Michigan Senate Bill SB0137

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/12/25
• Refer: 3/12/25
• Report Pass: 5/7/25
• Refer: 5/7/25
• Report Pass: 5/15/25
• Engrossed: 5/20/25
• Refer: 5/20/25

Caption

Vehicles: title; reference to electronic transfer of title or interest in vehicle; update. Amends secs. 233, 234, 239 & 240 of 1949 PA 300 (MCL 257.233 et seq.).

Summary

Senate Bill 137 updates several provisions of the Michigan Vehicle Code to account for electronic titles and electronic transfer of vehicle ownership. The bill amends sections governing transfer of registration plates, title endorsement and delivery, transfer deadlines, and liability after a vehicle sale. In multiple places, it adds an exception for titles issued electronically under section 222, so that the paper-title requirements in the existing law do not apply when an electronic title is used. The bill also preserves and clarifies existing rules for non-electronic transfers. It continues to require sellers to properly endorse and deliver title, buyers to submit title and registration paperwork to the Secretary of State, and nondealer sellers to either accompany the buyer to a branch office or keep a record of sale for 18 months to avoid post-sale liability. The bill keeps the current penalties for violations, including civil infractions and misdemeanor penalties for certain improper transfers or attempts to evade immobilization or forfeiture rules.

Impact

SB 137 would amend MCL 257.233, 257.234, 257.239, and 257.240 to modernize title-transfer procedures by recognizing electronic titles and electronic title transfers. The practical effect is to exempt electronically issued titles from several paper-document requirements while leaving the underlying ownership-transfer, registration, and liability rules largely intact. It affects vehicle owners, purchasers, dealers, and the Secretary of State by aligning statutory language with current electronic titling practices.

Sentiment

The available legislative record suggests broad support for the bill. It was reported favorably out of committee without amendment and then passed the Senate 33-1, indicating strong bipartisan approval. The absence of recorded committee testimony in the provided materials suggests there was little publicized controversy at the committee stage.

Contention

The main point of policy change is the shift from paper-based title procedures to electronic title recognition, which may raise implementation questions for the Secretary of State, dealers, and private sellers accustomed to paper documentation. However, the bill does not appear to have generated major opposition in the recorded votes. Any concern would likely center on ensuring that electronic title transfers are secure, verifiable, and consistent with existing anti-fraud and liability protections rather than on the broader goal of modernization.