BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 1732
Page 1
CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
AB 1732 (Stone)
As Amended July 1, 2014
Majority vote
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|ASSEMBLY: |73-0 |(May 8, 2014) |SENATE: |36-0 |(August 18, |
| | | | | |2014) |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Original Committee Reference: B., P. & C.P.
SUMMARY : Prohibits a licensed vehicle manufacturer, transporter
or dealer from advertising a vehicle's prior use or ownership
history in an inaccurate manner, and prohibits licensed vehicle
dealers from advertising two conflicting rebate deductions or
advertising using the word 'rebate' unless the rebate is
directly offered by an affiliated finance company, regulated
utility or government entity. Specifically, this bill :
1)Prohibits a licensed vehicle manufacturer, transporter or
dealer from advertising a vehicle's prior use or ownership
history in an inaccurate manner.
2)Prohibits a licensed dealer from using the word "rebate" or
similar words, including, but not limited to, "cash back," in
advertising the sale of a vehicle unless the rebate is offered
directly to the retail purchaser by a finance company
affiliated with a vehicle manufacturer or distributor, a
regulated utility, or a government entity, as specified.
3)Prohibits a licensed dealer from advertising a rebate
deduction that conflicts with another advertised rebate
deduction.
4)Declares that no reimbursement is required pursuant to the
California Constitution because the only costs that may be
incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred
because this act creates a new crime or infraction, eliminates
a crime or infraction, changes the penalty for a crime or
infraction, or changes the definition of a crime.
5)Makes other technical or clarifying changes.
The Senate amendments add and then delete a provision permitting
AB 1732
Page 2
an exemption from the 48-hour requirement to withdraw an
advertisement for a vehicle that has been sold or withdrawn,
such that no substantial difference remains between the version
passed by the Assembly and the current version.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.
COMMENTS :
1)This bill would make three minor changes to vehicle
advertising law: an expansion of the rebate types a dealer may
advertise, a codification of an existing regulatory ban on
misrepresentation of a used vehicle's history, and an explicit
ban on advertising two conflicting rebates together. This
bill is sponsored by the California New Car Dealers
Association.
2)According to the author, "AB 1732 seeks to modernize
California's advertising laws to better protect consumers and
promote fair and open markets for the sale of all vehicles.
California's advertising laws were created to allow consumers
to have a complete understanding of their obligations when
making a purchase decision on a vehicle and to accurately
compare advertisements from different dealers. This bill
seeks to clarify and update current laws to reflect industry's
best practices."
3)According to the sponsor, this bill is intended to work three
distinct changes in vehicle advertising law.
This bill would alter the requirement that dealers only
advertise manufacturer or distributor's rebates by authorizing
car dealers to advertise rebates offered by a finance company
affiliated with the manufacturer or distributor, a regulated
utility or a government entity as well. This change is
intended to permit dealers to advertise other rebate programs
such as the 'Clean Vehicle Rebate Program' or 'Cash for
Clunkers.'
This bill would also codify existing regulations that overtly
require that express advertisements of a vehicle's prior use
or ownership history must be accurate. The sponsor states
that this particular regulation is largely unknown and that
its codification would help ensure compliance.
AB 1732
Page 3
Finally, this bill would clarify that a dealer may not advertise
a rebate deduction if it conflicts with another advertised
deduction. The sponsor states that this change is necessary
because of confusion among dealers and law enforcement as to
how a conflicting rebate would be enforced.
Analysis Prepared by : Hank Dempsey / B., P. & C.P. / (916)
319-3301
FN: 0004515