[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6329782,"mediaKeyId","2315642-68f462ff20996d89435b0fe9e2a52cc8","parentId",2315642,"title","Committee hears bill to allow direct sales by zero-emission vehicle manufacturers; testimony splits industry and labor, dealers warn of rural impacts","audioSeconds",475,"startMs",707000,"endMs",1182000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2315642-68f462ff20996d89435b0fe9e2a52cc8&start=707&end=1182","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2315642-68f462ff20996d89435b0fe9e2a52cc8/thumbnail_707000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6329782/Washington/Committee-hears-bill-to-allow-direct-sales-by-zero-emission-vehicle-manufacturers-testimony-splits-industry-and-labor-dealers-warn-of-rural-impacts","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6329782-696af1a596e1d15b04718f44094506ab/orig.mp4?Expires=1770594043&Signature=YEEqq4QVZyofTCAapKOu008o5VO4u75DlBdfhx9iF2uFeCNgMqO3Lg1HAWTdcBJZIfaWNrb8fQ4Sh68r4I~KS0BwQraK4wa2YnnoURlrb8CgImF~CaexzwwYptYhRV3aGMqYzkKqJPsuFN7tYq3vPwTsAxLQAsMR30VyYGdyH2YoWNjAEuWDjLnMc3k-h7rcLjXNoHzDbmvMl2NMof1Ypr7aV44Mtu9djdVaNaNgbRV8LvCSlqKWzBFC1zJiqksp-TJrbwErxSOu88tjtL3ePIduoZVxd4B-IP9~FI4eM6Kx06OUOdfSBHiqadNqvgkD7r7a~MdyJD9v1dhUweIsZg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","House Consumer Protection & Business","date","2025-02-14T00:00:00Z","article","Representative Beth D'Oleo introduced House Bill 17-21 and argued the measure would open Washington to direct sales by manufacturers of zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs), correcting what she called an uneven market created when the state granted Tesla an exception in 2014.

\"Washington denies consumers the choice to buy vehicles directly from American EV automakers,\" Representative Beth D'Oleo said, adding that single-company exceptions “created an uneven playing field, reduced competition, and limited consumer choice.” She described Colorado's visible Rivian fleet and said Washington should retain the economic benefits of EV investment.

Staff briefing and key provisions
- Megan Mulvihill, staff to the committee, summarized the bill’s major changes for ZEVs and for the franchise system. Key ZEV-specific provisions in the bill as described by staff:
- A qualified ZEV manufacturer may provide direct retail sales if it establishes at least two in‑state service centers and provides a mobile service for vehicle owners within the state.
- ZEV manufacturers may offer online direct sales provided delivery occurs through a designated service center, delivery center, or partnership dealership.
- Direct-sale ZEVs must include a warranty covering repairs and maintenance at a designated service center.
- Subject to funding, the Department of Commerce must establish a ZEV technician training and charging-infrastructure grant program. Grant funding may be used for publicly available ZEV charging infrastructure and employee training.
- A traditional auto dealer that partners with a manufacturer as a service or delivery partner is eligible for a one-time grant to help cover costs of servicing ZEVs; dealers that achieve 50% ZEV sales by 7/1/2030 may receive an additional award.
- Department of Licensing reporting requirements: beginning 7/1/2026 annual review of access and impacts, and a report due 7/1/2034 including a recommendation on whether to retain, modify or repeal an authorization for direct sales.
- Dealership-size market-area adjustments: in some counties the radius expands from 8 to 10 miles for new or relocated sites when population thresholds are met.
- Prohibitions on specific manufacturer practices such as subscription charges for built-in vehicle features that would otherwise function without ongoing support.

Support and testimony in favor
- Rivian representatives and other new‑entrant advocates testified in support. Arguments in favor included increased consumer choice, faster EV adoption, more in‑state investment and technician training, and equity and emissions benefits. Supporters emphasized that the bill would allow manufacturers to partner with local dealers for service and delivery and that grants and training could help onboard the dealer network for EV maintenance.
- Hannah Steinweg (Rivian) said Washington’s exception for Tesla “limits competition, hurts consumer choice and access.”
- Christopher Kaufman (Rivian general manager) described consumer frustration when test drives or showroom visits are restricted.
- Port of Seattle, IBEW (electrician union), Washington Building and Construction trades and climate organizations expressed support, noting potential emissions reductions and jobs from faster EV adoption.

