Accelerated Vehicle Retirement for
Fuel Economy: “Cash for Clunkers”
Brent D. Yacobucci
Specialist in Energy and Environmental Policy
Bill Canis
Specialist in Industrial Organization and Business
August 10, 2009
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
R40654
CRS Report for Congress
P
repared for Members and Committees of Congress
Accelerated Vehicle Retirement for Fuel Economy: “Cash for Clunkers”
Summary
In an attempt to boost sagging U.S. auto sales and to promote higher vehicle fuel economy, the
President signed legislation on June 24, 2009—P.L. 111-32—establishing a program to provide
rebates to prospective purchasers toward the purchase of new, fuel-efficient vehicles, provided the
trade-in vehicles are scrapped. The program provides rebates of $3,500 or $4,500, depending on
fuel economy and vehicle type of both the new vehicle and the vehicle to be disposed of. An
amount of $1 billion was appropriated for the program, which was established to cover sales
between July 1 and November 1, 2009.
Similar programs have been implemented in various U.S. states, but this would be the first federal
program. Further, in general those state pilot programs focused on retiring vehicles with older,
and in some cases malfunctioning, emissions control systems in order to promote better air
quality. The Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save (CARS) program (also called the Car
Allowance Rebate System) focuses, instead, on higher fuel economy and promoting U.S. auto
sales. Similar vehicle retirement programs have been implemented in other countries, such as
Japan, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom, and have provided at least a temporary boost
in auto sales.
It was anticipated by industry executives and government officials alike that the impact of this
program would be limited for several reasons. First, the time frame of the program is limited,
covering only sales between July 1 and November 1, 2009. The bill provided the National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) with only 30 days to complete the rulemaking
process, so the official start of the program was delayed until July 24, 2009. Second, the initial $1
billion only allows for rebates for around 250,000 vehicles, which may provide a “shot in the
arm” to new vehicle sales, but is unlikely to promote a long-term rebound in the auto market.
Third, the environmental benefit of the program is questionable, as the program will retire a
limited number of vehicles, and as the required increase in fuel economy is low (only 1 mile per
gallon in the case of larger trucks).
After officially launching on June 24, 2009, when NHTSA regulations were issued, the CARS
program was embraced by thousands of consumers and by auto dealers across the country, who
advertised it widely. By the end of the first week, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)
announced that nearly all of the funds appropriated for it were committed, based on rising dealer
applications for rebate reimbursements and surveying of dealer backlogs.
Recognizing the stimulative effect of the program, the House of Representatives voted to
appropriate additional funds (H.R. 3435) on July 31, 2009. It raises the appropriation by $2
billion, tapping funds from the economic recovery act (American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act, or ARRA, P.L. 111-5). The appropriation passed under the suspension of the rules and by a
vote of 316-109. The Senate passed H.R. 3435 on August 6 by a vote of 60-37, and President
Obama signed the bill into law (P.L. 111-47) on August 7.
This report outlines the key provisions of the CARS program, discusses the initial impact of the
program and some of the concerns raised by Senators. It also summarizes similar programs in
other countries.
Congressional Research Service
Accelerated Vehicle Retirement for Fuel Economy: “Cash for Clunkers”
Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
CARS Program ........................................................................................................................... 2
Program Regulations............................................................................................................. 3
Value of a Rebate .................................................................................................................. 3
Eligible Trade-in Vehicle................................................................................................. 4
Eligible New Vehicle....................................................................................................... 4
Rebate Value ................................................................................................................... 4
Impact of the Program: Expectations and Reality .................................................................. 5
Expected Auto Industry/Sales.......................................................................................... 5
Expected Fuel and Greenhouse Gas Savings.................................................................... 5
July 2009 Experience ...................................................................................................... 6
Comparison to Programs in Other Countries................................................................................ 7
Tables
Table 1. Criteria for Determining CARS Rebate Value................................................................. 4
Table 2. Recent Foreign Fleet Modernization Programs ............................................................... 8
Contacts
Author Contact Information ........................................................................................................ 9
Congressional Research Service
Accelerated Vehicle Retirement for Fuel Economy: “Cash for Clunkers”
Introduction
In an attempt to boost sagging U.S. auto sales and to promote higher vehicle fuel economy,
Congress has passed several proposals this spring:
• On June 9, 2009, the House passed H.R. 2751, authorizing a four-year, $4 billion
program. The Senate did not act on this bill.
