Back to the trend of the day: Chinese carmakers went bust, leaving hundreds of thousands of cars without repairs
Poly Rating · from the trend of the day

Right to repair electric cars: best places in 2026

Most right-to-repair laws order the carmaker to share data and parts, so when the carmaker is gone the duty goes with it: China's 10-year parts rule did not stop 850,000 cars being orphaned.

  • No. 1: European Union
  • 10 places

01Final list

The leading AIs each built their own list of ten independently. Here is one result that is easy to check: every place has a reason, a source, and the list of AIs that included it.

Order: from most to least AI agreement.

A bright badge means this AI put the entry on its list. A dim badge means it did not.

  1. 1

    European Union

    The most layers: open repair data since 2020, battery diagnosis added in June 2026 and the Data Act owner right. But battery-removability duties may cover only light-transport packs, not car batteries.

    Included it: Claude, ChatGPT, Meta, Gemini, MiMo, Kimi, DeepSeek, Wenxin.

    In their lists: Claude: 1 · ChatGPT: 2 · Meta: 1 · Gemini: 1 · MiMo: 1 · Kimi: 1 · DeepSeek: 1 · Wenxin: 1

    What each AI noted 8
    • Claudeplace 1

      It has the most layers: independent-shop data access, a battery passport open to repairers from February 2027 and a repair directive from July 2026. None of the sources I found says what happens if the maker is gone.

    • ChatGPTplace 2

      The EU's standardized repair-information rules provide a strong baseline for independent garages, even though they cannot conjure a missing manufacturer's software infrastructure.

      Source ↗
    • Metaplace 1

      Only region where importer takes over 10-year parts duty when maker disappears — battery passport mandatory Feb 2027

    • Geminiplace 1

      The EU Battery Regulation (EU 2023/1542) mandates battery passports and independent modular cell replacement from mid-2026, regardless of manufacturer status.

    • MiMoplace 1

      Delegated Regulation 2026/699 tells carmakers to hand vehicle data and software to independent diagnostic-tool makers — the closest thing to a dead-maker-proof rule anywhere.

      Source ↗
    • Kimiplace 1

      Two legal doors into every car — the manual door (2018/858) and the data door (Data Act) — plus a 12-month warranty bonus for choosing repair.

      Source ↗
    • DeepSeekplace 1

      From Feb 2027, every EV battery gets a passport that independent repairers can read — the first legal right to battery data, but it still needs a maker to file it.

    • Wenxinplace 1

      7–10 year parts mandate plus battery repair law — but only if someone enforces it after the maker is gone

    8 AIs put it here
  2. 2

    Massachusetts (US)

    75% of voters backed car data access that needs no maker authorization, with $10,000 or treble damages per denial. Yet the appeal is still open, and makers can switch telematics off.

    Included it: Claude, ChatGPT, Meta, Gemini, MiMo, Kimi, DeepSeek, Wenxin.

    In their lists: Claude: 2 · ChatGPT: 1 · Meta: 2 · Gemini: 2 · MiMo: 4 · Kimi: 2 · DeepSeek: 3 · Wenxin: 2

    What each AI noted 8
    • Claudeplace 2

      It is the only US state law that forces an open telematics platform on makers, and it has been stuck in appeal for years.

    • ChatGPTplace 1

      A car's diagnostic data is legally accessible to the owner and an owner-authorized independent shop, rather than being exclusively a dealer's private resource.

      Source ↗
    • Metaplace 2

      Only US state requiring standardized open telematics platform by law — independent shops get data with owner permission

      Source ↗
    • Geminiplace 2

      Its voter-enacted Data Access Law forced automakers to create an open-access telematics platform, ending the dealer monopoly over remote wireless EV troubleshooting.

    • MiMoplace 4

      A voter-passed data-access law meets its answer in court: the state itself argues automakers could comply by simply switching telematics off.

    • Kimiplace 2

      75% of voters said yes, and every denial of access costs treble damages or $10,000 — automakers are still appealing in 2026.

    • DeepSeekplace 3

      74.8% of voters backed access that “shall not require any authorization” by the maker — the closest law to the orphan-car test.

    • Wenxinplace 2

      First US state to force open car data — yet federal bankruptcy can still kill the app

    8 AIs put it here
  3. 3

    United Kingdom

    The block exemption keeps garages' data access until May 2029. Sources clash on whether the 10-year parts period is in statute or only an ombudsman's 'reasonable period'.

    Included it: Claude, ChatGPT, Meta, Gemini, MiMo, Kimi, DeepSeek, Wenxin.

    In their lists: Claude: 4 · ChatGPT: 6 · Meta: 4 · Gemini: 6 · MiMo: 3 · Kimi: 4 · DeepSeek: 5 · Wenxin: 6

    What each AI noted 8
    • Claudeplace 4

      Rights are voluntary-leaning. In one 100-garage poll, 30% turned work away in a year for lack of data.

    • ChatGPTplace 6

      A competitive repair-information framework helps garages work across brands, but it does not automatically transfer an insolvent automaker's software to a successor.

    • Metaplace 4

      Mirrored EU 10-year parts rule post-Brexit, plus 8yr/100k mile EV battery warranty with 70% capacity floor

      Source ↗
    • Geminiplace 6

      The post-Brexit Motor Vehicle Block Exemption Order keeps anti-monopoly repair channels open, but leaves failed EV startups with no parts escrow backstop.

