Washington is rewriting the very definition of a car. Federal regulators are beginning to draft a rule change that could radically transform how we think about vehicles and clear the path for completely new classes of self-driving car designed from scratch for a human less future. At stake: the opportunity to speed up the rollout of robotaxis, or cars designed to be used only by people or companies.

On Tuesday, June 25, the U.S. Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration released its proposed new changes for the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS). The idea is quite simple. If a vehicle is intended to be driven solely by an automated driving system, or ADS, then it’s not required to have a steering wheel, brake, accelerator, clutch, or any other control used by a human. The logic, said regulators, is that why should a car have controls in it when it will never be driven by humans.

The autonomous vehicle industry has long argued that federal motor vehicle safety standards were created more than five decades ago to apply to vehicles operated by humans and not robots. They were not designed with technology like robotaxis in mind. Companies developing autonomous cars have pushed regulators, at both federal and state level, to reform existing regulations to be better suited to their new applications.

This regulatory tweak could potentially unblock designs that have so far failed or required special waivers, like some of the two-seater roadsters the auto industry envisions for ride-hailing services, without passengers. One likely big winner: Tesla, which has said it’s working on a two-seat vehicle called the Cybercab with no controls at all, intended as part of a network of ride-sharing robotaxis.

1. Musk Has Lobbied Hard for AV Regulation Reform

Elon Musk, the CEO of the company, has relentlessly urged U.S lawmakers to create government regulations, paving way for widespread use of the company’s self driving technology, and the newly introduced bill would do precisely that for Musk’s ambitious goal. So far Tesla already has been trying out a number of their self-driving units, disguised as custom driven Teslas Model Ys, in their robotaxi pilot in Dallas, Austin and Houston, and can already roll out dedicated purpose-built Cybercab units which would revolutionise everything for them.

Tesla’s Regulatory Push:

• Musk lobbied Washington for framework
• Robotaxis already running in Texas
• Uses modified Model Y SUVs currently
• Cybercab deployment would be transformative
• Proposal aligns with Tesla’s ambitions

There is a tremendous amount riding on the outcome for Tesla. A ridehail robot, as compared to an existing human consumer vehicle Retrofitted, enables the designers of the Cybercab to design every part of Cybercab with the passenger experience as the guiding principle, as opposed to the design for existing driving conventions or car conventions the Cybercab would design to be an out-and-out consumer ridehail robot, rather than have a traditional car design constrained for ridehail service, This could be the most significant regulatory shift for Tesla throughout its existence should the Department of Transportation enact the policy.

2. Other Robotaxi Players Are Watching Closely

Indeed, other major players in the robotaxi space pay attention to this idea as well. Waymo, a unit of Google’s parent company Alphabet, has done much of the Heavy Lifting for this AV development and “would likely have to file an application with us for the necessary regulatory exemptions to begin testing the vehicle on private roads,” as spokesperson Clara Jung told TechCrunch at the time of the Waymo On-demand pilot’s public beta announcement. Although Zoox, an Amazon-owned robotaxi maker, has a car custom-designed from scratch (meaning Waymo hasn’t necessarily proven its “open” AV concept), it still needs government exemptions for any real world AV road testing. GM’s stopping the fully manual drive mode of the Origin AV Jan. 31 after deeming its development hindered by regulatory uncertainty, which makes the Origin the only “AV” in the auto industry that doesn’t need a chauffeur.

Industry Impact Beyond Tesla:

• Amazon’s Zoox developing purpose-built AV
• Zoox relies on government exemptions currently
• GM cancelled Origin AV in 2024
• Regulatory uncertainty drove GM’s decision
• Proposal could rekindle cancelled projects

This proposal could rekindle such ambitious projects across the automotive industry and level the playing field for radical new vehicle designs that have no place for a steering wheel or pedals. The regulatory barrier that forced companies like GM to abandon their most innovative concepts could soon be lifted, potentially unlocking a new wave of investment and development in purpose-built autonomous vehicles that are optimized entirely around the passenger rather than the driver.