• On June 18, the Senate passed the conference report to the Supplemental
Appropriations Act of 2009 (H.R. 2346); the House had passed it two days
earlier. While focused on supplemental military appropriations, Title XIII of the
bill included the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save (CARS) program.
Added in conference, this provision is similar to H.R. 2751.1 A bill with more
stringent qualification requirements was introduced in the Senate (S. 247), but
was never considered on the Senate floor. The President signed the bill on June
24, 2009 (P.L. 111-32).
• On June 31, 2009, the House passed H.R. 3435, appropriating an additional $2
billion for CARS, with funding to be taken from the economic stimulus law, the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-5). The Senate
passed the bill on August 6, and President Obama signed the bill into law (P.L.
111-47) on August 7. This legislation was enacted because the $1 billion included
in the Supplemental Appropriations was nearly fully committed only a week after
the official regulations were issued and the CARS program would have ended if
additional funds were not approved.
The CARS program provides consumers with a rebate of up to $4,500 toward the purchase of a
new, more fuel-efficient vehicle. The value of the rebate is based on the fuel economy and fuel
savings of the new vehicle compared to the old vehicle, as well as the vehicle class of both (i.e.,
passenger car, light truck, or work truck). To qualify for a rebate, the auto dealer must certify that
the engine of the old vehicle will be disabled, and the vehicle will be sent to be crushed or
shredded. An amount of $1 billion was initially appropriated for the program, enough funding for
between 222,000 and 286,000 rebates.2
A severe recession and major decline in auto sales has motivated lawmakers to consider ways to
support the domestic automotive industry. In recent months, a federal presence in the automotive
industry has developed, including new grant and loan programs, support through the Troubled
Asset Relief Program (TARP), and partial federal ownership of Chrysler and General Motors.
Coupled with the economic concerns about the auto industry have been historically high gasoline
prices experienced through the summer of 2008. In response to high fuel prices and growing
concerns over greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, new policies on fuel economy
include tighter Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards enacted in the Energy
Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA, P.L. 110-140), as well as even tighter standards on
fuel economy and greenhouse gases proposed by the Obama Administration.3
1 The key difference is while H.R. 2751 would authorize $4 billion for a one-year program, with the actual funding
subject to appropriation, the Supplemental appropriates $1 billion for a four-month program, through October 2009.
2 On August 7, President Obama signed P.L. 111-47, expanding the program by an additional $2 billion.
3 For more information on CAFE standards and the Administration proposal, see CRS Report R40166, Automobile and
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
1
Accelerated Vehicle Retirement for Fuel Economy: “Cash for Clunkers”
As a way to promote new vehicle sales, higher fuel economy, and lower emissions, an accelerated
vehicle retirement (AVR)—also called “cash for clunkers” or fleet modernization—program was
proposed. AVR programs provide financial incentives for a vehicle owner to “retire”—i.e.,
usually shred or crush4—an old vehicle and purchase a new vehicle. Previous state-level AVR
programs5 in the United States have generally focused on air quality,6 since newer tailpipe
emissions standards are significantly more stringent than older standards,7 and many older
vehicles no longer meet the less stringent standards for which they were originally certified.
However, some recent programs abroad have focused directly on motivating new vehicle sales
and propping up the automotive sector.
The program established in P.L. 111-32 combines the goal of promoting auto sales with improved
fuel economy. The general argument has been that the United States is at a critical juncture and
has an opportunity to use any recovery in the auto sector to foster a switch to more fuel efficient
vehicles. Therefore, most cash for clunkers proposals in the 111th Congress have tied incentives to
the purchase of vehicles with higher fuel economy.
