs can also use FRS to identify missing persons, intercept domestic terrorism, deter theft, and achieve other security initiatives. However, biometric data is sensitive and there are numerous remaining questions about how to implement and regulate FRS in a way that maximizes its safety and security potential while simultaneously ensuring individual’s right to privacy, data security, and technology-based equality. Legal Issues Facing Automated Vehicles, Facial Recognition, and Individual Rights seeks to highlight the benefits of using FRS in public and private transportation technology and addresses some of the legitimate concerns regarding its use by private corporations and government entities, including law enforcement, in public transportation hubs and traffic stops. Constitutional questions, including First, Forth, and Ninth Amendment issues, also remain unanswered. FRS is now a permanent part of transportation technology and society; with meaningful legislation and conscious engineering, it can make future transportation safer and more convenient. Click here to access the full SAE EDGETM Research Report portfolio.
Products and services must be provided without jeopardizing safety for end-users. It is a fact that failures that compromise the health or safety of the user of the product (or with other people that interact with it) are recognized as one of the biggest problems for any manufacturer, mainly if these failures are identified after the product sales which leads to the necessity of the recall, where the manufacturer is responsible for a corrective action under the country’s legislation. In this work, the reasons and causes of the automotive recall were studied from 2011 to 2019, with emphasis on failures resulting from the production process. This research comprised all models and brands of national and or imported vehicles marketed in Brazil in the period, which represented a total of 886 Brazilian automotive recalls were studied individually, and 13,930,803 motor vehicles involved in recalls. The recalls were divided into two main causes: defects arising from failures in product development and/or the manufacturing process. Product development failures are associated with product development, product specifications, validations, and tests, while failures in the manufacturing process are associated with the development of manufacturing processes, control processes, defects in manufacturing devices, human failures, incorrect storage, damage to the product during the distribution and use of defective or wrong raw materials. When adding up all the vehicles from this research sample, it was observed that the product recall was responsible for 72.95% while the recall due to process failures was responsible for 27.05% of the total vehicles. At the end of this work, the trends of the Brazilian automotive recall will be presented, as soon as their causes and whether there have been advances or not in these serious quality problems that are the cause of automotive recalls. Recall; Automotive industry; Quality
An electronic assembly is created by integrating thousands of parts from multiple suppliers utilizing a host of circuit card manufacturing processes. With the lead elimination from electronics resulting from the European Union Reduction of Hazardous Substances (RoHS) legislation, many of the heritage aerospace and defense commercial off the shelf (COTS) solder materials with tin–lead have become obsolete. Most notably there has been an increasing cost and schedule pressure to use commercially available pure tin part finishes and lead–free solders in aerospace and defense electronic systems.
Items per page:
50
1 – 50 of 655