In December, the European Commission published its Clean Corporate Vehicles proposal as part of the broader Automotive Package. 

Its stated aim is to accelerate the uptake of zero- and low-emission vehicles in corporate fleets, which account for around 60% of new car registrations and up to 90% of new vans across the EU.

On paper, it sounds reasonable. Corporate fleets turn over faster than private vehicles, so greening them should accelerate the supply of cleaner cars into the second-hand market and, by extension, should benefit consumers and the environment.

But having examined the detail carefully, our view is that this proposal is fundamentally flawed in its design and risks doing more harm than good.

A regulation without a mechanism

The proposal sets mandatory targets at Member State level for the share of zero- and low-emission vehicles in new corporate registrations by large undertakings, starting from 2030. 

But it does not impose direct obligations on individual companies. 

Instead, it gives Member States broad discretion to design national measures, which could range from incentives and tax adjustments to access restrictions and tolling, to reach those targets.

This creates a fundamental disconnect. Member States have a target to meet, but no standardised way of passing that obligation to the businesses actually registering the vehicles. 

The result will almost certainly be a patchwork of different national regimes across Europe, creating complexity and competitive distortions. 

The targets also relate to annual registrations of new vehicles, not the overall composition of a fleet. 

So, if a company happens to need to replace only ICE vans each year, or needs to expand its fleet to meet demand, it faces an impossible compliance puzzle.

Technology neutrality with one hand, mandates with the other

What makes this proposal especially frustrating is the context in which it arrives. 

The same Automotive Package includes a revision of the CO₂ emission standards that introduces greater flexibility and acknowledges the role that technologies like e-fuels and plug-in hybrids can play alongside battery electric vehicles. 

The Commission has explicitly talked about reinstating technological neutrality as a guiding principle.

Yet the Clean Corporate Vehicles proposal does the opposite. 

By defining “clean” almost exclusively in terms of tailpipe emissions, it effectively narrows the field to battery electric vehicles and, to a lesser extent, plug-in hybrids. 

Vehicles running on renewable or synthetic fuels, which could deliver significant emissions reductions, are excluded. This is a planned economy approach to a problem that requires market-led solutions.

The proposal also bans Member States from providing financial support for the purchase, lease or operation of corporate ICE vehicles from 2028, and ties eligibility for support to a “Made in the EU” requirement that hasn’t yet been defined. 

The combination of mandates, subsidy withdrawal and protectionist conditions is a recipe for uncertainty. 

The view from the loading bay

As an operator of large fleets across multiple European markets, we can speak from direct experience about the practical challenges this proposal would create.

Electric vans remain significantly more expensive to purchase or lease, offer limited range and require daily downtime for charging that eats into delivery schedules. 

The market offering for electric light commercial vehicles is still limited compared to their ICE equivalents. 

And charging infrastructure varies enormously between Member States. What might be feasible in the Netherlands is a very different proposition in Romania, for example. 

These aren’t arguments against electrification. We are actively investing in the EV transition across our business and the aftermarket we serve. 

But mandating targets without the enabling conditions being in place penalises the businesses trying to navigate it.

What this means for the aftermarket

For the wider aftermarket, the implications are significant. 

If implemented as proposed, this regulation would distort the second-hand market by flooding it with vehicles that may not suit the needs of the SMEs and smaller operators who inherit them. 

It could depress residual values of electric corporate vehicles, creating the same affordability and battery replacement challenges I’ve written about before.

It would also add yet another layer of regulatory complexity for an industry already navigating MVBER, Type Approval, end-of-life vehicle regulations and more. 

And the fragmented national implementation all but guarantees inconsistent outcomes across the EU’s single market.

Making our voice heard

We’ve provided detailed feedback on this proposal through our industry partners and will continue to engage as it moves through the legislative process in the European Parliament and Council this year.

While we support ambitious decarbonisation goals for transport, we need regulation that is workable, technology-neutral and grounded in operational reality. 

Incentives that create the right conditions for businesses to invest in cleaner fleets will always be more effective than mandates that ignore the constraints they operate under.

The CO₂ standards revision shows the Commission can take a pragmatic approach. 

The same thinking needs to be applied here before this proposal creates more problems than it solves.

As always, I’m keen to hear from others who are grappling with these challenges. 

If this proposal would affect your business, share your thoughts below. Your experiences are exactly the kind of evidence we need to make the case for sensible reform.