4400万电车不加油 到底该不该交养路费？

China currently has 44 million new energy vehicles (NEVs) that do not pay road maintenance fees through fuel taxes, a long-standing institutional gap. Introducing road maintenance fees for NEVs is an inevitable future trend. Key insights are as follows:

1. Institutional background: The 2009 fuel tax reform merged road maintenance fees into fuel prices, based on the "pay more for more use" principle that rested on the implicit assumption all vehicles run on fossil fuel. This assumption no longer holds today. In addition, road maintenance fees primarily fund the upkeep of ordinary and rural roads, not expressways or urban roads.

2. Road damage mechanism: NEVs of the same class are 400 to 700 kilograms heavier than gasoline-powered vehicles. Road damage increases to the fourth power of axle load, meaning NEVs cause greater road wear, but far less than heavy-duty trucks, so the issue should not be overstated.

3. Existing policy and future frameworks: NEV purchase tax incentives have been gradually phased out. The tax will be cut in half for 2026–2027, and fully restored in 2028, though NEVs will still retain some preferential treatment. The industry has put forward three collection schemes: based on battery capacity, annual mileage, or curb weight. The author recommends a nationwide weight-based framework with flexible adjustments allowed for local governments.

This article outlines the policy trend of road maintenance fee collection for NEVs, with multi-faceted reference value for NEV brand operations. Key takeaways are as follows:

1. Policy trend: Introducing road maintenance fees for NEVs is an inevitable trend. Delays in implementation stem from two factors: policymakers aim to support the NEV industry to achieve national top-level strategic goals of energy security and carbon reduction, and technical issues including metering and user privacy protection remain unresolved.

2. Product R&D direction: A weight-based collection scheme is the most likely outcome. Brands need to balance battery capacity and vehicle weight in R&D to avoid excessively high future taxes eroding product competitiveness, and prioritize the development of lightweight models accordingly.

3. Operational strategy adjustment: Purchase tax incentives are already being phased out, meaning policy support is gradually withdrawing. Combined with future road maintenance fees that will raise user operating costs, brands need to reserve room for price adjustments in advance. In consumer communications, brands should avoid stoking confrontation between NEV and gasoline vehicle owners, and instead guide users to understand the cost-sharing logic to reduce resistance.

This article sorts out the policy direction and industry changes related to NEV road maintenance fees, and outlines relevant risks and opportunities for NEV sellers. Key insights are as follows:

1. Policy trend: Road maintenance fee collection for NEVs is only a matter of time. Combined with the ongoing phase-out of NEV purchase tax incentives, this means policy dividends are gradually withdrawing, and the industry is shifting from policy-driven growth to market-driven competition.

2. Risk warning: Early implementation of the fee will raise user operating costs, and may weigh on NEV sales in the short term, particularly for heavy, mid-to-high-end models. Sellers need to adjust their product pitching logic in advance to address user questions about costs.

3. Opportunity outlook: The future policy will most likely leave room for flexible local adjustments. Regions friendly to NEV adoption such as tourist cities may introduce lower fee rates, so sellers can lay out channel布局 in these regions in advance.

4. Operational adjustments: If a weight-based scheme is implemented, sellers can step up promotion of lightweight models, highlight their tax advantage, and attract cost-sensitive consumers.

The discussion of NEV road maintenance fee collection in this article offers启示 for product R&D and business layout for NEV manufacturers. Key takeaways are as follows:

1. Production and design adjustments: If tiered weight-based road maintenance fee collection becomes the mainstream scheme, manufacturers need to optimize battery technology to reduce curb weight while maintaining range, to align with future tax rules and improve product competitiveness.

2. Business opportunity layout: Manufacturers can develop products adapted to each possible collection scheme in advance. For example, if a capacity-based scheme becomes mainstream, battery swap models will require connected fee collection design, so manufacturers can partner with battery swap operators in advance to develop compatible products.

