The EU Council of Transport Ministers has rejected the EU Commission's proposal to require older vehicles to undergo a general inspection once a year in future. Specifically, the proposal concerned cars and light commercial vehicles over ten years old. The Commission's aim was to increase road safety through more frequent inspections and at the same time to better control emissions.

The proposal came from from the EU Commission. In spring 2025, it proposed a revision of the EU rules on vehicle inspection, which included annual inspections for older cars and vans. The Commission justified this with the aim of further reducing the number of road deaths and serious accidents and making the roads safer.

The EU Commission believes that older vehicles are playing an increasingly important role in accident statistics and emission values. In several EU countries, the vehicle population has aged significantly in recent years. The Commission argued that modern assistance systems, stricter emission standards and new safety standards are not available in older vehicles. More frequent technical inspections should detect possible defects earlier.

This argument is not new. There have already been similar attempts in the past. However, they regularly failed due to resistance from the member states because there were no reliable figures to prove a clear link between shorter HU intervals and fewer accidents.

These plans did not find a majority in the Council of the European Union. The transport ministers came to the conclusion that the benefits of an annual MOT had not been sufficiently proven. At the same time, millions of vehicle owners across Europe would have faced additional burdens, both financially and organizationally.

Several Member States pointed out that the technical condition of a vehicle depends more on maintenance and use than on age alone. A blanket annual inspection interval was therefore considered too crude an instrument. Automobile clubs and interest groups had also voiced clear criticism in advance. The ADAC does not consider an annual general inspection to be necessary, because, in its view, from a technical and safety point of view, a tighter inspection cycle would is not necessary and would have created additional burdens for owners. 

---

Motorcycles were not directly affected by the EU Commission's original proposal. Nevertheless, the topic was relevant for many motorcyclists. In the past, there have been repeated discussions at EU level about greater involvement of motorcycles in roadworthiness testing.

Associations such as FEMA therefore pointed out at an early stage that motorcycles statistically play only a very minor role in serious accidents due to technical defects. The rejection of the proposal by the EU Council is therefore also an important signal for two-wheelers.

Everything remains the same for motorcycles. The main inspection is still due every two years. There are no shortened intervals, no new age limit and no additional inspection obligations. There are also no indirect changes. The EU Council's decision clearly shows that blanket tightening without any demonstrable benefit has no political backing. This currently also applies to motorcycles.

The position of the EU Council is not yet final EU law, but the basis for possible further discussions with the EU Parliament. However, it is considered very unlikely that the annual HU will be put on the agenda again in this form. Should there be new proposals in the future, these would have to be justified, discussed and decided on again. Changes are not expected in the short term.

Harleysite comment

The discussion shows once again how wide the gap can be between theory and practice. Technology cannot be assessed solely on the basis of vehicle age. Anyone who regularly maintains their motorcycle knows exactly what condition it is in. The EU Council's decision provides clarity and prevents additional bureaucracy without measurable benefits. This is a sensible result for motorcyclists.