    • MiMoplace 3

      Ten years of spare parts and repair information survive the end of type-approval — obligations written to outlast the model, if not the maker.

      Source ↗
    • Kimiplace 4

      Keeps the EU repair-information rulebook and adds a binding ombudsman — but nothing holds parts for a maker that no longer exists.

    • DeepSeekplace 5

      10 years is only a “reasonable period” in an Ombudsman code, not a statute — and there is no car-software right to repair.

    • Wenxinplace 6

      Consumer Rights Act gives 6 years of claims — but no one to sue if the maker has vanished

      Source ↗
    8 AIs put it here
  4. 4

    South Korea

    A written statutory parts duty (8 years after final sale per the law text; 10 in another unsourced claim), but there is no independent data-access right and every duty falls on makers.

    Included it: Claude, ChatGPT, Meta, Gemini, MiMo, Kimi, DeepSeek, Wenxin.

    In their lists: Claude: 8 · ChatGPT: 8 · Meta: 6 · Gemini: 5 · MiMo: 7 · Kimi: 6 · DeepSeek: 4 · Wenxin: 4

    What each AI noted 8
    • Claudeplace 8

      I could not find a Korean repair-data statute. The one clue is the Russian bill's note that Korean carmakers already supply documentation by practice.

    • ChatGPTplace 8

      A strong domestic automotive manufacturing base is not, by itself, a legal promise that an unrelated failed startup's proprietary software will be maintained.

    • Metaplace 6

      High-voltage EV devices free repair conditions improved, but parts supply centered on direct shops — small shops excluded

    • Geminiplace 5

      The Motor Vehicle Management Act legally forces manufacturers to disclose proprietary battery cell origins and standardized BMS interfaces to certified garages.

    • MiMoplace 7

      Hyundai built a whole company — Partecs — whose only job is keeping parts flowing for discontinued cars.

      Source ↗
    • Kimiplace 6

      The Motor Vehicle Management Act orders makers to keep supplying parts for a decree-set period — the duty outlives the warranty, though not necessarily the maker.

      Source ↗
    • DeepSeekplace 4

      8 years of spare parts by statute — longer than China’s 10-year rule is in practice.

      Source ↗
    • Wenxinplace 4

      10-year parts rule plus data sharing — but no one tested it on a dead carmaker

      Source ↗
    8 AIs put it here
  5. 5

    China

    Estimate: Ten years of hardware parts on paper, but no software cover. 850,000 orphan cars tested it, and a court reportedly had to advance 34.24M yuan to keep WM servers running.

    Included it: Claude, ChatGPT, Meta, Gemini, MiMo, Kimi, DeepSeek, Wenxin.

    In their lists: Claude: 6 · ChatGPT: 5 · Meta: 10 · Gemini: 7 · MiMo: 5 · Kimi: 5 · DeepSeek: 8 · Wenxin: 5

    What each AI noted 8
    • Claudeplace 6

      Its rules guarantee cover at the start of an EV's life, with an 8-year, 120,000 km minimum on core components. That cover rests on the maker still existing, and owners were warned that opening parts without permission may be illegal.

    • ChatGPTplace 5

      A ten-year hardware-support requirement and new battery-traceability rules help, but an owner can still face a six-month wait for a proprietary part.

      Source ↗
    • Metaplace 10

      10-year parts law on paper, but becomes unsecured debt in bankruptcy — owners told opening component without permission may be illegal

      Source ↗
    • Geminiplace 7

      Strict MIIT rules mandate 8-year warranties and 10 years of spare parts, yet courts treat unauthorized battery pack disassembly as potential trade secret theft.

    • MiMoplace 5

      Rules oblige a maker to keep parts flowing after it stops building a model — yet owners are told that opening a component without the maker's permission may be illegal.

    • Kimiplace 5

      A 10-year parts-and-service duty on paper; 850,000 orphan cars show software wasn't in the fine print.

      Source ↗
    • DeepSeekplace 8

      A 10-year parts rule on paper and 850,000 orphan cars on the road — the gap is the ranking.

      Source ↗
    • Wenxinplace 5

      Hundreds of thousands of orphans show the law on paper means little without enforcement

    8 AIs put it here
  6. 6

    Japan

    Hard recall law (fines up to ¥200m), but no statute forces makers to hand over parts or repair data. Manuals and scan tools flow through voluntary channels.

    Included it: Claude, ChatGPT, Meta, Gemini, MiMo, Kimi, DeepSeek, Wenxin.

    In their lists: Claude: 9 · ChatGPT: 4 · Meta: 9 · Gemini: 4 · MiMo: 10 · Kimi: 7 · DeepSeek: 7 · Wenxin: 3

    What each AI noted 8
    • Claudeplace 9

      Same gap as Korea: no Japanese statute found, only a note that Japanese makers supply service documentation.

    • ChatGPTplace 4

      Repair manuals, wiring diagrams and specialist scan tools are part of an established maintenance-information system, but not a guaranteed digital afterlife.

    • Metaplace 9

      No law squarely forces makers to hand over spare parts or repair info — courts rely on IP doctrines

    • Geminiplace 4

      Strict Shaken inspection standards and cross-manufacturer dealer associations ensure orphaned domestic vehicles are assimilated into shared repair networks.