CARS Program
As enacted, the CARS program provides a rebate toward the purchase of a new, more fuel-
efficient vehicle, provided the old vehicle is transferred by the auto dealer to a facility where it
will be crushed or shredded. Consumers are not responsible for the actual scrapping of the
vehicle. The legislation establishes many of the elements necessary for the program, including the
criteria for obtaining a rebate, as well as requirements for auto dealers to be registered under the
program. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), within the U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), has had responsibility for developing regulations for
implementation of the program. It should be noted that the buyers are eligible for a rebate
regardless of where the vehicle is made.
(...continued)
Light Truck Fuel Economy: The CAFE Standards, by Brent D. Yacobucci and Robert Bamberger.
4 In most cases, the state or the dealer is responsible for scrapping the old vehicle. In the case of the CARS program, the
dealer, not the consumer, would be responsible for transferring the old vehicle to a facility for scrappage.
5 For more information on these programs, see CRS Report 96-766, A Clean Air Option: Cash for Clunkers, by David
M. Bearden.
6 Specifically to remove the most polluting vehicles from the road to help the states comply with National Ambient Air
Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone and particulate matter.
7 For example, federal standards for hydrocarbon emissions from new cars are 94% lower then they were 30 years ago
(1970). Nitrogen oxide (NOx) standards are 97% lower. J.G. Calvert, J.B. Heywood, and R.F. Sawyer,, et al.,
“Achieving Acceptable Air Quality: Some Reflections on Controlling Vehicle Emissions,” Science, vol. 261 (July 2,
1993), p. 37; Frank M. Black, “Control of Motor Vehicle Emissions – The U.S. Experience,” Critical Reviews in
Environmental Control, vol. 21 (1991), p. 376; National Research Council, State and Federal Standards for Mobile
Source Emissions, 2006, pp. 92-93; CRS Report RS20247, EPA's Tier 2 Emission Standards for New Motor Vehicles:
A Fact Sheet, by David M. Bearden.
Congressional Research Service
2
Accelerated Vehicle Retirement for Fuel Economy: “Cash for Clunkers”
Program Regulations
NHTSA was given one month to develop regulations implementing the program, and it did so,
issuing them and officially launching the CARS program on July 24, 2009.8 Those regulations
include
• procedures for dealers to register for the program;
• procedures for dealer reimbursement for the value of the rebate within 10 days of
submitting required information;
• a prohibition on dealers using the rebate to offset other rebates or discounts;
• a requirement that dealers disclose the estimated scrappage value of the trade-in
and to retain up to $50 of the actual scrappage value for administrative costs;
• requirements and procedures for the disposal of trade-in vehicles; and
• enforcement of penalties (up to $15,000 per violation of the above requirements
and prohibitions).
P.L. 111-32 includes a clause “[n]otwithstanding the requirements of section 553 of title 5, United
States Code, the Secretary shall promulgate final regulations to implement the Program not later
than 30 days after the date of the enactment of this Act.” Despite various statutory requirements
that could have precluded promulgation of regulations within 30 days—most notably the
Administrative Procedure Act, which generally requires sufficient time for public notice and
opportunity for comment on proposed regulations9—the regulations were issued on time.
Value of a Rebate
Under the CARS program, NHTSA issues rebates directly to auto dealers when they have sold an
eligible vehicle between July 1, 2009, and November 1, 2009. The value of the rebate is deducted
from the price of the vehicle and the dealer is in turn reimbursed by NHTSA. Only one rebate can
be used per person, and only one rebate will be issued per vehicle (regardless of the number of
joint owners). NHTSA may only issue rebates up to the total value of its appropriation (initially
$1 billion for the CARS program, increased by an additional $2 billion on August 7).
The value of the rebate is based on the type of new vehicle purchased, the type of trade-in
vehicle, and the fuel economy of both. Four classes of vehicles are eligible: (1) passenger
automobiles (cars); (2) category 1 trucks10 (sport utility vehicles and smaller vans and pickup
trucks); (3) category 2 trucks (larger light-duty pickup trucks and vans); and (4) category 3 trucks
(medium-duty pickup trucks and cargo trucks and vans).
