HB 5765 would create a new state tax framework for electric vehicles, self-charging hybrid electric vehicles, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles beginning January 1, 2027. Instead of relying only on the existing vehicle registration tax, owners or lessees of these vehicles would have to choose between two new options: a flat annual tax or a miles-traveled tax. The flat tax is tied to a “road usage charge,” while the miles-traveled option charges based on odometer-based miles driven in Michigan, with a reduction for certain fuel taxes already effectively paid by hybrid vehicles. The bill also sets rules for billing, payment, late fees, delinquency collection, odometer reporting, audits, and the use of an outside account manager to administer the program.
The bill would amend the Michigan Vehicle Code by adding a new section governing electric vehicle road-use taxation and administration. It authorizes the Secretary of State to contract with an account manager to enroll participants, calculate bills, collect payments, and report mileage data, while limiting the Secretary of State’s use of collected revenue to program administration and directing unused amounts to the Michigan transportation fund. It also creates penalties for inaccurate mileage reporting by the account manager and for tampering with odometers by participating vehicle owners. The bill further requires procedures for reducing charges for miles driven outside Michigan, establishes privacy safeguards for data sharing, and allows electronic payment options including ACH and credit cards.
The bill’s overall effect would be to impose a new registration-related tax burden on EV and hybrid owners while creating a user-fee style alternative based on actual miles traveled. It would affect vehicle owners, lessees, the Secretary of State, the Department of Treasury, and any contracted account manager, and it would likely shift some transportation funding responsibility from gasoline taxes toward direct charges on electric and hybrid vehicles. The bill is also tied to a companion measure, HB 5766, and would not take effect unless that related bill is enacted.
Because no committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, there is no documented debate or formal vote history to gauge sentiment. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears designed to address concerns about road funding and perceived fairness as more drivers use vehicles that pay less or no gasoline tax. At the same time, the structure of the bill suggests likely concern from EV and hybrid owners about added costs, privacy, odometer tracking, administrative complexity, and the need to document out-of-state mileage.
The main points of contention are likely to be whether EVs and hybrids should pay a separate road-use charge at all, whether mileage-based taxation is practical and privacy-protective, and whether the flat tax or miles-traveled option is more equitable. Another likely issue is the role of a private or contracted account manager in collecting and processing mileage data, as well as the accuracy of odometer reporting and the burden of audits, billing, and compliance. The bill’s tie-bar to HB 5766 also indicates that its implementation depends on related legislation moving together.
HB 5765 would add a new section to the Michigan Vehicle Code establishing a special tax regime for electric vehicles, self-charging hybrid electric vehicles, and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. It would create two alternative tax methods—a flat annual tax or a miles-traveled tax—set rules for administration by the Secretary of State and a contracted account manager, and direct revenues to the Michigan transportation fund after administrative costs. It would also create penalties for inaccurate mileage reporting and odometer tampering, require out-of-state mileage adjustments, and impose new billing, payment, and delinquency procedures for participating vehicle owners and lessees.
No committee transcripts or votes were provided, so there is no direct recorded sentiment from lawmakers in the available materials. From the bill text and caption, the measure appears to be framed as a transportation funding and road-use fairness proposal rather than a punitive measure, suggesting support from those seeking to replace lost fuel-tax revenue. However, the design of the bill implies likely opposition or concern from EV and hybrid stakeholders over added costs, privacy, administrative burden, and the use of odometer-based tracking.
The most likely contention is over whether electric and hybrid vehicles should be singled out for a new tax and whether the flat tax or miles-traveled tax is the better approach. Privacy and data-sharing concerns are also central, because the bill allows mileage reporting through a contracted account manager and requires safeguards if data are shared. Additional concerns may include the accuracy of odometer-based billing, the burden of documenting out-of-state miles, the role of a private administrator, and whether the new charges could discourage adoption of cleaner vehicles.