Opposition and concerns
- Franchise dealer groups, legacy automakers and dealer owners testified in opposition. Their primary concerns: the franchise dealer model provides widespread same‑day service and parts access across rural and underserved communities; direct-sales carve-outs could disadvantage dealers who invest in community service networks; a bifurcated system would create inconsistent rules and grant advantages to select manufacturers.
- Susan Daga, general counsel for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association, noted franchise dealers employ “over 20,000 workers, accounting for nearly $2,000,000,000 in annual payroll” and provide service in many communities.
- Joel Olsen, a dealer in Walla Walla, cautioned that companies typically do not set up service centers in smaller towns, potentially reducing access to repairs and warranty service outside metro areas.
- Several major manufacturers and industry groups (Alliance for Automotive Innovation, Toyota, General Motors, Ford, Honda and others) opposed the bill for creating special regulatory treatment rather than a single set of rules for all manufacturers.

Points of clarification from staff and sponsors
- Staff, Megan Mulvihill, clarified that the proposed Commerce grant program is “subject to funding” and the bill does not specify a dedicated funding source.
- The sponsor, Representative D'Oleo, said she was open to amendments and expressed willingness to work on equity and access language, including potential ties to existing state EV rebate and charging programs.

Why the discussion matters
- The bill would change how new ZEV manufacturers enter and operate in the Washington market. Proponents argue it will expand consumer choice and speed EV adoption; opponents say it risks weakening local service networks and creating uneven regulatory treatment.

Where it stands
- The bill drew extensive public testimony both pro and con and will be considered further following the committee’s executive actions. No final floor action was recorded during the public‑testimony segment of this meeting.

Speakers (selected)
- Megan Mulvihill, staff to the committee (staff briefing). First referenced 00:11:02.
- Representative Beth D'Oleo, prime sponsor (remarks and Q&A). First referenced 00:18:32.
- Hannah Steinweg, Rivian (support). First referenced 00:40:12.
- Christopher Kaufman, Rivian (general manager) (support). First referenced 00:40:53.
- Susan Daga, general counsel, Washington State Auto Dealers Association (opposition). First referenced 00:41:43.
- Joel Olsen, owner/operator, Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram of Walla Walla (opposition). First referenced 00:41:56.
- Kurt Augustine, Alliance for Automotive Innovation (opposition). First referenced 00:42:36.

Notes and limitations
- Descriptions of grant programs, reporting requirements and fee allowances are taken from the staff briefing as read into the record by committee staff and the sponsor; funding for the Commerce grants was repeatedly described as “subject to funding” and no specific funding source was identified in the briefing.

Ending
- The committee heard broad testimony for and against HB17-21 and acknowledged ongoing policy tradeoffs around consumer choice, rural service access, equity and climate objectives. Sponsors offered to work with stakeholders on amendments to address concerns.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","House Consumer Protection & Business - 2/14/2025 8:00 AM","oneSentenceSummary","Representative Beth D'Oleo introduced HB17-21 to allow certain ZEV manufacturers to sell directly to consumers under conditions including in-state service centers, drawing split testimony from EV advocates and franchise dealers.","taxTitle","Consumer Protection & Business, House of Representatives, Legislative Sessions, Washington","taxId",20258,"location","Washington","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6329777,"House Bill 14-64 would license home-equity-sharing originators; supporters say oversight needed, opponents call product predatory",241,3284000,3525000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2315642-68f462ff20996d89435b0fe9e2a52cc8&start=3284&end=3525","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2315642-68f462ff20996d89435b0fe9e2a52cc8/thumbnail_3284000.jpg","/articles/6329777/Washington/House-Bill-14-64-would-license-home-equity-sharing-originators-supporters-say-oversight-needed-opponents-call-product-predatory","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6329777-d1c42c8910a824211d6d5e5628d6284b/orig.mp4?Expires=1770594043&Signature=mYvlANFRsxqcfVqyr-1zhsF~2hGaKt4gGWaxjOzg01T2fojWnGLUmBI-FctW51-ovuvO7WdEnuBB2SBSxCKcFTg06utn7HhmxgoHui9A7qxpRtWWdvrTZJyUwalAWQBclGknPRwNZvNeap2hhnEIRqq8IpT-lzOi7-NNmAOkZwug7Ge1knwEELWAJdmQPXJ5gE7zBHBssNmhRNtOu2KuP9hMGBVjXhXL3gCLCyzk9-CBimEZm4J9R20MDoZVT3dqP6JV1CL1HwXjmYE8fNZE6bBeK2u0CfF5BPfdcTq2WhMXyO76oP6kOPTxPZJkDJ7I3oMxVk6qm6GTikLvjMcgOg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Committee staff summarized House Bill 14-64 as creating a licensing and regulatory framework for home equity sharing agreement (HESA) originators and imposing a set of consumer protections and prohibitions.

Staff briefing and key elements
- Megan Mulvihill, staff to the committee, said the bill would establish a new chapter requiring HESA originators to obtain a license from the Department of Financial Institutions beginning July 1, 2026. Key requirements described by staff include:
- A three‑day cancellation right for homeowners.
- A homeowner’s beginning home equity must be at least 10%.
- Appraisals must meet industry standards and be performed by an independent third-party appraiser unless the homeowner consents to an affiliated appraiser.
- A cap on the annualized cost of a HESA of 25%.
- A list of prohibited acts (for example, charging an early‑settlement penalty or preventing a homeowner from renting the property).
- Record-keeping, reporting requirements and cumulative remedies; violations may also be violations of the state Consumer Protection Act.