3. Waymo’s Retrofit Strategy Could Be Leapfrogged

This raises an interesting problem for Alphabet’s Waymo, who has been America’s largest provider of paid robotaxi trips. Waymo has built a business by fitting thousands of its vehicles with the equipment to allow for manual driving like existing Jaguar I-Pace sedans that is now considered legally necessary to scale. However, the solution has the potential to become challenged by an entirely new approach.

Waymo’s Position Under Threat:

• Largest paid robotaxi operator currently
• Operates across 11 U.S. cities
• Retrofits existing cars like Jaguar I-Pace
• New rule could enable competitors to leapfrog
• Purpose-built AVs offer new efficiencies

With this potential new rule, Waymo’s competitors would be able to totally eclipse Waymo’s “retrofit” strategy by coming out with entirely re-designed and re-concepted “born-ready” robotaxis, designed for operation by an AV. In other words, a completely new, ride-hailing car with no pedals, mirrors or a steering wheel, may have an cabin that so vastly alters and improves on anything you would experience with a Waymo you may have to wonder if other vehicles should really be called robotaxis at all.

4. Safety Standards Remain Even Without the Pedal

Just as important as knowing what this proposal will do is knowing what it won’t do. NHTSA has been consistent, and emphatic, on that: The actual pedal itself might be on the chopping block, but high safety performance for braking? Not going to happen. The requirements governing stopping distances, braking performance and the like remain the same whether a person is doing the braking or the software driving the vehicle is, the responsibility just transfers from an individual’s foot on the pedal to an automated system.

What the Proposal Does Not Change:

• Braking performance standards remain unchanged
• Federal stopping distance rules still apply
• Responsibility shifts to automated system
• Performance replaces physical hardware requirement
• Safety benchmarks stay firmly in place

This focus on performance over physical hardware is a recurring theme in the broader modernization effort underway at NHTSA. The announcement also opened the door to re-evaluating other features traditionally designed for human drivers, including rearview mirrors, windshield wipers, and windshield defrosters, all of which may be redundant for the cameras and sensors used by an autonomous driving system. The future vehicle may not just lack pedals but many of the familiar components we associate with driving today.

5. AV Regulation Reform Has Bipartisan Support

This regulatory momentum is not a recent or partisan development. The push to update the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards for autonomous vehicles has been a bipartisan effort spanning multiple administrations. During the Biden administration, NHTSA finalized a rule that allowed autonomous vehicles to operate without steering wheels. The current proposal from the Trump administration continues that same trajectory, suggesting a broad consensus across party lines that the rules governing vehicles must evolve to reflect new technology.

Bipartisan Regulatory Evolution:

• Biden era allowed steering wheel removal
• Trump administration continues same trajectory
• Broad consensus that rules must evolve
• NHTSA calls it a generational revolution
• America aims to lead globally

NHTSA Administrator Jonathan Morrison captured this sentiment powerfully, stating that the United States is at the cusp of the greatest technological revolution in vehicle technology since the innovation of the Model T. He argued that if America wants to lead the way in this transformation, the regulatory framework must be fundamentally reimagined to match the pace of innovation rather than acting as a barrier to it at this critical moment in history.

6. Safety Advocates Are Raising Serious Alarms

This bold step into the future is not without significant debate and criticism from safety experts. As regulators move to remove what they call pointless barriers, safety advocates are raising alarms and questioning whether the technology is truly ready for such a leap. The core of their concern is that fundamental safety systems are being removed before comprehensive AV-specific safety standards are even fully in place, creating a potentially dangerous gap between what the technology can do and what the law requires it to prove.

Key Safety Concerns Raised:

• Safety systems removed before standards exist
• Consumer Reports criticizes regulatory carve-outs
• Other countries developing comprehensive standards
• Performance must be proven before removal
• Innovation outpacing reliable safety protocols

William Wallace of Consumer Reports criticized NHTSA’s approach of creating regulatory carve-outs instead of developing strong and comprehensive autonomous vehicle safety standards as other countries are currently doing. Cathy Chase of Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety argued that the performance of AVs needs to be regulated to be demonstrably safe before safety systems such as a brake pedal are removed from vehicles that will be making life-or-death decisions on public roads shared with pedestrians and cyclists.

