Europe’s trailer manufacturers are challenging a new EU regulation they say is unfair, unrealistic, and potentially damaging to the haulage industry.
The CO₂ Showdown: Trailer Industry Fights Back Against Climate Rules
A group of eight major European trailer manufacturers (names like Schmitz, Cargobull, Krone, Kögel, Fliegl, etc.) have contested against the EU in the European Court of Justice, targeting parts of Regulation (EU) 2024/1610. This regulation imposes binding CO2 reduction targets on trailers, even though trailers themselves have no engines (and thus produce no direct CO2).
Under these rules, from the 1st of July 2024 onwards, semi-trailers must reduce their simulated CO2 emissions by 10%, and other trailers must get theirs down by 7.5% – as determined by the EU’s VECTO-trailer simulation tool. If manufacturers fail to meet this target by 2030, they are at risk of penalties of €4,250 per vehicle, per gram of CO2, per tonne-kilometre. The challengers argue that the regulation is detached from practical realities. It unfairly penalises trailer makers, threatens their jobs, and their competitiveness.
The manufacturers have some extremely viable arguments against the regulation – the main one being that trailers physically cannot emit CO2 directly. To treat trailers like engines is, ultimately, a flawed premise. There is also the point of VECTO-Trailer models rewarding theoretical design tweaks without accounting for real-world effects. In practice, such changes could reduce load capacity, lead to more empty trips, or require more trucks – ultimately increasing emissions.
Economic risk is also a stance the manufacturers fight for, with these penalties set in place, trailer costs could raise up to 40%, making them unaffordable for many manufacturers and fleet operators. The challengers warn that 70,000+ jobs within the industry across Europe are at stake, as well as small and medium-sized companies who lack the financial and technical buffer to absorb this kind of burden.
They have made three requests to the court: abolish or revise the use of VECTO-Trailer as the sole metric for CO2 compliance; impose a moratorium on penalties until targets become technically feasible; and allow crediting zero-emission tractor units to offset some of the trailer burden, such as introducing a ZE Vehicle Correction Factor.
The manufacturers had already attempted an action for annulment before the EU’s General Court, but it was dismissed – the court saying they lacked “individual concern” to pursue it, so it has been escalated the matter to the European Court of Justice. This is a precedent for Algorithmic Regulation, testing whether simulated models (like VECTO) may be used to impose real-world penalties, even when real-world behaviour may differ significantly, and would create a ripple effect extending past the trailer industry and into employment, regional manufacturing strength, and international competitiveness.
If they succeed and are given a ruling in their favour, the manufacturers might force the EU to rethink how it regulates non-emitting components in transport systems. This legal showdown won’t just shape trailer design – it could redraw the map for climate policy in transport as a whole.