Supporters’ testimony
- Industry representatives and some HESA providers said licensure and clear rules would weed out bad actors and give consumers a regulated option. Speakers representing Hometap, Unlock Technologies and Point argued the product can be a legitimate alternative for homeowners who are “equity rich and cash poor,” and that codifying consumer protections would reduce harm.
- Isaac Castellano (lobbyist; representing Hometap, Unlock and Point) urged support and said the bill ‘‘establishes a strong regulatory framework that recognizes the unique nature of these products while avoiding the challenges and pitfalls of attempting to regulate these unique products.’’
- Josh Gaffney (HomeTap Equity Partners) and Lee Kaplan (Unlock Technologies, general counsel) also advocated for the bill as a way to standardize protections and oversight.

Opponents’ testimony and concerns
- Consumer advocates, legal aid organizations and some attorneys urged a no vote. Their primary arguments:
- Home equity sharing agreements resemble mortgages in practice and have loss and repayment profiles similar to mortgage loans; three other states that considered HESAs have concluded they are mortgage loans that should be regulated as such.
- The 25% annualized cost cap is too high and could still leave homeowners exposed to large costs when a HESA becomes due.
- HESAs often target homeowners who are home‑equity rich but cash poor (including elderly homeowners and communities of color); opponents said the bill, as written, is industry-driven and would not sufficiently protect those vulnerable people.
- Several opponents described case examples of harm; the committee received written comments and oral testimony urging stronger borrower protections or a rejection of the bill.
- Organizations testifying in opposition included the National Consumer Law Center, Northwest Consumer Law Center, Washington State Association for Justice, and Statewide Poverty Action Network.

Balance of arguments
- Supporters urged that licensing and specific consumer protections would provide a regulated product and reduce bad actors. Opponents argued that the product’s economic profile means it should be treated under existing mortgage laws and subject to mortgage licensing and protections rather than a separate HESA chapter with a relatively high allowable annualized cost.

Points of procedure and next steps
- A number of stakeholders were invited and given constrained testimony time; the committee asked for written comments where speakers could not finish oral testimony. Staff emphasized the DFI licensing approach and listed the statutory consumer protections in the bill as read into the record.

Speakers (selected)
- Megan Mulvihill, staff to the committee (staff briefing). First referenced 00:54:44.
- Isaac Castellano, contract lobbyist (representing Hometap, Unlock and Point) (support). First referenced 00:57:15.
- Josh Gaffney, general counsel, HomeTap Equity Partners (support). First referenced 00:57:46.
- Lee Kaplan, general counsel, Unlock Technologies (support). First referenced 00:58:26.
- Matt Windsor, Point Digital Finance (support). First referenced 00:59:15.
- Andrew Pizer, National Consumer Law Center (opposition). First referenced 00:59:45.
- Bridal Donkers, attorney for Crystal Lawrence (opposition). First referenced 01:01:24.
- Amanda Martin, Northwest Consumer Law Center (opposition). First referenced 01:02:10.
- Molly Gallagher, Statewide Poverty Action Network (opposition). First referenced 01:08:14.

Why the debate matters
- Home equity is the principal asset for many lower- and middle-income households. Proponents say HESAs can provide alternatives to high-cost loans or forced sales; opponents insist HESAs often lead to greater long-term loss of homeowner wealth and displacement unless subject to mortgage-style consumer protections.

Ending
- The committee heard detailed argument on both sides and closed the public hearing; the measure’s proposed approach (a new licensure and oversight chapter with a 25% cap) drew sharply divergent views. The transcript records extensive requests for written materials and offers from the sponsor and stakeholders to continue negotiations.","Staff described HB14-64 as a bill to license and regulate home-equity-sharing agreement (HESA) originators beginning 07/01/2026, with consumer protections such as a three-day cancellation right and a 25% annualized-cost cap.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6329787,"Committee advances several consumer-protection bills; votes at a glance",171,39000,210000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2315642-68f462ff20996d89435b0fe9e2a52cc8&start=39&end=210","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2315642-68f462ff20996d89435b0fe9e2a52cc8/thumbnail_39000.jpg","/articles/6329787/Washington/Committee-advances-several-consumer-protection-bills-votes-at-a-glance","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6329787-8bd14dbc3429d40f67c0927183a22728/orig.mp4?Expires=1770594043&Signature=iEG3RrbP1GsDuMo6e9K6Cau7dgNER140TPVjBhxTXdAcir5WFMLF-TDVnbju3qTPx1mZYgvHRmk5uvo-dl5bQyx~7UgUGHQadpd62egFQhFwmtWnMyFMoXJP2a-rVhba3SxWc4Ye4cajRIyMONuCoXDKUyaeBeEDsDdyxBifPKqtVdHCLRIqnb28zthCyWKXeLLuzHvPzhlrycqMnCro83ZtUabGMV3-B-uFPosDnmLGG3VKUaxWivxM~~M6unKJ7wPIAProJFZf1G-BYVs8KFdsOoGxStrif~YqBimwVvbQceSRLahwNAH9ZH5PplyMoxHSILeXHfxV1olrDKP6qg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Consumer Protection & Business Committee reported multiple bills out of committee on Feb. 14, moving a package of consumer-protection and business-related measures to the next legislative step.