    • MiMoplace 10

      Repair information access rests on industry guidelines rather than statute — the ACCC's own international review files it under voluntary frameworks.

      Source ↗
    • Kimiplace 7

      Hard recall law — up to a year in prison and ¥200m in fines — but repair data flows through voluntary channels that die with the company.

    • DeepSeekplace 7

      No statutory parts period — makers voluntarily supply roughly 10 years, and diagnostic access is paid pass-through.

    • Wenxinplace 3

      10-year parts law keeps shelves stocked — but diagnostic keys stay with the maker

    8 AIs put it here
  7. 7

    India

    A voluntary Right to Repair portal with 66 brands and a competition ruling against parts lock-ups, but nothing covers software or parts once a maker fails.

    Included it: Claude, ChatGPT, Meta, Gemini, MiMo, Kimi, DeepSeek, Wenxin.

    In their lists: Claude: 10 · ChatGPT: 7 · Meta: 8 · Gemini: 10 · MiMo: 8 · Kimi: 9 · DeepSeek: 9 · Wenxin: 8

    What each AI noted 8
    • Claudeplace 10

      Repairers are asking for a law, while a Competition Commission record shows allegations that makers withheld parts, tools and software from independent workshops.

      Source ↗
    • ChatGPTplace 7

      The national Right to Repair portal helps owners find service information and parts details, but information access is not a substitute for a binding continuity guarantee.

    • Metaplace 8

      Right to Repair Portal lists manuals and spare prices for 66+ brands including Tata, Mahindra — voluntary, not binding

    • Geminiplace 10

      The Department of Consumer Affairs launched a Right to Repair portal to register EV makers, but lacks mechanisms to prevent bricked smart scooters and cars.

    • MiMoplace 8

      Battery responsibility outlives the seller: extended producer rules require 70% collection of EV batteries by 2027-28 whether or not the maker still sells cars.

      Source ↗
    • Kimiplace 9

      Consumer courts and a competition ruling opened the parts market — after years of litigation.

      Source ↗
    • DeepSeekplace 9

      A voluntary Right to Repair Portal, no statutory parts period and no enforcement.

    • Wenxinplace 8

      10-year parts rule on the books — but nobody has tested it when a maker actually folds

    8 AIs put it here
  8. 8

    United States (federal)

    No federal car right-to-repair law and no 10-year parts law. The 2023 data pledge is voluntary, so it is worth nothing from a maker that no longer exists.

    Included it: Claude, ChatGPT, Meta, MiMo, Kimi, DeepSeek, Wenxin. Did not include: Gemini.

    In their lists: Claude: 5 · ChatGPT: 3 · Meta: 7 · MiMo: 9 · Kimi: 8 · DeepSeek: 10 · Wenxin: 7

    What each AI noted 7
    • Claudeplace 5

      Federal protection is a 2023 voluntary pledge between makers and repairers. The binding bill has been scaled back.

      Source ↗
    • ChatGPTplace 3

      Warranty law can constrain repair restrictions, but a legal warranty is not the same as a functioning factory or a warehouse full of parts.

    • Metaplace 7

      2014 MoU gives OBD-II access nationwide, but telematics locked behind maker cloud — no escrow if maker fails

    • MiMoplace 9

      The REPAIR Act has been a bill since February 2025 — with a White House meeting in June 2026, but still no federal law.

      Source ↗
    • Kimiplace 8

      Magnuson-Moss guards the warranty while the maker exists — and the famous '10-year parts law' does not exist.

      Source ↗
    • DeepSeekplace 10

      No federal right to repair and no parts-duration law — the last warranty backstop was a 2009 GM/Chrysler program.

    • Wenxinplace 7

      FTC is writing repair rules — but Chapter 11 still lets a maker kill your app overnight

    7 AIs put it here
  9. 9

    Australia

    Sharing repair data has been law, not a pledge, since 1 July 2022, and the ACCC has pushed Mazda, Kia and BYD on prices. But a liquidated maker cannot be fined.

    Included it: Claude, Meta, Gemini, MiMo, DeepSeek, Wenxin. Did not include: ChatGPT, Kimi.

    In their lists: Claude: 3 · Meta: 3 · Gemini: 8 · MiMo: 2 · DeepSeek: 2 · Wenxin: 10

    What each AI noted 6
    • Claudeplace 3

      An enforcer with teeth: the ACCC probes pushed Mazda, Kia and BYD to cut what they charge for repair data.

    • Metaplace 3

      2021 law compels makers to sell all dealer-level diagnostic info to independents at fair price within 2 business days

      Source ↗
    • Geminiplace 8

      The Motor Vehicle Information Scheme (MVIS) legally compels automakers to share software service data on fair terms under threat of heavy financial penalties.

    • MiMoplace 2

      Since 1 July 2022, sharing repair information is not a promise — it is a legal obligation under the Competition and Consumer Act.

      Source ↗
    • DeepSeekplace 2

      Up to AUD 10 million per breach — Australia fined Honda AUD 18,780 and warned five Chinese carmakers in 2025.

      Source ↗
    • Wenxinplace 10

      Australian Consumer Law covers 2-year warranties — but orphaned EVs get no extra help

      Source ↗
    6 AIs put it here
  10. 10

    Maine (US)

    Copied Massachusetts by ballot in 2023, but its owner-access platform is now due only on 1 September 2027, after a January 2026 veto and an April rewrite.