8 Although not officially under way until July 24, 2009, a number of auto manufacturers encouraged their dealers to
begin trading under the system as early as the first week in July, promising that they would guarantee the transactions,
as long as they followed the law. This created a backlog of transactions that were filed with NHTSA starting on July
24.
9 For more information on the Administrative Procedure Act, see CRS Report RL32240, The Federal Rulemaking
Process: An Overview, by Curtis W. Copeland.
10 These category definitions are different from the weight-based definitions used to classify trucks (e.g., classes 1
through 8) generally.
Congressional Research Service
3
Accelerated Vehicle Retirement for Fuel Economy: “Cash for Clunkers”
Eligible Trade-in Vehicle
To qualify for the rebate, the trade-in vehicle must be in drivable condition; have been
continuously insured by the same owner for at least one year;11 and have been manufactured less
than 25 years before the date of trade-in (1984). For all vehicles except category 3 trucks, the
trade-in vehicle must have a combined estimated new Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-
rated fuel economy (as defined on the fueleconomy.gov website) of no more than 18 miles per
gallon (mpg). Category 3 trucks must be from model year 2001 or newer
Eligible New Vehicle
To qualify for the rebate, the manufacturer’s suggested retail price (MSRP) must be less than
$45,000 for the new vehicle. For cars and category 1 and 2 trucks, the vehicle must comply with
EPA’s Tier 2 emissions standards, and for category 3 trucks the vehicle must comply with new
heavy-duty engine standards. Except for category 3 trucks, new vehicles must meet the following
mileage standards: 22 mpg for a passenger car; 18 mpg for a category 1 truck; and 15 mpg for a
category 2 truck.
Rebate Value
Rebates are worth either $3,500 or $4,500, depending on different parameters, as shown in Table
1.
Table 1. Criteria for Determining CARS Rebate Value
New Vehicle Category
Passenger
Rebate Value
Automobile
Category 1 Truck
Category 2 Truck
Category 3 Truck
$4,500
At least 10 mpg
At least 5 mpg higher At least 2 mpg higher None
higher fuel economy
than trade-in
than trade-in
than trade-in
18 mpg minimum
15 mpg minimum
22mpg minimum
$3,500
At least 4 mpg
At least 2 mpg higher At least 1 mpg higher Trade-in is a MY2001
higher than trade-in
than trade-in
than trade-in OR
or newer category 3
trade-in is a MY2001
truck
22mpg minimum
18 mpg minimum
or newer category 3
truck
Trade-in is of similar
size or larger than
15 mpg minimum
new truck
Source: CRS Analysis of H.R. 2346.
Note: Category 1 includes sport utility vehicles and smaller vans and pickup trucks. Category 2 includes larger
pickup trucks and vans. Category 3 includes medium-duty pickup trucks, cargo trucks, and cargo vans.
11 Because two states, New Hampshire and Wisconsin, do not require auto insurance under state law, NHTSA updated
its regulations to exempt vehicles in those two states from the insurance requirement. National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, Requirements and Procedures for the Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save Program, Docket No.
NHTSA-2009-0120, Washington, DC, August 2009, http://www.cars.gov/files/amendment.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
4
Accelerated Vehicle Retirement for Fuel Economy: “Cash for Clunkers”
Impact of the Program: Expectations and Reality
Expected Auto Industry/Sales
The impact of the CARS program on the auto industry was expected to be limited by the narrow
scope of the program. First, the program is limited to vehicles purchased over four months in the
summer and fall of 2009.12 Second, the number of rebates is limited to the available
appropriation—only about 222,000 to 286,000 rebates can be issued under the initial $1 billion
appropriation.13 Therefore, it was thought that this program would more likely provide a “shot in
the arm” to U.S. auto sales rather than provoking a systemic change in the auto industry, the new
vehicle fleet, or fleetwide fuel economy.
