A BILL to amend and reenact §§ 46.2-715, 46.2-730, 58.1-3503, and 58.1-3506 of the Code of Virginia, relating to display of license plate; only rear plate required; exception.
HB1198 would change Virginia’s vehicle registration rules to generally require only a rear license plate, while preserving exceptions for vehicles that are already required to display both front and rear plates and allowing the Department of Motor Vehicles to continue authorizing two plates where applicable. The bill also amends the antique vehicle statutes to align with that rear-plate framework and to clarify when antique motor vehicles and antique trailers may use single plates, year-of-issue plates, or metal tabs, as well as the limited-use rules that apply to antique registrations.
In addition to the plate-display changes, the bill updates the property tax classifications in the Code of Virginia so that antique motor vehicles that may be used for general transportation are treated consistently across the tangible personal property tax provisions. It revises cross-references in the personal property tax statutes to reflect the antique-vehicle changes, but it does not broadly alter tax rates or create new tax exemptions beyond those existing classifications. The bill would therefore affect vehicle owners, antique car collectors, local tax assessors, law enforcement, and DMV administration of registration and plate compliance.
HB1198 would amend §§ 46.2-715 and 46.2-730 to change the default display requirement for most motor vehicles from two plates to one rear plate, while maintaining exceptions for certain vehicle types and preserving DMV authority to issue or recognize two valid plates where applicable. It also makes conforming changes to §§ 58.1-3503 and 58.1-3506 so that antique motor vehicles used for general transportation are consistently referenced in the Commonwealth’s tangible personal property tax classifications. The bill would affect vehicle registration enforcement, antique plate issuance, and local property tax administration, but it does not appear to create a new tax category or materially change the tax treatment of most other property classes.
The available record shows no committee transcript or floor vote history, so there is no documented debate or recorded vote pattern to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill’s content, the measure appears to be a targeted administrative and vehicle-equipment change rather than a broad policy overhaul. Its introduction and referral to the Transportation Committee suggest it was treated as a transportation-regulation bill, but the lack of further action indicates it did not advance out of committee.
The most likely points of contention are the practical and enforcement implications of moving to a rear-plate-only system, including whether law enforcement, tolling, and identification practices would be affected, and whether any exceptions should remain for certain vehicle classes. Antique vehicle owners could also be sensitive to the bill’s interaction with limited-use rules and the conditions for using historic plates. Because the bill also touches local tangible personal property tax classifications, local governments and tax administrators could be attentive to any unintended effects on assessment or classification language, even though the bill is largely conforming in that area.