Wisconsin right to repair legislation remains pending in the state legislature after bipartisan groups of lawmakers introduced bills in both the state assembly and state senate in March.
The legislation would prohibit car manufacturers from maintaining a technological or “specified legal barrier” that impairs car owners’ ability to access vehicle-generated data, including telematics data.
Automotive right to repair has been a hot topic during the last year, as major automotive manufacturers, collision repair companies, aftermarket brands and Maine-based independent repair shops have been involved in policymaking through the activity of both the public-private Maine Automotive Right to Repair Working Group and the Maine State Legislature.
Additionally, earlier this year, national lawmakers introduced the Right to Equitable and Professional Auto Industry Repair (REPAIR) Act in both the U.S. Senate and U.S. House. That legislation remains pending at the committee level in both chambers.
Lawmakers who introduced the Wisconsin right to repair bill in that state legislature borrowed some language from the federal REPAIR Act, specifically language that would prohibit auto manufacturers from mandating the use of a particular brand or manufacturer of parts, tools or equipment, outside of warranty or recall repairs.
The Wisconsin legislation would specifically ban car manufacturers from directing car owners to use any particular brand or manufacturer of parts, tools or equipment. However, manufacturers would be able to recommend the use of certain brands only if they provide a prominent notice immediately following the recommendation stating the following: “NOTICE: Vehicle owners can choose which repair parts, tools, and equipment to purchase and should carefully consider their options.”
Commonality with Maine Right to Repair Legislation
Though the Wisconsin bills aren’t a reprint of Maine legislation, they resemble several provisions of it.
For instance, prior to amendment, the Wisconsin right to repair bill originally called for a standardized access platform to be the means by which manufacturers provide consumers with vehicle data. The Maine bill retains language stipulating that violators could be responsible for paying $10,000 to independent repair facilities or consumers for every denial of data access. The Wisconsin legislation includes similar language.
While both the Wisconsin and Maine proposals include language to provide consumers and repair shops standardized access to vehicles’ diagnostic data, Republican Rep. William Penterman, the primary sponsor of the Wisconsin Assembly bill, told Autobody News in an interview he wanted to limit government involvement in the vehicle data dissemination process.
“That one goes a little bit farther than we were looking to go in terms of getting the government more involved with standardizing some of the [diagnostic] codes,” he said.
The Maine Legislature passed a wide-ranging right to repair bill, LD 1228, on June 18. That legislation is headed to Gov. Janet Mills’ desk for signature.
If signed into law, the Maine bill would create the Maine Motor Vehicle Right to Repair Commission, comprising a dozen total members from the spheres of automotive, aftermarket and diagnostic tool manufacturing; parts distribution and retail; local independent repair facilities; new vehicle sales; automotive cybersecurity; and “one member representing the public.” Members of the commission would serve three-year terms.
The commission may issue recommendations for manufacturer best practices in providing consumers with access to motor vehicle data, and may seek input from stakeholders and others regarding privacy issues around data disclosure, according to the passed Maine legislation.
“We're really more going into components of freedom, that you have the right to repair your own vehicle,” Penterman said. “It's something that companies cannot and should not withhold from you. So, that's really more the angle that we were going with here.”
Support for Wisconsin Proposal
Under the Wisconsin legislation, auto manufacturers would also be barred from imposing measures that impact the ability of aftermarket parts manufacturers, repair shops, distributors and service providers to produce or offer compatible aftermarket parts.
Further, manufacturers would be prevented from implementing policies that inhibit owners’ ability to choose towing providers or to diagnose, repair and maintain their vehicle in the “same manner as would a manufacturer or motor vehicle dealer.”
Penterman and his co-sponsors have worked closely with the state motorcyclist advocacy group ABATE of Wisconsin, Inc., as well as the state’s automotive salvage industry, to draft and advance the legislation.
The premise for the bill arose when ABATE members indicated to Penterman’s office that Harley-Davidson was constraining their ability to get motorcycles more than 10 years old repaired.
Noting Harley-Davidson as one of Wisconsin’s “great manufacturers” — with an engine manufacturing plant in suburban Milwaukee — Penterman said the ability to break down engines and replace various components is a “great hobby” that people should be allowed to do freely and effectively.