Expected Fuel and Greenhouse Gas Savings
The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) estimated that a cash for
clunkers plan could save a vehicle owner an average of 300 gallons of fuel per year,14 leading to
11,000 barrels of oil per day saved if roughly 575,000 vehicles were scrapped.15 However, that
proposal assumed that to qualify for a rebate, the new vehicle would have exceeded average fuel
economy standards by 25%, leading to new vehicle fuel economy of 35 mpg. The CARS program
is far less stringent, requiring only 22 mpg from new passenger cars and even lower fuel economy
from light trucks. Assuming ACEEE’s methodology (trade-in vehicle achieves 16.9 mpg, and is
driven 8,000 miles per year), then a new 22 mpg car would save roughly 140 gallons of fuel per
year. Assuming this is the average fuel savings for all scrapped vehicles, and that 250,000 rebates
are distributed under the first $1 billion, the initial phase of the program would save 35 million
gallons of gasoline and diesel fuel annually, or roughly 2,300 barrels per day.16 In terms of
greenhouse gases, this would translate to roughly 300,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide
annually.17 18 However, a key caveat is that the actual fuel and greenhouse gas savings could be
lower if the new vehicle is driven more miles annually than the vehicle it replaced, which is a
common occurrence. Further, since the passenger car requirements are more stringent than the
12 This time frame could be even shorter, depending on how long it takes NHTSA to finalize regulations.
13 Assuming $1 billion, and assuming all rebates are worth $4,500, NHTSA could issue 222,222 rebates. Assuming all
rebates are worth $3,500, NHTSA could issue 285,714 rebates.
14 American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, Accelerated Retirement of Fuel-Inefficient Vehicles Through
Incentives for the Purchase of Fuel-Efficient Vehicles, Washington, DC, January 13, 2009, p. 7, http://www.aceee.org/
transportation/Crusher%20white%20paper%20fin.pdf.
15 ACEEE’s proposal included other vouchers including scrappage vouchers for the purchase of fuel efficient used cars
and for transit subsidies.
16 This would represent roughly 0.01% of the roughly 19 million barrels per day of petroleum consumed in the United
States. Energy Information Administration, U.S. Product Supplied for Crude Oil and Petroleum Products, Washington,
DC, May 2009, http://tonto.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_cons_psup_dc_nus_mbblpd_m.htm.
17 Assuming 19.4 pounds of carbon dioxide emitted per gallon of gasoline consumed. Environmental Protection
Agency, Emission Facts: Average Carbon Dioxide Emissions Resulting from Gasoline and Diesel Fuel, EPA420-F-05-
001, Washington, DC, February 2005, http://www.epa.gov/otaq/climate/420f05001.htm.
18 300,000 metric tons would represent a very small fraction of the roughly 7.2 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide
equivalent emitted in the United States in 2007. Environmental Protection Agency, Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2007, EPA 430-R-09-004, Washington, DC, April 15, 2009, http://www.epa.gov/
climatechange/emissions/usinventoryreport.html.
Congressional Research Service
5
Accelerated Vehicle Retirement for Fuel Economy: “Cash for Clunkers”
requirements for light-duty trucks, these savings could also be lower, if most of the new vehicles
purchased under the program were sport utility vehicles, pickup trucks, and vans.
July 2009 Experience
In the space of a month, the CARS program has exceeded the expectations of its sponsors, the
Obama administration and auto dealers. Rather than spreading sales out over a four-month period,
consumers have visited showrooms in large numbers and, as a result, the program funding was
forecast to run out by late July or in the first week of August.19 According to Automotive News,
250,000 autos have been sold through this program in the month of July 2009, with many sold
even before the final NHTSA regulations were released. Eligible auto sales reported on the
NHTSA hotline grew from about 4,000 on the first day to six times that a few days later. This
surge in sales and reporting is one reason that many dealers had difficulty in reaching NHTSA to
register and report their eligible sales. According to a survey by Automotive News, 90% of
dealers were dissatisfied with the time it has taken to be reimbursed by the government.20
NHTSA tabulated the first 80,000 transactions21 that had been registered and found that:
• Fuel economy is rising. The average vehicle purchased under CARS has 25.4
mpg, compared with an average of 15.8 mpg for traded-in vehicles. This upgrade
will save owners up to $1,000 this year on gasoline costs.22
• There is a shift to automobiles. Eighty-three percent of the trade-ins are trucks
and 60% of the new vehicle purchases are cars, so it appears that low-fuel-
economy SUVs and trucks are being scuttled in favor of more fuel-efficient
passenger cars. This NHTSA finding is borne out by a similar finding from an
Automotive News survey which found that 73% of trades were from one
category (such as trucks) to another category (such as autos).