    Included it: MiMo, Kimi. Did not include: Claude, ChatGPT, Meta, Gemini, DeepSeek, Wenxin.

    In their lists: MiMo: 6 · Kimi: 3

    What each AI noted 2
    • MiMoplace 6

      Voters passed a vehicle data-access right-to-repair law at the ballot box — and in January 2026 the governor vetoed the amended version.

    • Kimiplace 3

      Copied Massachusetts by ballot in 2023 — its open-access platform is now due 1 September 2027.

      Source ↗
    2 AIs put it here

More about the top three ↓

02More about the top three

The ranking is above. Here is more about the three places at the top: what they are, why they are here, and what is worth knowing.

These places are compared using different measures, including data access, financial remedies, and parts availability.

1European Union

No. 1 — European Union. On the lists of 8 of 8 AIs; median place there: 1. The EU leads because layered data-access rules offer the closest thing to repair rights that survive a maker’s disappearance.

EU on a globe
S. Solberg J. , Kolja21 , Masterdeis / derivative work: Kolja21 · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons

Did you know

  • A court case began when Stellantis asked two independent repairers to log into its server through a paid subscription before doing diagnostics. In 2023 the EU's top court ruled that repairers must get both read and write access through the car's diagnostic port.

What it is
A regional framework of vehicle data and repair rules.
Its edge
It combines the most layers, including a repair-data rule and the Data Act.
Who should know
Useful to anyone comparing how much repair access may last when a maker disappears.
  • Founded1993
  • HeadquartersBrussels

Wikipedia · Wikidata

Why it is here
  • Since 2018, EU law has required makers to give independent operators access to vehicle diagnostics, tools, software downloads and repair information. The access must be unrestricted, standardised and non-discriminatory. — (voice only)

History
  • In 1973, an oil crisis brought economic problems across the European Community after Middle East oil-producing nations raised prices and restricted sales. The shock helped push leaders to set up a fund to support poorer regions. — (voice only)

Keep in mind
  • A 2026 rule sets tiers of vehicle data access. Independent tool makers get access from 23 December 2026, and makers have until June 2027 to open standard access portals. So full access is not here yet.

  • Parts makers and other trade groups said in 2024 that repair information for electric vehicle batteries is growing scarce, and that carmakers' control of car-generated data gives them an edge over independent shops.

Where to go further
  • Open the full EU Data Act and search the page for the word "repair". It shows which car data rights apply and how the law is written, in its own words.

Compare the top three ↓

2Massachusetts (US)

No. 2 — Massachusetts (US). On the lists of 8 of 8 AIs; median place there: 2. Massachusetts ranks highly for its voter-backed, maker-independent data access and stated financial remedy, though the appeal remains open.

Umass Amherst Skyline
The original uploader was Eraboin at English Wikipedia . · CC BY 2.5 · Wikimedia Commons
CICS building
Quadrin · CC BY-SA 4.0 · Wikimedia Commons
Molecular playground
Ruslan Nabioullin · CC BY-SA 3.0 · Wikimedia Commons

Did you know

  • The measure targeted the part the original 2013 repair law left out, telematics. Car owners could share repair-relevant data with independent shops through a smartphone app, and the rules start from model year 2022.

What it is
A state law giving car owners a way to share repair data.
Its edge
It sets a stated financial remedy for each unlawful denial of access.
Who should know
Useful to readers weighing a clear remedy against unresolved legal challenges.
  • Founded1863
  • HeadquartersAmherst, Hampshire County

Wikipedia · Wikidata

Why it is here
  • The law makes each unlawful denial of vehicle data access compensable by treble damages or $10,000, whichever is greater. That gives the access right a stated financial remedy. — (voice only)

History
  • In 1919, a huge molasses tank burst in Boston’s North End, killing 21 people and injuring 150. A court later found the owners negligent, and the disaster led to changes in how industries were regulated. — (voice only)

Keep in mind
  • Carmakers sued to block the law, saying federal safety law overrides it. A lower court dismissed the suit in February 2025. The First Circuit appeal was argued in February 2026, and as of August 2026 no ruling had been reported.

Where to go further
  • Start with the Implementation section. It shows how the 2020 vote turned into rules, and what was still open with the courts and the car makers.

ChatGPT put it first. What they saw in it
  • ChatGPT: A car's diagnostic data is legally accessible to the owner and an owner-authorized independent shop, rather than being exclusively a dealer's private resource.

Compare the top three ↓

3United Kingdom

No. 3 — United Kingdom. On the lists of 8 of 8 AIs; median place there: 4.5. The UK makes the top three because its repair-information framework lasts through May 2029, while its parts promise is less certain.

Did you know

  • If a maker limits independent garages' access to information, tools or training, that clause is not exempt. The rest of the agreement can still benefit, and the CMA can cancel the exemption for a specific agreement.

