VT Bill Would Eliminate Annual Inspections for Most Vehicles

VT Bill Would Eliminate Annual Inspections for Most Vehicles

Freshman legislator’s proposal joins growing national trend to scrap mandatory safety checks

A newly introduced bill in the Vermont House would exempt most passenger vehicles from mandatory annual safety and emissions inspections, potentially saving Vermonters tens of millions annually while reigniting debate over whether such programs improve road safety—or simply provide infrastructure for future government overreach.

House Bill H.690, introduced by Representative Mike Tagliavia (R Orange-1), exempts all noncommercial motor vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 14,000 pounds or less. For practical purposes, this covers nearly every personal vehicle on Vermont roads. The bill would take effect July 1, 2026.

What the Bill Does

The legislation amends 23 V.S.A. § 1222 to exempt noncommercial vehicles under the weight threshold, while leaving inspection requirements intact for school buses, motor buses, and commercial vehicles.

Currently, all Vermont-registered vehicles must undergo annual safety inspections and, for vehicles 16 model years old or less, emissions testing. Vehicle owners typically pay $35-60 for inspections plus a $6 state sticker fee. Failed inspections can trigger hundreds in repair costs.

Vermont Would Join a Growing Trend

Only 14 states still require annual safety inspections. New Hampshire eliminates passenger vehicle inspections January 31, 2026. Texas dropped its requirement January 1, 2025. States including Florida, Iowa, Michigan, and Alaska have never required periodic inspections.

The Safety Debate: Inconclusive at Best

The federal Government Accountability Office reviewed the evidence in 2015 and found “three U.S. studies of the relationship between safety inspections and crash rates over the past two decades have failed to find statistically significant differences in crash rates in states with inspection programs compared to those without.”

More fundamentally, NHTSA data shows vehicle component failure causes only about 2 percent of crashes. Driver behavior causes 94 percent. Why mandate an expensive program targeting such a tiny slice of accidents?

Florida has never required inspections; Massachusetts requires both safety and emissions testing annually. Florida’s 2023 fatality rate: 15.2 per 100,000. Massachusetts: 4.9—the nation’s lowest. But Massachusetts also has dense urban driving, excellent emergency services, and high seatbelt compliance. Mississippi has the highest fatality rate at 24.9—with no inspection program—but also has rural roads and higher impaired driving rates. Nobody can isolate the inspection variable from dozens of confounding factors.

The Hidden Agenda: Mileage Tracking Infrastructure

Here’s what legislators won’t say publicly: the annual inspection system isn’t just about safety—it’s infrastructure for future vehicle miles traveled (VMT) taxes.

Vermont’s Agency of Transportation has been studying VMT fees since 2021 and backs a plan to record odometer readings at annual inspections. Patrick Murphy, the agency’s sustainability manager, told the Senate Transportation Committee in 2024 that using inspections to track mileage avoids “privacy concerns” and “high costs” of GPS tracking. Translation: the inspection station becomes a state data collection point.

🍁 Make a One-Time Contribution — Stand Up for Accountability in Vermont 🍁

Massachusetts is further along. Senate Bill 2246, the “Freedom to Move Act,” would establish statewide VMT reduction goals and create an “interagency coordinating council” to reduce how much people drive. Senate Majority Leader Cynthia Creem said the quiet part out loud: “Setting specific goals for reducing vehicle miles traveled would help guide decisions made across state government.”

Anyone who thinks Vermont’s Democrat/Progressive legislators aren’t watching Massachusetts hasn’t been paying attention. Eliminating inspections removes a convenient chokepoint for tracking—and eventually taxing—every mile Vermonters drive.

Inspections as Criminal Liability

The inspection regime also creates perverse legal jeopardy for mechanics.

In 2014, Barre mechanic Steven Jalbert inspected an elderly couple’s 1992 Chevy Corsica. Two months later, the brakes failed, killing 83-year-old Elizabeth Ibey. The Attorney General charged Jalbert with manslaughter.

Jalbert had previously recommended replacing rusted brake lines, but the owners refused. He allegedly didn’t put the car on a lift or test the brakes before passing it. He pleaded guilty to reckless endangerment and got 90 days of house arrest.

But an inspection is a snapshot, not a warranty. Brake lines can fail a week after passing. The Jalbert case—Vermont’s first criminal prosecution of an inspection mechanic—sent a chill through the industry. It was reported that some mechanics were refusing to inspect older cars rather than risk criminal charges. The state wants inspections as both a revenue ritual and a liability shield that can imprison mechanics when vehicles inevitably fail.

Economic Impact

Vermont’s inspection station network generates significant revenue from fees. The AVIP system collects $2.26 per inspection in vendor fees plus the $6 state sticker fee.

For vehicle owners, eliminating inspections could save $50-100 annually in direct costs, plus avoided repair mandates. Across Vermont’s roughly 500,000 registered vehicles, aggregate savings approach $25-50 million annually.

Political Prospects

H.690 faces uncertain prospects in a legislature where Democrats still hold a majority. Environmental concerns around emissions testing may generate opposition, and inspection mechanics statewide could see reduced work—adding labor considerations.

The bill has not yet been assigned to a committee. But Tagliavia has introduced legislation that will force a conversation about regulatory costs, personal responsibility, and whether Vermont’s inspection program—established when vehicles were far less reliable—still makes sense in 2026.

If you found this information valuable and want to support independent journalism in Vermont, become a supporter for just $5/month today!

Dave Soulia | FYIVT

You can find FYIVT on YouTube | X(Twitter) | Facebook | Instagram

#fyivt #VermontPolitics #H690 #VehicleInspections

Support Us for as Little as $5 – Get In The Fight!!

Make a Big Impact with $25/month—Become a Premium Supporter!

Join the Top Tier of Supporters with $50/month—Become a SUPER Supporter!


Discover more from FYIVT

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

admin Avatar

One response to “VT Bill Would Eliminate Annual Inspections for Most Vehicles”

  1. H. Jay Eshelman Avatar
    H. Jay Eshelman

    Check out Ohio.

    Ohio does not require statewide periodic safety inspections for most privately owned motor vehicles (passenger cars, light trucks, etc.). Unlike many states, there is no annual or biennial safety inspection mandated across the entire state of Ohio for registration renewal of standard personal vehicles.

    There are, however, emission tests in Ohio (known as E-Check) that are required in certain counties. The few counties requiring E-Check in Ohio are not determined by the Ohio legislature but chosen based on federal mandates under the Clean Air Act, administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

    Nonetheless, while Ohio’s motor vehicle safety record is not particularly suspect nor notably worse than the national average, Ohio’s record compares favorably to Vermont’s when looking at fatality rates per 100 million vehicle miles traveled, the standard metric for comparing roadway danger adjusted for driving exposure.

    It seems reasonable to conclude then, that even with no mandated motor vehicle inspections, Ohio’s roads are generally safer per mile driven than Vermont’s. Thus, the expense of Vermont’s legislated requirement for motor vehicle inspections has no reasonable basis.

Leave a Reply to H. Jay EshelmanCancel reply

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

By signing up, you agree to the our terms and our Privacy Policy agreement.

RSS icon Subscribe to RSS