• Truck fuel economy is improving. Among the category 1 trucks sold, new
vehicles have 39% higher fuel economy than the traded-in trucks.
• The Detroit 3 benefit. Sales of vehicles under CARS nearly reflect the current
market share of the Detroit 3. Their share of this program is 47%; their market
share is about 45%. Of those vehicles sold from foreign manufacturers, the
NHTSA data shows that more than half of them were built in the United States.
19 There has been confusion with conflicting timelines. On Thursday, July 30, Secretary LaHood said that the program
would end on the next day due to a looming shortfall. That prognosis was later amended and dealers were told that
vehicles sold through this program on Sunday, August 2, would still qualify. Then on Monday, August 3, White House
press secretary Robert Gibbs said that vehicles sold through Friday, August 7, could still qualify.
20 Automotive News survey reported on August 3, 2009.
21 The NHTSA data are based on vehicle sales through Saturday, August 1. Source: “CARS-Car Allowance Rebate
System” fact sheet distributed on Monday, August 2, 2009.
22 Some independent reports take a different view: “According to a survey of car dealerships and 2,200 consumers by
CNW Research, the average fuel economy of vehicles traded in last week was 16.3 miles a gallon, which is not much
less than the 18 m.p.g. needed to qualify for a government rebate of $3,500. The relatively small differential suggests
that consumers have not been turning in the oldest, dirtiest and least fuel-efficient cars, but instead have been getting
rid of their second and third cars …” Source: New York Times, “Cash for Clunkers, By the Numbers,” August 4, 2009.
Congressional Research Service
6
Accelerated Vehicle Retirement for Fuel Economy: “Cash for Clunkers”
Some argued that Congress should take more time, before extending CARS, to evaluate the
progress of this program in its first month, and others argued that it is not appropriate to continue
to support selective industries with subsidies like this. They argued that if Congress supports auto
sales, it should also support appliance sales, for example.
Comparison to Programs in Other Countries
Many programs in other countries have focused more on providing short-term stimulus to auto
sales, rather than promoting fuel economy (See Table 2). Arguably, the most-discussed program
has been Germany’s program, which provided vouchers for 2,500 Euro (roughly $3,500)23 toward
the purchase of a new vehicle for scrapping a vehicle at least nine years old. There were no
stipulations on the fuel economy or greenhouse gas emissions of the vehicle. Similarly, Japan
offered a 250,000 Yen (about $2,600) subsidy for turning in a car at least 13 years old. However,
some countries (e.g., France and Spain) have made fuel economy improvements or greenhouse
gas reductions a condition for eligibility in their fleet-modernization programs.
In June 2009, auto sales rose by 2.4%, “their first year-on-year rise in 14 months, thanks almost
entirely to scrappage schemes in a dozen countries.”24 Volkswagen, for example, said that the
German incentive accounted for half of the 800,000 vehicles it sold within Germany this year.
While some European automakers are calling for these scrappage programs to be extended when
they expire this year, some analysts say these programs may well lead to a “severe slump in car
sales after the expiration of the incentives, which they say will artificially pull forward demand
for new cars. ‘We’re definitely setting up problems for the future,’” said a auto industry analyst at
UBS in London.25 When the French offered a similar program in the 1990s, sales fell by 20%
when it ended.26
23 All currency conversions are from Washingtonpost.com, World Currencies—Current Values and Conversion Tool,
June 22, 2009, http://financial.washingtonpost.com/custom/wpost/html-currencies.asp. 1 Euro = $1.38.