7. Emergency Scenarios Raise Unanswered Human Questions

The human element introduces another critical layer of complexity to this debate. The American Automobile Association voiced its support for easing regulations but stressed the urgent need for transparency in how these vehicles communicate their status to the people inside them and around them. In a world of driverless cars without familiar controls, what happens in an emergency? How are passengers or first responders supposed to interact with a vehicle that offers no intuitive way to take command or even understand what the vehicle is doing at any given moment?

Unanswered Human Factor Questions:

• AAA supports easing but wants transparency
• Emergency interaction remains unresolved
• No intuitive controls for passengers
• First responders face new challenges
• Technology and human behavior must align

These are critical questions about the intersection of technology and human behavior that remain largely unanswered by the current proposal. The removal of familiar physical controls does not just affect the driving experience; it changes the entire relationship between a person and the machine they are traveling in. Until clear answers exist for how humans interact with a fully autonomous vehicle in unexpected or dangerous situations, these concerns will remain at the center of the public debate.

8. Tesla’s Own Robotaxis Still Need Human Intervention

Dan O’Dowd, founder of the AV safety advocacy group The Dawn Project, brought the critique directly to one of the proposal’s biggest potential beneficiaries. He argued that reliability standards must be met before physical controls are removed from any vehicle on public roads. His criticism is sharpened significantly by Tesla’s own admission to NHTSA that its current robotaxis sometimes require remote human intervention from teleoperators to navigate obstacles or move after a crash, complicating the narrative of fully unsupervised autonomy.

Tesla’s Current Autonomy Limitations:

• Dawn Project demands reliability standards first
• Tesla admitted needing teleoperator intervention
• Remote humans help navigate obstacles
• Also needed after crash situations
• Full unsupervised autonomy not yet achieved

This admission complicates Tesla’s position as the loudest advocate for removing physical controls from autonomous vehicles. If the current robotaxi fleet still requires a human to remotely intervene in certain situations, the argument for removing the last physical safety backup available to passengers becomes considerably harder to make convincingly to the safety community, to regulators weighing the public comment responses, and to the general public who will ultimately be the passengers in these vehicles.

9. A 30-Day Comment Period Will Shape the Outcome

The proposal is now in a 30-day public comment period, allowing industry stakeholders, safety groups, and the general public to formally weigh in before the Department of Transportation decides whether to finalize the proposed changes. The Autonomous Vehicle Industry Association, which represents companies including Waymo and Zoox, has already commended the decision as a meaningful step toward facilitating American leadership in the global autonomous vehicle race that is intensifying with each passing year.

The Comment Period and Next Steps:

• 30-day public comment period open
• Industry stakeholders and public can respond
• AV Industry Association already commended proposal
• Waymo and Zoox represented in support
• DOT will decide on finalization after

The battle lines are clearly drawn between those who see this proposal as unleashing a new era of American innovation and those who see it as a premature and potentially dangerous gamble with public safety. The outcome of the comment period and the DOT’s final decision will determine whether the United States takes a bold leap into a pedal-free autonomous future or pauses to develop the comprehensive safety standards that critics argue must come first.

10. This Proposal Redefines Our Relationship With the Car

For the average person, the implications of this regulatory shift are immense and far-reaching. If adopted, it could dramatically shorten the timeline for seeing fleets of purpose-built robotaxis appear in cities across the country. The conversation for car dealerships, service centers, and fleet managers will rapidly evolve from selling and maintaining cars for individual owners to servicing and managing vast networks of autonomous vehicles that are constantly in motion and never parked in a private driveway.

What This Means for Everyone:

• Robotaxi fleets could arrive sooner
• Car ownership model faces disruption
• Dealerships must adapt their model
• Car shifts from tool to service
• We become passengers not drivers

This proposed rule is more than just a technical update to a safety standard; it represents a pivotal moment in our century-long relationship with the automobile. The removal of the brake pedal is a tangible symbol of a future where the car becomes an autonomous entity, a service we summon rather than a machine we operate. The driverless car is no longer a distant science fiction concept, and this proposal may be the moment the wheels of that transformation begin turning faster than ever before.