“I just don't think it's appropriate that some of these companies are [saying], ‘Hey, you own this engine, you own this device, you can't go into it,’” Penterman said “You can't even attempt to fix it, nothing like that. That's not right. It's all about giving the consumer the right and the access to the tools and the materials needed to repair their own products, instead of always having to go back to the manufacturer.”
He clarified that his legislation applies to light-duty consumer vehicles in addition to motorcycles. Nineteen Wisconsin House lawmakers introduced the House version, Assembly Bill 135. Three senators introduced the companion Senate Bill 129 in their chamber.
Opposition to Wisconsin Bills
Penterman noted that despite trying to work with “some industry partners,” their response “has not necessarily been supportive.”
One industry group leery of the Wisconsin right to repair proposal is the Society of Collision Repair Specialists (SCRS).
In an email to Autobody News, SCRS said vehicle data is already available to consumers, and claimed the bill doesn’t address the challenges repair shops currently face in serving their customers today.
SCRS Executive Director Aaron Schulenburg assigned responsibility for unfair repair procedures with insurers and their claims practices. Certain insurance practices may drive consumers and repair shops to ignore necessary repair steps, use second-rate tools, or get strong-armed to approve installation of aftermarket parts even when consumers prefer OEM parts, he wrote.
“Unfortunately, this bill does not materially address those challenges that repair shops face servicing their customers today — such as the commercial influence on consumer choice,” Schulenburg wrote. “These provisions don’t appear to protect consumer choice in collision repair parts, as much as they protect the commercial interests of companies who benefit from insurance policy restrictions.”
The latest action on the legislation was a fiscal estimate completed in April. The estimate projected no fiscal effect to the state, meaning no new annual expenditures or revenues. It would require the Wisconsin Division of State Patrol to update its Traffic and Criminal Software (TraCS), but those costs would be limited and absorbed within the division’s operating budget, according to the estimate.
Schulenburg wrote that a federal regulation governing right to repair is “more ideal” than state laws.
“Having individual states pass unique laws, for vehicles, parts and processes which are developed, sold and deployed across the country is counterintuitive,” he added.
SCRS has been working with the Automotive Service Association (ASA) and the Alliance for Automotive Innovation to propose the Safety as First Emphasis (SAFE) Repair Act in the U.S. Congress. This bill has yet to be introduced during the current session.
The proposed measure differs from the abovementioned federal REPAIR Act, which sought to also guarantee a vehicle owner’s access to diagnostics and repair data, while prohibiting automakers from impairing a non-OEM parts manufacturer from producing or selling compatible aftermarket parts.
“We believe our members deserve to operate their businesses under the same rules and with access to the same repair information, parts and tools, and that it should be encompassed in a single, federal law,” Schulenburg wrote. “We would much prefer the Wisconsin legislature voice its support for a federal solution like the SAFE Repair Act to their delegation in Washington D.C., than to consider passing another state law on the topic.”
Next Steps
Penterman noted the next step is to secure a hearing on his bill. The lower chamber’s legislation is currently pending in the State Affairs Committee. The biennial sessions of the Wisconsin Legislature usually end in the February-March time frame. The current session is in its first year, so lawmakers will likely adjourn sometime in late winter 2026, Penterman said.
“We do have some time yet, and that's kind of the beauty of it,” he added. “We’ve introduced it. It's been out there for a few months now, and we've certainly gotten some feedback. But we're looking to bring the public in and hear from folks what they have to say, and make further tweaks and adjustments as necessary. But, really, it's just trying to get it through the legislative process and to that next step.”
In addition to the sponsors, Autobody News sought comment from Tesla, Concerned Auto Recyclers of Wisconsin, the Wisconsin Automobile & Truck Dealers Association, Wisconsin Collision Repair Professionals, the national Auto Care Association, and the national Alliance for Automotive Innovation.
None of these entities commented on the Wisconsin legislation. This stands in contrast to the Maine right to repair policy process, which saw input from at least nine local and national companies and associations during an April 10 hearing on considered legislation.
Brian Bradley