What it is
A repair-information framework and an ombudsman code on parts.
Its edge
Its block exemption keeps a repair framework in place through May 2029.
Who should know
Useful to readers comparing current garage access and the uncertainty around parts after a maker fails.
  • Founded1921
  • HeadquartersUnited Kingdom

Wikipedia · Wikidata

Why it is here
  • The UK’s motor-vehicle block exemption is set to expire on 31 May 2029. Its rules cover agreements involving spare parts and vehicle repair and maintenance services, giving garages a framework that continues beyond 2026. — (voice only)

  • For standard UK model lines, the Motor Ombudsman says parts are ordinarily available for 10 years after production ends. It describes this as a reasonable period in its New Car Code, not a general statutory deadline. — (voice only)

History
  • In 1952, a thick, toxic smog trapped London for days, disrupting travel and killing thousands. It helped spur the Clean Air Act of 1956, which restricted smoke emissions and encouraged cleaner fuels. — (voice only)

Keep in mind
  • The current UK exemption expires in May 2029, and no consultation on a replacement has been launched. The article says the UK is about a year behind the EU's tiered data access rollout.

What people say
  • "In short, this is a debate about who gets to fix your car, and at what price." — Amanda Webb, CEO of FixMyCar

Where to go further
  • Read Article 6 first. It says car makers must not stop independent garages from getting repair information, tools, or training. The rest of the order is harder going.

Compare the top three ↓

The top three side by side

European UnionMassachusetts (US)United Kingdom
In the AIs' lists8 / 88 / 88 / 8
Founded199318631921
HeadquartersBrusselsAmherst, Hampshire CountyUnited Kingdom
Put first byClaude, Meta, Gemini, MiMo, Kimi, DeepSeek, WenxinChatGPT—

Places with the same number of AIs are ordered by their average place in the AIs' own lists.

03Worth knowing

What the AIs noticed while building the list.

Duties written against 'the manufacturer' die with the manufacturer. Only rights that owners or shops can exercise themselves, such as the EU Data Act and Massachusetts' private right of action, survive a collapse.

Noticed by:
Included it: Claude, Gemini, Kimi, DeepSeek. Did not include: ChatGPT, Meta, MiMo, Wenxin.
Source ↗

Strong data laws can remove features instead of unlocking them. The Massachusetts Attorney General said disabling telematics counts as compliance, and Subaru did exactly that.

Noticed by:
Included it: MiMo, Kimi. Did not include: Claude, ChatGPT, Meta, Gemini, DeepSeek, Wenxin.
Source ↗

The best insolvency protection so far came from courts, not laws. Fisker's judge made the estate cover recall costs, and a Chinese court ordered money advanced to keep WM Motor's servers on.

Noticed by:
Included it: Claude, Meta. Did not include: ChatGPT, Gemini, MiMo, Kimi, DeepSeek, Wenxin.
Source ↗

The widely repeated American belief that carmakers must supply parts for 10 years has no statute behind it.

Noticed by:
Included it: Kimi. Did not include: Claude, ChatGPT, Meta, Gemini, MiMo, DeepSeek, Wenxin.
Source ↗

04Questions people ask

Are electric cars expensive to repair?

Day-to-day maintenance and repair costs about 40% less than for comparable gas cars, but an out-of-warranty battery pack replacement runs roughly $5,000–$22,000.

Are electric cars expensive to repair if the maker goes bust?

Yes, mainly because parts and data become hard to get. One Neta owner waited over six months for a reducer that sells second-hand for almost 50% more than before.

What is the right to repair for electric cars in the EU?

Under Regulation 2018/858, makers must give independent shops repair and diagnostic information, and a repair directive adds repair duties from 31 July 2026.

Source ↗
Why do sources disagree on EU battery repair rules?

Regulation 2023/1542 sets explicit removability rules for portable and light-transport batteries, and these phase in from February 2027. Some summaries wrongly stretch them to every car traction pack.

Source ↗

05How we counted

In plain words, no formulas.

1The question

Top 10 Places Where an Electric-Car Owner Is Protected If the Maker Goes Bust

2Why this topic

Repair-rights indexes score laws as if the maker is still alive. This ranking shows where owners keep real rights after the maker is gone and where they depend on goodwill.

3Where it applies

Global comparison: EU, China, US (federal and states such as Massachusetts), UK, Japan, South Korea, India and others

4What we looked at

  • Legal right for independent shops to get diagnostic data and tools
  • Battery-pack repair duties on makers, and whether they still apply once the maker is gone
  • How long makers must keep spare parts available
  • Rules that keep software and apps running, or put them in escrow, if a maker fails
  • Warranty or insurance backstops for buyers of failed brands
  • EU Regulation 2018/858 Art. 61 and Delegated Regulation 2026/699 — Independent shops' access to OBD data, tools and repair information, extended in June 2026 to traction-battery diagnosis
  • EU Battery Regulation 2023/1542 — Battery removability, replacement and battery-passport rules by battery category, phasing in from February 2027
  • EU Repair Directive 2024/1799 — Repair duties and a ban on obstructing repair, applying from 31 July 2026

5Who ranked

The leading AIs, each building its own list of ten independently and naming a source for every place: Claude, ChatGPT, Meta, Gemini, MiMo, Kimi, DeepSeek, Wenxin.

6How the places were set

The same entry written differently by different AIs was counted as one. The more AIs put an entry on their list, and the higher they put it, the higher its place. "AI agreement" shows how many of the AIs had it on their own list. Sources are only those the AIs found themselves; nothing was added by hand.

