Clarify Motor Vehicle Dealer Laws.
HB 406 limits manufacturer conditioning of dealer transfers/terminations, strengthens procedural protections for dealers, and speeds reviews to safeguard dealer continuity.
HB 406 limits manufacturer conditioning of dealer transfers/terminations, strengthens procedural protections for dealers, and speeds reviews to safeguard dealer continuity.
Status: Introduced Nov 12, 2024 (Regular Message Received From House)
Subject areas: Commerce; Franchises; Motor vehicles; Retailing; Transportation
Purpose
- Strengthen protections for new motor vehicle (including RV) dealers and prospective transferees by limiting manufacturers’ ability to condition or block dealer transfers, terminations, relocations, or succession, and by clarifying procedures and timelines for contested terminations or refusals to approve transfers.
Key provisions and changes
- Restrictions on manufacturer conditioning of approvals
- Prohibits manufacturers/distributors from conditioning approval of a proposed sale/transfer/assignment, change in executive management or designated successor, relocation, or change in use of a facility on the dealer’s willingness to: build or renovate facilities, acquire or divest one or more line‑makes, establish exclusive facilities/personnel/display space, or otherwise make comparable business concessions.
- Bars conditioning approvals on the dealer entering a right‑of‑first‑refusal in favor of the manufacturer.
Limits on grounds for denial
Fees when manufacturers object to transfers
Enhanced procedural protections for terminations/nonrenewals
Who is affected
- New motor vehicle manufacturers, distributors and their field representatives.
- Licensed new motor vehicle dealers (including RV dealers where applicable), prospective buyers/transferees, and dealer principals/executive managers.
- State Motor Vehicle Commissioner’s office (administrative workload for hearings and determinations).
Procedural / timeline notes
- The bill revises G.S. 20‑305 and focuses on procedures for approvals, denials, terminations, and related hearings. It mandates specific Commissioner timeframes for adjudication (180 days generally; 90 days for priority cases) and preserves dealers’ franchises pending administrative review.
Potential impact
- Strengthens dealer transfer and succession rights and limits manufacturers’ leverage to force facility investments, brand divestitures, or restrictive contractual options as a condition of approvals.
- May increase administrative workload for the Commissioner (more contested hearings and expedited adjudications).
- Could reduce litigation and negotiation leverage for manufacturers; may increase short‑term disputes but aims to protect dealer continuity and marketplace competition.
Note: This summary synthesizes the bill language clarifying franchise transfer, termination, and approval procedures in G.S. 20‑305 (as provided in the bill text). If you want, I can (1) extract exact statutory language changes side‑by‑side, (2) prepare a short one‑page explainer for dealers or manufacturers, or (3) identify potential fiscal or administrative impacts in more detail.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.