What Is the REPAIR Act and What Does It Cover?

The REPAIR Act, formally the Right to Equitable and Professional Auto Industry Repair Act, is a proposed federal bill that would require automakers to share diagnostic data, repair tools, and wireless telematics information with independent repair shops and vehicle owners on the same terms they already give their own dealerships. It has not been enacted. Introduced first as H.R. 906 in the 118th Congress and reintroduced as H.R. 1566 in the 119th Congress, the bill was forwarded from subcommittee to the full House committee by voice vote in February 2026.¹ Until it passes the full House, clears the Senate, and is signed by the President, none of its provisions carry legal force.

Where the Bill Stands in Congress

The first version, H.R. 906, stalled in the 2023–2024 session without a floor vote.² The reintroduced H.R. 1566 has cleared its subcommittee but still has several steps ahead of it.¹ Vehicle owners cannot invoke the REPAIR Act today to force a manufacturer to hand over data or unlock a diagnostic tool. Existing federal law still applies, and those protections are covered further down.

The bill covers motor vehicles designed for public roads. Its text references both the standard OBD diagnostic ports used in cars and light trucks and the J-1939 interfaces found on heavier commercial vehicles, so its reach would extend well beyond passenger sedans and SUVs.³ Nothing in the current federal bill sets a weight-based exclusion, contrary to some online summaries that borrow a 14,000-pound cap from a separate Massachusetts state law.

What Automakers Would Have to Share

The core rule is straightforward: whatever data, tools, and documentation a manufacturer provides to its dealer network, it would have to make available to independent shops and vehicle owners on the same terms, at the same cost (minus any dealer discounts or rebates), and through the same channels. That covers diagnostic trouble codes, wiring diagrams, calibration files, and any other information a technician needs to identify and repair a fault.³

Repair tools would face the same rule. If a dealer technician can buy a proprietary scan tool to reprogram a transmission control module, an independent shop would be entitled to purchase the same tool at the same price, with the same cryptographic protections in place.³

Telematics and Wireless Data

Modern vehicles stream data wirelessly to the manufacturer through built-in telematics systems, including engine fault codes, sensor readings, and maintenance signals. Under the REPAIR Act, any vehicle-generated data a manufacturer collects wirelessly would have to be made available to the owner and anyone the owner designates, wirelessly and through a standardized access method.⁴ This is the provision automakers have fought hardest, because telematics data underpins a growing set of subscription and predictive-maintenance services.

Owner Control Over Data

Vehicle owners could request that anyone who accesses their vehicle-generated data delete it within 72 hours of the request. Exceptions apply for record-keeping, accounting, safety purposes, and de-identified research data, but the default puts the owner in control of how long repair data sits in someone else’s system.

What Automakers Could No Longer Do

The bill would prohibit manufacturers from using software locks, proprietary barriers, or other technological restrictions to prevent an owner or independent shop from diagnosing, repairing, or maintaining a vehicle in the same way a dealer could.³ Tying a vehicle’s functionality to a specific brand of parts or a specific service provider would also be off-limits. A manufacturer could not, for example, program the vehicle to flash a warning or limit braking assist because an aftermarket brake pad was installed, or disable remote start because an oil change happened at an independent shop.

Cybersecurity is the one area where manufacturers keep some flexibility, and it is not a blank check. Independent providers would get access subject to the same security protections the manufacturer applies to its own dealers. The standard is uniform, not selective. A manufacturer could not invoke “cybersecurity risk” to withhold data from independents while sharing that same data freely with its authorized network.

Enforcement and Penalties

The Federal Trade Commission would be the primary enforcer. Violations would be treated as knowing violations of an FTC rule on unfair or deceptive practices under Section 18(a)(1)(B) of the FTC Act.⁴ That classification triggers civil penalties under 15 U.S.C. § 45(m)(1)(A), currently up to $53,088 per violation after the most recent inflation adjustment.⁵ Across thousands of shops and vehicles, per-violation penalties can escalate quickly.

The bill does not appear to create a private right of action. Individual owners and independent shops likely could not sue manufacturers directly under the REPAIR Act. Complaints would go to the FTC, which would investigate and pursue enforcement through its administrative process.

When the Rules Would Take Effect

If enacted, the bill would phase in on a staggered schedule:⁴

On enactment: manufacturers must provide access to data through physical OBD and J-1939 diagnostic ports on the same terms as dealers.
Within 90 days: the FTC establishes an advisory committee to guide implementation.
Within 1 year: the FTC develops security standards for data access.
Within 1 year after the final security rule: wireless telematics data must be shared with owners and their designees.
Within 2 years: the FTC designates an independent entity to oversee the secure-access framework, and manufacturers must notify owners of their rights under the law.

The telematics provision, the most contested piece, would in practice take two to three years to kick in, because it depends on the FTC first finalizing security rules.

What Protections Already Exist

Even without the REPAIR Act, vehicle owners have federal protection under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. A manufacturer cannot condition a warranty on the consumer’s use of a specific branded part or service provider.⁶ A dealer cannot void your warranty just because you had your oil changed at an independent shop or installed aftermarket brake pads. The only exception is when the FTC grants a specific waiver after the manufacturer proves the vehicle will function properly only with the identified part or service, and those waivers are rare. Outside that narrow exception, the manufacturer must prove that a non-original part actually caused the defect before denying a warranty claim.⁷ Keep dated receipts describing parts and services performed.

The FTC voted unanimously in 2021 to prioritize enforcement against manufacturers that use adhesives making parts difficult to replace, limit availability of parts and tools, or withhold diagnostic software.⁷ The Commission already has authority to act against the most egregious repair restrictions under its existing unfair-practices mandate.⁸

Several states have also moved ahead of Congress. Massachusetts voters approved an automotive right-to-repair ballot measure in 2020, and Maine followed in 2023. Both laws generally require manufacturers to provide access to telematics data through standardized open platforms, though implementation has been slowed by manufacturer legal challenges and federal cybersecurity concerns. A federal REPAIR Act, if passed, would create a single national standard rather than a patchwork.

1
Congress.gov. H.R.1566 – 119th Congress (2025-2026): REPAIR Act
2
Congress.gov. H.R.906 – 118th Congress (2023-2024): REPAIR Act
3
Congress.gov. Text – H.R.1566 – 119th Congress (2025-2026): REPAIR Act
4
Congress.gov. Text – H.R.906 – 118th Congress (2023-2024): REPAIR Act
5
Federal Register. Adjustments to Civil Penalty Amounts
6
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 15 USC 2302 – Full Warranties
7
Federal Trade Commission. FTC to Ramp Up Law Enforcement Against Illegal Repair Restrictions
8
Office of the Law Revision Counsel. 15 U.S. Code 45 – Unfair Methods of Competition Unlawful; Prevention by Commission