A California bill that once proposed covering up to 90% of an electric truck’s purchase cost is still moving through the Legislature but that headline-making provision is no longer part of the bill. The July 1 amendment to SB 1213 removed the proposed 90% voucher language. The current version now focuses primarily on electric truck pricing transparency, future reviews of certain HVIP voucher limits, and a state study of possible financing tools for zero-emission commercial vehicles.
As of July 30, 2026, SB 1213 California remains an active bill in the Assembly Appropriations Committee. Its next hearing is scheduled for August 5, 2026. The bill has not become law, and its requirements could still be amended, held in committee, or rejected before reaching the governor. For fleets following California electric truck incentives, the most important takeaway is simple: SB 1213 could change how vehicle prices and incentive-supported transactions are reported, but it does not currently guarantee a larger voucher for every buyer.
What Happened to the Proposed 90% Electric Truck Voucher?
Earlier versions of the California electric truck bill included a provision that would have allowed an HVIP voucher to cover up to 90% of a vehicle’s total purchase cost. The proposed calculation could have included taxes and delivery fees. That provision attracted attention because the upfront cost of a battery-electric medium- or heavy-duty truck can be one of the largest barriers for fleets considering a transition from diesel. However, the Assembly amendment published on July 1 removed the language authorizing vouchers of up to 90%. The current bill no longer establishes that percentage or promises a specific incentive amount.
What remains is a requirement for the California Air Resources Board to reevaluate the cap on the purchase of unredeemed vouchers issued through the HVIP voucher program each year. The stated goal would be to increase the cap when feasible and maximize the benefits provided by zero-emission vehicle deployments. Any increase resulting from that review would be directed toward qualifying electric medium- and heavy-duty vehicles that provide a direct and meaningful benefit to disadvantaged communities. CARB would be responsible for establishing the eligibility criteria and determining the required connection between the vehicle’s operation and the community benefit. The bill would also require CARB to periodically reevaluate whether taxes should be included when calculating the maximum share of a vehicle’s cost that may be covered by the project.
These provisions could support future changes to California HVIP vouchers, but they do not automatically raise voucher amounts. The bill does not specify how large a future increase would be, when it would occur, or whether every fleet or vehicle would qualify. Fleets should therefore avoid building a truck-purchase budget around the removed 90% proposal. The current version creates a review process not a guaranteed discount.
New Pricing Rules Could Make Electric Truck Costs More Transparent
One of SB 1213’s main remaining provisions focuses on electric truck price transparency. If the bill becomes law, beginning January 1, 2027, certain California agencies administering eligible medium- and heavy-duty vehicle incentive programs would need to receive specified pricing information before including a vehicle model in those programs. Manufacturers would be required to report the manufacturer’s suggested retail price for eligible zero-emission vehicle models offered for sale in California. That information would need to be provided quarterly to the agency administering the incentive. For each vehicle receiving an incentive, the administering agency would also need a final purchase order that clearly separates the vehicle’s base price from additional costs, including:
- Taxes
- Fees
- Warranties
- Service agreements
- Components added after manufacturing
Agencies could collect additional information needed to monitor pricing behavior. That information could include the truck’s make, model, model year, gross vehicle weight rating, body type, vehicle identification number, and nominal battery capacity. CARB and the California Energy Commission would then compile and publish the data every six months. The information would be presented in an aggregated format by vehicle model and model year.
The published information would need to anonymize buyers and protect confidential manufacturer and dealer transaction information. The goal would be to improve market visibility and oversight without publicly identifying individual purchasers or disclosing protected business information. A vehicle model could have its incentive eligibility immediately suspended if the required reporting rules were not followed. CARB could also recover incentive funds connected to knowingly false information or anticompetitive pricing and sales practices. The agency could coordinate with the California attorney general when investigating potential violations.
These rules would not automatically reduce zero-emission truck prices. Manufacturers and dealers would still determine their prices, while vehicle configurations, battery capacities, warranties, bodies, equipment, and other costs would continue to vary. However, more detailed purchase orders and aggregated pricing data could make it easier to compare vehicles and see where added costs enter the transaction. The information could also help state agencies evaluate whether public funding is lowering buyer costs or being absorbed through higher prices elsewhere in the deal.
For fleets using California truck incentive programs, that could provide a clearer view of the difference between the truck’s base price, additional equipment, transaction costs, and the final incentive-supported price.
What Could SB 1213 Mean for Fleets and Owner-Operators?
Most of the proposed reporting responsibilities would fall on manufacturers, dealers, CARB, the California Energy Commission, and other agencies administering covered incentive programs. Fleets and owner-operators would not be responsible for publishing the market data. However, they could see changes in how purchase orders are prepared and how vehicle prices are presented during an incentive-supported transaction.
A more detailed purchase order could help a buyer answer practical questions such as:
- What is the base price of the truck?
- Which components were added after manufacturing?
- How much is being charged for warranties and service agreements?
- Which taxes and fees are included?
- How does the incentive affect the final amount due?
That information may be especially useful when comparing trucks with different bodies, battery capacities, charging requirements, warranties, and vocational equipment. SB 1213 would also require CARB to work with the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development and the California Infrastructure and Economic Development Bank to explore additional electric truck financing opportunities. A report would be due to the Legislature by January 1, 2028.
The report would examine options such as:
- Low-cost loans for zero-emission trucks
- Residual-value guarantees
- Greater private-investor participation
- Incentives encouraging new market entrants
- Financing support for used zero-emission vehicles
- Diesel-to-zero-emission truck conversions
- Other strategies intended to improve market access and lower costs
These are subjects for a future state report. SB 1213 would not immediately create a low-cost loan, residual-value guarantee, conversion grant, or used-truck financing program. That distinction matters. A requirement to study financing options is not the same as funding an active program. Fleets should not delay or commit to a truck purchase based on the assumption that these financing tools will become available. The current HVIP process would remain important for buyers considering medium- and heavy-duty electric trucks. Under HVIP, an approved dealer submits the voucher request for the purchaser. When approved and funded, the incentive is applied as a point-of-sale reduction on the purchase order rather than paid to the purchaser later as a rebate.
HVIP funding is generally offered on a first-come, first-served basis while funds remain available. The amount and availability may depend on the eligible vehicle, purchaser type, funding category, set-aside program, and current program rules.
Before relying on a voucher, fleets should confirm:
- That the vehicle appears in the current HVIP catalog
- That the dealer is HVIP-approved
- That funding remains available
- That the fleet meets the applicable purchaser requirements
- That the planned operation qualifies for any enhanced incentive
- That the purchase order follows current program rules
A vehicle being marketed as “HVIP eligible” does not necessarily mean that funding is reserved or guaranteed for a particular buyer. SB 1213 has moved forward, but the bill moving through the Legislature today is different from the version that first attracted attention. The proposed language allowing an HVIP voucher to cover up to 90% of an electric truck’s total purchase cost has been removed. The current bill would instead require annual reviews of certain voucher limits, establish new electric-truck pricing disclosures, and direct California agencies to study additional financing approaches.
Those changes could improve price comparisons and give the state more information about how public incentives affect electric truck transactions. They could also provide policymakers with options for expanding access to affordable zero-emission trucks in the future.
However, the current SB 1213 status remains active but unfinished. As of July 30, 2026, the bill is awaiting consideration in the Assembly Appropriations Committee and has not become law.
Fleets and owner-operators considering a purchase should continue to work from the rules and funding that exist today. Before planning around California electric truck incentives, confirm current HVIP funding, eligible vehicles, approved dealers, purchaser requirements, and the incentive amount available for the specific truck.