3. Insights for digital transformation: If a mileage-based scheme is adopted, manufacturers will need to equip vehicles with on-board systems that support mileage collection and data encryption. Manufacturers can advance R&D for related technologies to complete digital preparations and meet future regulatory requirements.

4. Competitive adjustment: As policy support gradually withdraws, manufacturers need to reduce reliance on policy subsidies, focus on improving core product strength, and prepare for market-based competition.

The implementation of road maintenance fee collection for NEVs is a clear future industry trend, which brings new market opportunities and directions for relevant supporting service providers. Key insights are as follows:

1. Industry development trend: The original road maintenance fee system built for gasoline vehicles is no longer applicable to NEVs. Policy implementation will require extensive supporting technical services, creating large, clear demand in this service market.

2. Core client pain points: Different collection schemes correspond to different pain points. A mileage-based scheme faces challenges of accurate mileage collection, user privacy protection, and accurate counting for hybrid vehicles. A capacity-based scheme faces difficulties connecting fee collection across home chargers and battery swap scenarios. A weight-based scheme faces pain points of aligning tax systems for NEVs and gasoline vehicles, and verifying vehicle weight.

3. Opportunity for solutions: Metering technology service providers can develop low-cost mileage collection and billing systems that meet privacy requirements. Energy service providers can develop tax collection connection solutions for different charging and battery swap scenarios. Government affairs service providers can develop end-to-end road maintenance fee collection and management systems that adapt to the management needs of different collection schemes.

The policy trend of NEV road maintenance fee collection raises new requirements for auto retail, energy service and other related platforms. Key takeaways are as follows:

1. Adaptation to merchant operational needs: Different collection schemes affect different types of merchants in different ways. Platforms need to adjust operational tools to support merchants. For example, sellers of heavy vehicle models need tools to explain tax costs to users, so platforms can develop relevant marketing service tools in advance to reduce conversion friction for merchants.

2. Advance adjustment of platform rules: If a capacity-based scheme is implemented, charging service platforms need to develop billing modules that add road maintenance fees in advance, and connect across public chargers, battery swap stations, home chargers and other scenarios to meet regulatory fee requirements.

3. Adjustment of recruitment and layout: After the policy is implemented, lightweight models that meet low tax standards will become more popular in the market. Platforms can increase the proportion of such merchants and models in recruitment to optimize platform product structure and align with changing market demand.

4. Risk mitigation: Platforms should avoid stoking confrontation between NEV and gasoline vehicle owners, communicate policy information in line with official statements, maintain a healthy discussion atmosphere to avoid public opinion risks, and prepare in advance for rule adjustments after policy implementation to avoid non-compliance.

This article sorts out the institutional adaptation issue of road maintenance fees triggered by the popularization of NEVs, which offers high reference value for relevant industrial and policy research. Key insights are as follows:

1. New industry developments: China's NEV fleet has now exceeded 44 million, and NEVs accounted for nearly 50% of new vehicle registrations in 2025. The rapid growth of the industry has overturned the design premise of the 2009 fuel tax system, leaving a clear institutional gap that is a new problem brought by industrial transformation.

2. Core contradiction: This issue is essentially a time gap conflict between industrial transformation and institutional update. Policymakers need to balance two goals: fairness and development. On one hand, it is unfair for 44 million NEVs to use roads for free; on the other hand, premature collection would slow NEV adoption and undermine national energy security and carbon reduction strategies.

3. Insights for policy research: Institutional update lagging behind technological breakthroughs is a common dilemma for new energy policies around the world. Policy adjustments should not be one-size-fits-all, and sufficient transition time should be reserved for the industry to balance both national strategic goals and social fairness.

4. Reference for policy design: The industry has already proposed three feasible schemes (based on battery capacity, mileage and curb weight), each with pros and cons. The author puts forward the idea of a unified national weight-based framework with local flexible adjustment, which provides a reference direction for follow-up research.