06Each AI's own list

🇺🇸 Claude10 places · 4 notes

The same question, answered by Claude alone. The final list above combines all the AIs.

  1. 1
    European Union (2026)

    It has the most layers: independent-shop data access, a battery passport open to repairers from February 2027 and a repair directive from July 2026. None of the sources I found says what happens if the maker is gone.

  2. 2
    Massachusetts, USA (2020 Data Access Law)

    It is the only US state law that forces an open telematics platform on makers, and it has been stuck in appeal for years.

  3. 3
    Australia (ACCC repair-information scheme)

    An enforcer with teeth: the ACCC probes pushed Mazda, Kia and BYD to cut what they charge for repair data.

  4. 4
    United Kingdom (Block Exemption, to 2029)

    Rights are voluntary-leaning. In one 100-garage poll, 30% turned work away in a year for lack of data.

  5. 5
    United States, federal (voluntary pact and REPAIR Act)

    Federal protection is a 2023 voluntary pledge between makers and repairers. The binding bill has been scaled back.

    Source ↗
  6. 6
    China

    Its rules guarantee cover at the start of an EV's life, with an 8-year, 120,000 km minimum on core components. That cover rests on the maker still existing, and owners were warned that opening parts without permission may be illegal.

  7. 7
    Russia (2026 law on repair documentation)

    A 2026 bill would make makers supply repair documentation. It is included here as an 'others' case.

  8. 8
    South Korea

    I could not find a Korean repair-data statute. The one clue is the Russian bill's note that Korean carmakers already supply documentation by practice.

  9. 9
    Japan

    Same gap as Korea: no Japanese statute found, only a note that Japanese makers supply service documentation.

  10. 10
    India

    Repairers are asking for a law, while a Competition Commission record shows allegations that makers withheld parts, tools and software from independent workshops.

    Source ↗

What Claude noticed

Most right-to-repair laws are written as duties of the maker. A law that depends on a maker's cooperation says little for an orphan car. In the sources I found, only data-access rights aimed at independent shops (EU, Massachusetts, Australia) partly survive a collapse.

The EU's own text sets different dates for related rules: repair directive transposition by 31 July 2026, removability rules and the battery passport from February 2027.

The best 'insolvency protection' seen so far came from a court, not a law. In Fisker's bankruptcy, a judge ruled the estate would cover recall costs, and the plan funded cloud support for five years.

China's 8-year, 120,000 km core-component warranty looks generous, yet more than 10 million NEVs are expected to leave warranty over three years from 2026, and the failed makers' warranties depend on them still existing.

🇺🇸 ChatGPT10 places · 2 notes

The same question, answered by ChatGPT alone. The final list above combines all the AIs.

  1. 1
    Massachusetts, United States

    A car's diagnostic data is legally accessible to the owner and an owner-authorized independent shop, rather than being exclusively a dealer's private resource.

    Source ↗
  2. 2
    European Union

    The EU's standardized repair-information rules provide a strong baseline for independent garages, even though they cannot conjure a missing manufacturer's software infrastructure.

    Source ↗
  3. 3
    United States, federal consumer-warranty framework

    Warranty law can constrain repair restrictions, but a legal warranty is not the same as a functioning factory or a warehouse full of parts.

  4. 4
    Japan

    Repair manuals, wiring diagrams and specialist scan tools are part of an established maintenance-information system, but not a guaranteed digital afterlife.

  5. 5
    China

    A ten-year hardware-support requirement and new battery-traceability rules help, but an owner can still face a six-month wait for a proprietary part.

    Source ↗
  6. 6
    United Kingdom

    A competitive repair-information framework helps garages work across brands, but it does not automatically transfer an insolvent automaker's software to a successor.

  7. 7
    India

    The national Right to Repair portal helps owners find service information and parts details, but information access is not a substitute for a binding continuity guarantee.

  8. 8
    South Korea

    A strong domestic automotive manufacturing base is not, by itself, a legal promise that an unrelated failed startup's proprietary software will be maintained.

  9. 9
    European Union battery-specific protections considered alone

    Battery traceability is valuable, but knowing a battery's identity does not guarantee that the only company holding its software keys still exists.

    Source ↗
  10. 10
    International baseline: manufacturer-dependent repair systems

    The weakest protection is a right that works only when the failed company still answers the phone.

    Source ↗

What ChatGPT noticed

Massachusetts stands out because its statute explicitly addresses access to telematics-derived mechanical data and independent repairers. However, it still cannot guarantee that every remote service survives the insolvency of a vehicle maker.

The EU has two distinct policy tracks: motor-vehicle repair-information access and battery sustainability and repair provisions. The latter should not be mistaken for a universal obligation to keep passenger-EV battery packs repairable by every independent shop.

🇺🇸 Meta10 places · 1 notes

The same question, answered by Meta alone. The final list above combines all the AIs.