The most significant actions included reporting substitute House Bill 1505 (insurance code revisions), substitute House Bill 1530 (merchant transaction fees limited to certain operators after amendment), substitute House Bill 1063 (regulated licensing for earned wage access providers), and substitute House Bill 1080 (lodging fee transparency). The committee adopted and incorporated several amendments before voting to report the bills with a due-pass recommendation.

Why it matters: These votes change the statutes governing how consumers interact with insurance, short-term wage-access products, merchants that pass along card fees, and how lodging providers disclose fees. Several votes also adopted targeted amendments restoring or clarifying consumer protections or narrowing application to particular businesses.

Votes at a glance
- Substitute House Bill 1505 — Insurance code technical revisions, including an adopted amendment (CLOD 3-25) restoring a requirement that health carriers provide coverage for a newborn child at no less than the mother's coverage for at least three weeks. Motion to report with due-pass carried; standing committee announcement: 9 aye, 5 nay, 1 excused.

- Substitute House Bill 1530 — Allows regulated businesses to charge transaction fees for credit-card payments; committee adopted MOLV 5-35 to limit the bill to tow truck operators and later adopted MOLV 5-34 to clarify the fee applies to credit cards and not debit cards. Reported out with due-pass: 13 aye, 1 nay, 1 excused.

- Substitute House Bill 1063 (proposed substitute H-1406.1) — Establishes licensing and regulation for earned-wage-access providers and adds multiple consumer protections (fee caps, prohibition on subscription fees, tipping restrictions, authority for Department of Financial Institutions to suspend licenses for child-support violations, and deposit of fees in the Financial Services Regulation Fund). Reported out with due-pass: 13 aye, 1 nay, 1 excused.

- Substitute House Bill 1080 — Requires lodging accommodations to disclose all fees in advertised and total price before reservation; amendment MOLV 5-37 clarified inclusion of assessment fees by government-created special districts and programs. Reported out with due-pass: 9 aye, 5 nay, 1 excused.

Procedure and amendments
- Several amendments were moved, adopted, or withdrawn on the floor during executive session. Representative Reeves made the primary motions to report multiple bills; Representative Santos moved and secured CLOD 3-25 on HB1505 to restore newborn coverage. Representative Wallen and Representative Donaghy were active in amendments on HB1530 (narrowing scope and clarifying payment definitions).

What the committee did not finalize
- The committee deferred action on some bills listed on the agenda (for example, HB12168 and some items not reached before recess). Several items were discussed at staff briefing length and then deferred for future action.

Speakers (selected, for attribution)
- Megan Mulvihill, staff to the committee (staff briefings). First referenced 00:01:25.
- Peter Clodfelter / Peter Kleyfels, staff to the committee (staff briefings on individual bills). First referenced 00:00:39 and 00:05:58 respectively.
- Representative Reeves (moved multiple motions, sponsor-level remarks). First referenced 00:18:30.
- Representative Santos (sponsored amendment CLOD 3-25 on HB1505). First referenced 00:30:44.

Notes and limitations
- Vote tallies are the standing-committee tallies announced on the record at the meeting. Where the transcript records a roll call, those results are reported exactly as announced (for example, “9 aye, 5 nay, and 1 excused” for HB1505). The article does not infer final floor outcomes; it reports committee-level actions only.

Ending
- The committee recessed for caucus and moved through executive session votes to meet cutoff deadlines. Most reported bills now advance in the legislative process and may be amended further in subsequent steps.","The Consumer Protection & Business Committee on Feb. 14 reported multiple bills out of committee with due-pass recommendations, including measures on insurance, earned wage access, merchant transaction fees for certain businesses and lodging fee disclosures. The committee adopted amendments on several measures.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee hears bill to allow direct sales by zero-emission vehicle manufacturers; testimony splits industry and labor, dealers warn of rural impacts

House Bill 14-64 would license home-equity-sharing originators; supporters say oversight needed, opponents call product predatory

Committee advances several consumer-protection bills; votes at a glance