Zero- and near-zero-emission medium- and heavy-duty vehicles: incentives: transparency.

New subdivision (d) in Section 43215 allows the state board to consider the unique production, inventory, body-build, and deployment cycles of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles when establishing model-year eligibility requirements for the voucher incentive project. This recognizes that heavy-duty vehicles have longer development timelines than passenger cars.

The suspension penalty for failing to comply with pricing transparency reporting requirements now requires a notice and a reasonable opportunity to cure before a vehicle model's eligibility is suspended, replacing the previous 'immediate suspension' standard. This adds a due process step.

The standard for recovering previously dispersed incentive funds was narrowed from 'false data that was knowingly provided or through anticompetitive pricing or sales behavior' to 'false data that was knowingly and intentionally misrepresented.' This removes the anticompetitive pricing basis and requires proof of intentional misrepresentation rather than mere knowing provision of false data.

The voucher cap increase language changed from mandatory ('shall be provided') to permissive ('may be provided'), giving the state board discretion over whether to increase the cap on purchases benefiting disadvantaged communities. Similarly, the requirement to establish eligibility criteria was changed from mandatory to permissive.

Added clarification that any pricing data made publicly available must be aggregated at a level sufficient to protect the confidentiality of manufacturer and dealer transaction information, strengthening privacy protections for published data.

The transparency requirements were renumbered from Section 43216 to new Section 43217, with Section 43216 left as an empty placeholder. The purchase order requirement was also clarified to specify it must be 'submitted through the incentive application process.'

The financing report requirements in Section 44274.16 were broadened from 'trucks' to 'medium- and heavy-duty vehicles' in multiple subsections (low-cost loans, retrofitting exploration, and residual value guarantees), expanding the scope of the analysis beyond just trucks.

The state board is now authorized to satisfy the Section 44274.16 reporting requirement by including the required information within its existing biennial report under Section 44274(d), providing flexibility in meeting the January 1, 2028 deadline.

Removed the provision allowing vouchers to cover up to 90% of the total cost of a vehicle purchase through the Hybrid and Zero-Emission Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Project, including taxes and delivery fees.

Added a requirement for the state board to periodically reevaluate whether or not taxes should be included when determining the maximum share of vehicle cost incentivized through the voucher project.

Changed the public data publication requirement from simply anonymizing buyers to also protecting the confidentiality of manufacturer and dealer transaction information, in addition to anonymizing buyers and showing pricing by vehicle model and model year.

Added a new item to the alternative financing report (due by January 1, 2028) requiring an exploration of increasing deployment and decreasing costs by retrofitting internal combustion trucks to zero-emission.

The entire amendment to Section 125 of the Streets and Highways Code (regarding how Caltrans notifies the public of highway closures or restrictions) was removed from the bill. This provision was described as 'nonsubstantive' in the prior digest but its removal means the bill no longer touches transportation infrastructure law.

The fiscal committee vote designation changed from 'no' to 'yes,' meaning the bill now requires review by the Legislative Fiscal Committee before passage.

References to 'Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank' were corrected to 'California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank' in both the digest and Section 44274.16, reflecting the agency's official name.

Section 43215 was restructured with a new introductory sentence for subsection (a) that consolidates the annual reevaluation requirement, though the substantive policy content (annual cap reevaluation, disadvantaged community criteria, and 90 percent voucher coverage) remains unchanged.

The bill now amends Section 39719.2 and adds Sections 43215, 43216, and 44274.16 to the Health and Safety Code, expanding scope from a single highway code section to multiple climate and vehicle incentive programs.

Beginning January 1, 2027, any medium- or heavy-duty vehicle model in an incentive program funded by the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund (including HVIP, Clean Fuel Reward, and Clean Transportation Program) must have its inclusion conditioned on receipt of pricing data from the manufacturer.

Original equipment manufacturers must provide their suggested retail price for all zero-emission vehicle models offered in California to the administering agency on a quarterly basis.

Administering agencies must receive a final itemized purchase order listing the base unit price (excluding incentives) and itemizing any charges for warranty, taxes, fees, service agreements, or additional components.

On or before January 1, 2028, the state board must explore alternative financing opportunities for zero-emission medium- and heavy-duty vehicles in coordination with the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development and the Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank, and report findings to the Legislature covering new market entries, private investor de-risking, low-cost loans, residual value guarantees, and other market improvements.

The state board must annually reevaluate the cap on unredeemed HVIP vouchers with the goal of increasing it to maximize zero-emission vehicle deployment benefits, with increases prioritized for electric vehicles benefiting disadvantaged communities.

Vouchers under the HVIP program may now be used to cover up to 90 percent of the total cost of a vehicle purchase, including taxes and delivery fees (previously the cap was lower).

The fiscal committee review designation changed from 'no' to 'yes,' indicating the amended bill now has fiscal implications requiring committee review.

Failure to comply with pricing transparency reporting requirements results in immediate suspension of a vehicle model's eligibility for state incentive programs.

The state board may recover previously dispersed incentive funds if they were based on false data knowingly provided or through anticompetitive pricing or sales behavior, and may coordinate with the Attorney General to investigate violations.

The state board must compile and make publicly available (in aggregated, anonymized format) the pricing data every six months on its website.