1 Japanese Yen = $0.0103. 1 Canadian dollar = $0.882. 1 British pound = $1.643.
24 Financial Times, “US Drives Its Claws into Scrappage Deals,” July 31, 2009.
25 Ibid.
26 The Globe and Mail, “The Ugly Economics Behind Europe’s Car Scrappage Bonanza,” May 16, 2009.
Congressional Research Service
7
Accelerated Vehicle Retirement for Fuel Economy: “Cash for Clunkers”
Table 2. Recent Foreign Fleet Modernization Programs
Country
Production and Sales Incentives
Canada
The Canadian government approved $92 million to support a scrappage program for
vehicles produced before 1996 when more stringent pollution laws were enacted. The
“Retire Your Ride” program offers consumers $300 to scrap their older vehicle, a
program administered by a nonprofit foundation. Auto dealers and manufacturers have
called on the government this year to commit $350 million to a scrappage program that
would offer consumer a $3,500 voucher to trade in cars that are at least 10 years old,
but the government has so far rejected such a program.a
France
A fleet modernization plan is in effect, providing motorists with a €1,000 ($1,400)
subsidy if they turn in vehicles more than 10 years old for more fuel efficient vehicles.
The French government has set aside up to €220 million for this program.b
Germany
Germany has perhaps the best publicized fleet modernization program, where
consumers scrapping at least a nine-year-old vehicle receive a €2,500 subsidy ($3,500).
Trade-ins must be certified as scrapped, with certain parts recycled. The government
provided €1.5 billion to fund it.c
Italy
Italy approved a €2 billion stimulus package for auto and domestic goods industries,
including an incentive of €1,500 ($2,100) to buy a new, less-polluting motor vehicle.d
Japan
A fleet modernization program is under way in Japan, with consumers eligible for a
¥250,000 ($2,600) subsidy if they turn in their car (at least 13 years old). New cars must
be used for at least a year.e
Spain
Spain’s scrappage program provides a €2,000 ($2,800) subsidy for the purchase of a new
car with low carbon dioxide emissions. Cars must be at least 10 years old to be eligible
for trade and then must be scrapped. The program also applies to used cars no more
than five years old and requires that a scrapped car is at least 15 years old.f
United Kingdom
A “scrappage grant” is available to car owners who turn in a car or van that is at least 10
years old. Owners receive a 2,000 ($3,300) pound sterling (£) subsidy, the cost of which
is split evenly between automakers and the UK government.g
Sources: Peterson Institute for International Economics, Money for the Auto Industry: Consistent with WTO Rules?,
February 2009; Does the Auto Bailout Undermine Global Trade Rules, interview with Gary Hufbauer, February 26,
2009; Automotive Trade Policy Council, Foreign Government Actions to Support Their Auto Industries; also see notes
below.
Note: This table highlights activities in some major industrial countries, but programs have also been enacted in
Austria, Greece, Malaysia, The Netherlands, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Turkey, and Taiwan, Source:
Automotive Trade Policy Council.
a. CBC.ca, “Support car sales with $350M ‘scrappage’ program, auto industry pleads,” August 4, 2009.
b. The Wal Street Journal, “In France, Oui to Bailout, Non to Layoffs,” March 19, 2009.
c. The Wal Street Journal, “Merkel Pledges Backing for Opel,” April 1, 2009.
d. The Wal Street Journal, “Italy Passes Stimulus Package,” February 7, 2009.
e. Reuters, “Update1-New Japanese Good For Car Sales-Nissan COO,” April 10, 2009.
f.
Automotive News Europe, “Subsidies Lead to a Mixed May Sales Result in Europe,” June 2, 2009.
g. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, Deloitte Says More Needed to Revitalize Ailing Automotive Industry, March 23, 2009.
Congressional Research Service
8
Accelerated Vehicle Retirement for Fuel Economy: “Cash for Clunkers”
Author Contact Information
Brent D. Yacobucci
Bill Canis
Specialist in Energy and Environmental Policy
Specialist in Industrial Organization and Business
byacobucci@crs.loc.gov, 7-9662
bcanis@crs.loc.gov, 7-1568
Congressional Research Service
9