Staff Reports
California’s regulators just took another run at telling drivers what they can buy — this time by approving the Replacement Tire Efficiency Program (RTEP). The spark for the fight is fresh: Dunlop Tires North America held a public briefing and sharply criticized the California Energy Commission’s new rule. If you care about choice, costs, or common sense, you should be paying attention.
Dunlop Blasts California’s New Tire Rules
Dunlop’s President & CEO Darren Thomas went public and did not mince words. He warned the rules will raise replacement tire prices and cut the number of tires you can buy. “Will prices increase? You bet they’ll increase,” Thomas said. He added that regulators often make bad policy when they don’t understand the tradeoffs. That pushback is the key new development: a major manufacturer saying regulators rushed to a one‑size‑fits‑all rule without fully weighing cost, safety and real‑world performance.
What the CEC Claims — and Why It Matters
The California Energy Commission, led by Chair David Hochschild, says the RTEP will save the state money and cut emissions. The CEC projects nearly $1 billion a year in fuel and electricity savings and big CO2 cuts. They also say the cost impact is modest. Those are big claims — but they rest on narrow testing of “rolling resistance” and models, not on the messy marketplace drivers actually face.
Industry Numbers and the Choice Problem
Numbers Don’t Lie — But Context Matters
Industry filings tell a different story about costs. The Tire Industry Association points out big price gaps: low‑end tires average about $81 now, while many low rolling resistance (LRR) tires list around $157. Some filings estimate that a large share of today’s tire models would not meet future Phase 2 limits. That “70% of options lost” figure gets tossed around a lot, and while it refers to a later phase, it shows the rules could shrink choice and push prices up for everyday drivers. Regulators promise small per‑tire increases. Dealers and data say the real world might be much worse.
Phases, Timelines, and What Drivers Should Expect
The rule doesn’t snap shut overnight. Phase 1 starts in 2029 and Phase 2 ramps later. Adoption by the CEC is a major step but the rule still faces administrative steps before full enforcement. That matters. It means there is time for more hearings, for the CEC and industry to work out timelines, and for lawmakers to demand clear safety and lifecycle analysis. If regulators are so confident about savings, they should be confident enough to show the full math and answer hard questions from dealers and drivers.
California likes to sell itself as a climate leader. Fine — but leadership isn’t a license to ignore costs or to bulldoze consumer choice. Dunlop’s public rebuttal shines daylight on a simple fact: policy must match reality, not wishful modeling. Regulators should slow down, prove the numbers beyond theory, and protect families who already struggle with high living costs. If they won’t, then elected officials ought to step in and defend the drivers paying the bill.
