eVED: Potential pinch points for the UK aftermarket

24 August 2026  

Proposals for a mileage-based electric Vehicle Excise Duty risk creating new complexity for drivers while placing additional operational demands on MOT stations, garages and service providers. As the government considers how the new regime will work, Peter Lawton, Head of Member Sections at the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT), sets out what it could mean for workload, data integrity and the wider UK aftermarket.

The proposed introduction of mileage-based Vehicle Excise Duty (eVED)  for battery electric (BEV) and plug-in hybrid (PHEV) vehicles from April 2028 would create new compliance requirements for motorists and a significant additional burden for the MOT ecosystem. In the UK, vehicles do not require an MOT until year three; however, under the current proposals, motorists could be required to submit annual mileage data from year one, potentially via MOT stations or other accredited providers, although the government’s consultation leaves open how such checks would be delivered in practice.

Executing such an approach at scale would be challenging. There are unresolved questions regarding capacity, capability and cost. Drivers would need to estimate mileage accurately, service providers would need to capture and report it reliably, and the DVLA would need to operate a system capable of handling millions of additional data points each year.

By April 2028, more than 4.5 million BEVs and PHEVs could be on UK roads, based on existing parc data and current uptake trajectories. Peak registration months such as March and September already place significant pressure on workshops, risking bottlenecks that spill into scheduling, throughput and customer experience.

Covering the administrative cost

Government says it will fund the mileage checks, but discussions with the sector have yet to touch on how workshops will be compensated. If each check takes 15 minutes, clarity is needed on what constitutes fair payment and how compensation reflects the real cost of delivery.  

Given that the maximum MOT test fee for class 4 vehicles has remained frozen at £54.85 for 16 years, an inflation-adjusted figure would arguably be appropriate, but ultimately, a comprehensive review of the test fee – taking into account future requirements and wider system improvements – would make far more sense. We understand such a review remains under consideration, though there is currently no timetable.

Many MOT stations operate on tight margins and with ageing infrastructure, limiting their ability to invest in new systems or processes without clear funding mechanisms or government support. Yet they would be expected to deliver consistent and accurate mileage reporting under increased scrutiny. Errors or disputes – particularly where penalties apply – risk becoming a new source of friction between motorists, garages and government.

Getting it right

Data integrity concerns also extend to vehicle tampering. If consumers are penalised for miscalculations or errors in third-party data, there is a risk of backlash against EV ownership and a slower shift into the mass market. A mileage-based tax system also risks encouraging fraud. Illegal “mileage blocker” devices are already readily available, adding further pressure on enforcement and auditing.

Digital services could streamline compliance – for example, enabling consumers and buyers to check a vehicle’s mileage and eVED status alongside existing MOT history checks. But effective delivery depends on early and detailed engagement with garages, MOT operators and any accredited bodies responsible for collecting or validating eVED-related data. Clarity on liabilities, data-handling standards and dispute processes must be built in from the outset. Low-friction solutions – such as photo or video odometer evidence, mileage checks at franchised dealers or mobile/non-workshop providers – could help maintain accuracy while minimising disruption.

Complexity also extends to ownership changes. Unlike conventional VED, eVED liability is proposed to “stay with the car” rather than the keeper. This raises questions about who is liable when vehicles are sold, returned at the end of contract or moved through the trade. If end-of-year mileage diverges from estimates, reconciliation payments could be triggered at awkward points in finance agreements or fleet cycles.

The SMMT’s position

SMMT has been clear throughout the consultation process that any move to a mileage-based eVED system must be workable for motorists and operationally realistic for the aftermarket. We are engaging closely with government, the DVLA, and industry stakeholders to press for proportionate enforcement, clear liability frameworks and adequate funding for those expected to deliver the system.

With enough lead time, proper consultation and investment in digital solutions, it is possible to protect data integrity without overloading garages or undermining consumer confidence. Getting this right matters – not just for the aftermarket, but for maintaining trust in the UK’s transition to zero-emission mobility.

After all, a new tax system should support – not complicate – the day-to-day realities of keeping Britain’s vehicles safe, roadworthy and on the road.

Should the scheme go ahead, SMMT will collaborate with government and its agencies to ensure the rollout is as smooth as possible.

Click here for more from the SMMT