BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �






           SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE       BILL NO: ab 2324
          SENATOR MARK DESAULNIER, CHAIRMAN              AUTHOR:  gatto
                                                         VERSION: 6/25/12
          Analysis by:  Carrie Cornwell                  FISCAL:  NO
          Hearing date:  July 3, 2012                        URGENCY:  YES




          SUBJECT:

          Electronic vehicle registration:  fees

          DESCRIPTION:

          This bill limits to $22 the amount a business providing 
          electronic vehicle registration services can charge a dealer for 
          those services.

          ANALYSIS:

          Since 2001, the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) has offered 
          an electronic vehicle registration (EVR) program in which motor 
          vehicle dealers may enter into contracts to act as DMV business 
          partners for vehicle registration and titling purposes.  A 
          dealer business partner communicates electronically through an 
          EVR service provider with DMV to register a vehicle it has sold 
          and then either the dealer or the EVR service provider mails 
          license plates, registration cards, and registration stickers to 
          the buyer.  DMV estimated last year that less than half of new 
          car dealers were participating in this voluntary EVR program.

          Last year the Legislature passed and the governor signed AB 1215 
          (Blumenfield), Chapter 329, which requires new car dealers 
          starting on July 1 2012 to become DMV business partners and to 
          electronically register both new and used vehicles they sell.

          AB 1215 generally increased the fees that a dealer can charge a 
          car buyer at the time of sale.  The bill did, however, limit the 
          specific fee that a dealer may charge a car buyer for this now 
          mandatory EVR to no more than the actual amount the dealer pays 
          to the EVR service provider for processing and mailing license 
          plates, registration cards, and registration stickers.  DMV 
          regulations further limit a dealer to charging consumers no more 
          than $29 for EVR.  DMV regulations, however, do  not  place any 
          limit on the amount that an EVR service provider can charge 




          AB 2324 (GATTO)                                        Page 2

                                                                       


          dealers for electronic vehicle registration services, but AB 
          1215 authorizes DMV to adopt such regulations.

           This bill  :

          1.Caps  the amount an EVR service provider can charge a dealer 
            at $22 per EVR transaction, and allows DMV to increase this 
            cap through regulations, if it deems this amount insufficient.

          2.Is an urgency measure.
          
          COMMENTS:

           1.Purpose  .  The author and sponsor assert that because of AB 
            1215's mandate for EVR on all cars sold by new car dealers, 
            EVR service providers should see a huge increase in their 
            business volume without a commensurate increase in their 
            expenses.  They assert, therefore, that prices should decrease 
            or hold steady and note that the largest EVR service provider 
            is maintaining its current charge.  They further note that two 
            EVR service providers did raise their prices from $19 to $29 
            and that because it takes months for a dealer to switch from 
            one EVR service provider to another, affected dealers and 
            their customers will soon face these inflated pass-through 
            charges.

           2.The competitive market  .  DMV reports that there are six EVR 
            service providers who charge dealers a range of prices for 
            electronically registering a vehicle but none of whom charge 
            more than $29.  As $29 is the maximum amount that a dealer may 
            pass through to a car buyer pursuant to DMV existing 
            regulations and, in any case, a dealer can pass through no 
            more than his actual EVR service provider cost, no dealers are 
            paying more for EVR than they can charge car buyers for those 
            services.  Also, the six EVR service providers compete with 
            each other both on price and services or add-ons offered.  
            This bill asks the Legislature to intervene in that 
            competition, something which AB 1215 assigned DMV the 
            capability to do, but which DMV has chosen not to do at this 
            time.

           3.Opposition  .  The opponent views this bill as interference with 
            the competitive market and asserts that an existing business 
            relationship between the California New Car Dealers 
            Association and one EVR service provider is the impetus for 
            the bill.  The opponent, Motor Vehicle Software Corporation, 




          AB 2324 (GATTO)                                        Page 3

                                                                       


            has recently raised its price per EVR transaction to $29 for 
            most dealers but reports that it also offers a premium service 
            for handling difficult registration transactions that can 
            arise when titling a vehicle.  This company notes that those 
            dealers that prefer one of its lower priced competitors are 
            free to buy EVR services from those competitors and that the 
            price cap in this bill is unfair to its business model.

           4.A DMV enforcement issue  .  DMV regulates both vehicle dealers 
            and EVR service providers.  If an EVR service provider is 
            bundling its services under a single charge beyond what 
            statute allows a dealer to pass through to a car buyer, then 
            DMV should notify that EVR service provider that it is not 
            complying with California law and is, therefore, at risk of 
            discontinuing business with DMV.  Similarly, if a dealer is 
            passing through charges to car buyers that statute does not 
            permit it to pass through, then DMV should take action as the 
            regulator of vehicle dealers in this state.  The committee may 
            wish to hold this bill and instead direct DMV to pursue the 
            regulatory issues it raises.

          Assembly Votes:

               Previous votes are not relevant.
               
          POSITIONS:  (Communicated to the committee before noon on 
          Wednesday,                                             June 27, 
          2012)

               SUPPORT:  California New Car Dealers Association

               OPPOSED:  Motor Vehicle Software Corporation