  1. 1
    European Union

    Only region where importer takes over 10-year parts duty when maker disappears — battery passport mandatory Feb 2027

  2. 2
    Massachusetts, USA

    Only US state requiring standardized open telematics platform by law — independent shops get data with owner permission

    Source ↗
  3. 3
    Australia

    2021 law compels makers to sell all dealer-level diagnostic info to independents at fair price within 2 business days

    Source ↗
  4. 4
    United Kingdom

    Mirrored EU 10-year parts rule post-Brexit, plus 8yr/100k mile EV battery warranty with 70% capacity floor

    Source ↗
  5. 5
    California, USA

    SB 244 Right to Repair 2023 plus 7-year parts for electronics — strongest US consumer protection after Massachusetts

    Source ↗
  6. 6
    South Korea

    High-voltage EV devices free repair conditions improved, but parts supply centered on direct shops — small shops excluded

  7. 7
    United States (Federal)

    2014 MoU gives OBD-II access nationwide, but telematics locked behind maker cloud — no escrow if maker fails

  8. 8
    India

    Right to Repair Portal lists manuals and spare prices for 66+ brands including Tata, Mahindra — voluntary, not binding

  9. 9
    Japan

    No law squarely forces makers to hand over spare parts or repair info — courts rely on IP doctrines

  10. 10
    China

    10-year parts law on paper, but becomes unsecured debt in bankruptcy — owners told opening component without permission may be illegal

    Source ↗

What Meta noticed

Massachusetts telematics platform is model for software escrow — requires standardized open access platform administered by independent party, but automakers sued and implementation delayed

🇺🇸 Gemini10 places

The same question, answered by Gemini alone. The final list above combines all the AIs.

  1. 1
    European Union

    The EU Battery Regulation (EU 2023/1542) mandates battery passports and independent modular cell replacement from mid-2026, regardless of manufacturer status.

  2. 2
    Massachusetts (United States)

    Its voter-enacted Data Access Law forced automakers to create an open-access telematics platform, ending the dealer monopoly over remote wireless EV troubleshooting.

  3. 3
    California (United States)

    The state enforces a 10-year/150,000-mile emissions and battery performance warranty backed by strict manufacturer bonding and SB 244 repair rights.

  4. 4
    Japan

    Strict Shaken inspection standards and cross-manufacturer dealer associations ensure orphaned domestic vehicles are assimilated into shared repair networks.

  5. 5
    South Korea

    The Motor Vehicle Management Act legally forces manufacturers to disclose proprietary battery cell origins and standardized BMS interfaces to certified garages.

  6. 6
    United Kingdom

    The post-Brexit Motor Vehicle Block Exemption Order keeps anti-monopoly repair channels open, but leaves failed EV startups with no parts escrow backstop.

  7. 7
    China

    Strict MIIT rules mandate 8-year warranties and 10 years of spare parts, yet courts treat unauthorized battery pack disassembly as potential trade secret theft.

  8. 8
    Australia

    The Motor Vehicle Information Scheme (MVIS) legally compels automakers to share software service data on fair terms under threat of heavy financial penalties.

  9. 9
    Germany

    National implementation of the Electrical and Electronic Equipment Act forces industrial recycling consortia to assume battery end-of-life liabilities.

  10. 10
    India

    The Department of Consumer Affairs launched a Right to Repair portal to register EV makers, but lacks mechanisms to prevent bricked smart scooters and cars.

🇨🇳 MiMo10 places · 3 notes

The same question, answered by MiMo alone. The final list above combines all the AIs.

  1. 1
    European Union (EU)

    Delegated Regulation 2026/699 tells carmakers to hand vehicle data and software to independent diagnostic-tool makers — the closest thing to a dead-maker-proof rule anywhere.

    Source ↗
  2. 2
    Australia

    Since 1 July 2022, sharing repair information is not a promise — it is a legal obligation under the Competition and Consumer Act.

    Source ↗
  3. 3
    United Kingdom

    Ten years of spare parts and repair information survive the end of type-approval — obligations written to outlast the model, if not the maker.

    Source ↗
  4. 4
    Massachusetts (US)

    A voter-passed data-access law meets its answer in court: the state itself argues automakers could comply by simply switching telematics off.

  5. 5
    China

    Rules oblige a maker to keep parts flowing after it stops building a model — yet owners are told that opening a component without the maker's permission may be illegal.

  6. 6
    Maine (US)

    Voters passed a vehicle data-access right-to-repair law at the ballot box — and in January 2026 the governor vetoed the amended version.

  7. 7
    South Korea

    Hyundai built a whole company — Partecs — whose only job is keeping parts flowing for discontinued cars.

    Source ↗
  8. 8
    India

    Battery responsibility outlives the seller: extended producer rules require 70% collection of EV batteries by 2027-28 whether or not the maker still sells cars.

    Source ↗
  9. 9
    US federal (REPAIR Act)

    The REPAIR Act has been a bill since February 2025 — with a White House meeting in June 2026, but still no federal law.

    Source ↗
  10. 10
    Japan

    Repair information access rests on industry guidelines rather than statute — the ACCC's own international review files it under voluntary frameworks.

    Source ↗

What MiMo noticed

The EU's newest tool targets the exact orphan-car failure point: delegated rules adopted in 2026 require carmakers to make software and information available to independent diagnostic tool makers.

Australia is the counter-example to 'voluntary works': its repair information scheme has been mandatory and enforceable since 1 July 2022, while the US federal REPAIR Act is still pending.

India's answer to dead makers is producer responsibility rather than repair law: EV battery producers must hit 70% collection by 2027-28 under the 2022 waste rules.

🇨🇳 Kimi10 places · 3 notes

The same question, answered by Kimi alone. The final list above combines all the AIs.

  1. 1
    European Union

    Two legal doors into every car — the manual door (2018/858) and the data door (Data Act) — plus a 12-month warranty bonus for choosing repair.

    Source ↗
  2. 2
    Massachusetts (US)

    75% of voters said yes, and every denial of access costs treble damages or $10,000 — automakers are still appealing in 2026.

  3. 3
    Maine (US)

    Copied Massachusetts by ballot in 2023 — its open-access platform is now due 1 September 2027.

    Source ↗
  4. 4
    United Kingdom

    Keeps the EU repair-information rulebook and adds a binding ombudsman — but nothing holds parts for a maker that no longer exists.

  5. 5
    China

    A 10-year parts-and-service duty on paper; 850,000 orphan cars show software wasn't in the fine print.

    Source ↗
  6. 6
    South Korea

    The Motor Vehicle Management Act orders makers to keep supplying parts for a decree-set period — the duty outlives the warranty, though not necessarily the maker.

    Source ↗
  7. 7
    Japan

    Hard recall law — up to a year in prison and ¥200m in fines — but repair data flows through voluntary channels that die with the company.

  8. 8
    United States (federal)

    Magnuson-Moss guards the warranty while the maker exists — and the famous '10-year parts law' does not exist.

    Source ↗
  9. 9
    India

    Consumer courts and a competition ruling opened the parts market — after years of litigation.

    Source ↗
  10. 10
    Norway (EEA)

    EEA membership means EU repair rights arrive by incorporation — with a lag, and with no escrow for a dead maker's app.

What Kimi noticed

The orphan test decides everything: duties written against 'the manufacturer' — parts supply, battery cooperation, app uptime — die with the manufacturer. Only owner-executable rights survive: the EU Data Act's personal data right and Massachusetts's treble-damages private action are the two laws in this list a dead company cannot switch off.

From 23 June 2026 the EU finally writes traction-battery diagnosis into mandatory repair information (Delegated Regulation 2026/699) — including what independents need to open and repair the pack, the exact capability Chinese orphan owners were denied.

The famous American belief that 'car companies must supply parts for 10 years' has no statute behind it — Hemmings could not find any such US law, and NHTSA has never enforced one.

🇨🇳 DeepSeek10 places · 2 notes

The same question, answered by DeepSeek alone. The final list above combines all the AIs.

  1. 1
    European Union

    From Feb 2027, every EV battery gets a passport that independent repairers can read — the first legal right to battery data, but it still needs a maker to file it.

  2. 2
    Australia

    Up to AUD 10 million per breach — Australia fined Honda AUD 18,780 and warned five Chinese carmakers in 2025.

    Source ↗
  3. 3
    Massachusetts, United States

    74.8% of voters backed access that “shall not require any authorization” by the maker — the closest law to the orphan-car test.

  4. 4
    South Korea

    8 years of spare parts by statute — longer than China’s 10-year rule is in practice.

    Source ↗
  5. 5
    United Kingdom

    10 years is only a “reasonable period” in an Ombudsman code, not a statute — and there is no car-software right to repair.

  6. 6
    Canada

    You can legally bypass a digital lock, but no one has to give you the code or the data.

    Source ↗
  7. 7
    Japan

    No statutory parts period — makers voluntarily supply roughly 10 years, and diagnostic access is paid pass-through.

  8. 8
    China

    A 10-year parts rule on paper and 850,000 orphan cars on the road — the gap is the ranking.

    Source ↗
  9. 9
    India

    A voluntary Right to Repair Portal, no statutory parts period and no enforcement.

  10. 10
    United States (federal)

    No federal right to repair and no parts-duration law — the last warranty backstop was a 2009 GM/Chrysler program.

What DeepSeek noticed

Even the strongest law depends on a living maker: Australia can fine a carmaker AUD 10 million, but it cannot make a bankrupt one upload diagnostic data.

Spare-parts mandates vary from zero to 20 years: South Korea 8 years by statute, China 10 years on paper, the EU Parliament proposing 20 years for some parts, Japan no statutory period.

🇨🇳 Wenxin10 places

The same question, answered by Wenxin alone. The final list above combines all the AIs.

  1. 1
    European Union 2026

    7–10 year parts mandate plus battery repair law — but only if someone enforces it after the maker is gone

  2. 2
    Massachusetts, USA 2026

    First US state to force open car data — yet federal bankruptcy can still kill the app

  3. 3
    Japan 2026

    10-year parts law keeps shelves stocked — but diagnostic keys stay with the maker

  4. 4
    South Korea 2026

    10-year parts rule plus data sharing — but no one tested it on a dead carmaker

    Source ↗
  5. 5
    China 2026

    Hundreds of thousands of orphans show the law on paper means little without enforcement

  6. 6
    United Kingdom 2026

    Consumer Rights Act gives 6 years of claims — but no one to sue if the maker has vanished

    Source ↗
  7. 7
    United States (Federal) 2026

    FTC is writing repair rules — but Chapter 11 still lets a maker kill your app overnight

  8. 8
    India 2026

    10-year parts rule on the books — but nobody has tested it when a maker actually folds

  9. 9
    Norway 2026

    EV paradise with strong consumer laws — but no specific orphan-car shield either

  10. 10
    Australia 2026

    Australian Consumer Law covers 2-year warranties — but orphaned EVs get no extra help

    Source ↗