The Netherlands’ national government is proposing to introduce a helmet requirement for young riders of e-bikes, speed pedelecs, fat bikes, e-scooters and other light electric vehicles (LEVs) in 2027.
The proposal, which has yet to be presented to the House of Representatives and the Senate, seeks to enforce helmet use for riders of all LEVs who are under the age of 18.
The move follows much concerned discussion in the Netherlands about the popularity of fat bikes among younger riders, and an associated increase in injuries involving them. An initial measure to target only fat bike riders with mandated helmet use has encountered numerous obstacles, with the government concluding that “it’s proving impossible to distinguish between rules for fat bikes and other e-bikes, such as electric cargo bikes.”
In addition to the helmet legislation, the government wants to take other measures to reduce the number of accidents involving electric bicycles with:
A campaign to improve the behaviour of riders.
Supporting the bicycle industry in developing a quality mark for electric bicycles.
The goal is to submit the proposed legislation to the House of Representatives in the autumn of 2026, and for the helmet requirement to take effect in 2027.
Comments Off on LEVA-EU: Driving the Future of Light Electric Mobility in Europe
Over the past year—and indeed over many years—LEVA-EU and its members have worked together to fundamentally strengthen the position of light electric vehicles (LEVs) in Europe. Through focused advocacy, deep technical expertise, and sustained engagement with EU institutions and standardisation bodies, LEVA-EU has ensured that the voice of the LEV industry is heard where it matters most.
As the only European association fully dedicated to light electric vehicles in all their diversity, LEVA-EU plays a critical role in protecting the sector’s interests, shaping regulatory frameworks, and creating the conditions for innovation and fair competition. Our achievements to date, and our ambitious plans for the years ahead, demonstrate both the impact of our work and the value of being part of a strong, united industry platform.
Our Strategic Priorities for 2026
Looking ahead to 2026, LEVA-EU is further strengthening its capacity to support members and defend the future of the LEV sector.
From 1 January 2026, we will welcome two new colleagues, Laurent Guérisse and Luca Destro, who will focus specifically on member recruitment and enhanced membership services. This expansion marks the next step in the continued growth of the LEVA-EU team, allowing us to deliver even more targeted support while intensifying our advocacy at both EU and national level.
A central priority for 2026 will be the firm opposition to regulatory initiatives that threaten the viability of light electric vehicles. Proposals such as peak power limits, restrictive support ratios, or arbitrary methods for measuring maximum continuous rated power risk stifling innovation, distorting markets, and undermining the competitiveness of European LEV manufacturers—particularly in segments such as electric cargo cycles and advanced electric bicycles. LEVA-EU will continue to challenge these approaches with clear technical arguments and evidence-based policy input.
In parallel, we are advocating for the inclusion of L5, L6 and L7 light electric vehicles in policy measures currently aimed exclusively at electric cars. These vehicles are a vital part of the sustainable mobility ecosystem and must be recognised as such in incentive schemes and deployment strategies.
LEVA-EU will also maintain pressure on the European Commission to move towards a dedicated LEV Regulation—one that reflects the technical realities and market diversity of the sector—and to establish a dedicated consultation platform for LEV stakeholders. This is essential to ensure that future legislation is developed with, rather than about, the industry.
Additional priorities for 2026 include:
Further development of our internal Battery Working Group to support members on battery safety, compliance, and waste management.
Continued opposition to anti-dumping duties on components imported from China for the assembly of electric bicycles in Europe.
Ongoing monitoring and advocacy to keep EU and national policies aligned with the interests of the LEV sector.
Comprehensive legislative intelligence and hands-on guidance for our 65+ members to ensure regulatory compliance across Europe.
Delivering Tangible Results for the LEV Industry
LEVA-EU’s credibility is built on results. In recent years, our work has delivered concrete outcomes that benefit the entire sector.
Embedding Light Electric Mobility in EU Urban Policy
Within the European Commission’s Expert Group on Urban Mobility, LEVA-EU successfully secured the formal recognition of “light electric mobility” alongside walking and cycling in the Group’s Recommendations for Urban Mobility Policy. Crucially, these recommendations now explicitly call on the European Commission for harmonised technical legislation and dedicated standards for LEVs, developed in close consultation with the sector itself.
Progress Towards a Dedicated LEV Regulatory Framework
LEVA-EU has consistently pushed back against inappropriate legislative frameworks, working to exclude light electric vehicles from both the Machinery Directive/Regulation and Regulation (EU) 168/2013. At the same time, we continue to press the Commission to propose a dedicated LEV Regulation tailored to the specific characteristics of these vehicles.
Shaping Standards That Reflect Market Reality
Our association has played a decisive role in standardisation:
Contributing extensively to the EN 17860 standards for electric cargo cycles and trailers, now fully published.
Ensuring that Series Hybrid (SH) systems are properly addressed through close collaboration with members.
Actively participating in the systematic review of EN 15194 for EPACs, with continued advocacy for the inclusion of SH systems.
Representing LEV interests within CENELEC TC21X and successfully advocating within IEC TC125 for the creation of a joint Working Group.
Supporting the international revision of EN 50604-1+A1 to better align battery safety requirements with LEV applications.
Participating in CEN TC354-WG4 for the review of EN 17826.
Building Awareness and Capacity on Standardisation
Through close cooperation with Small Business Standards (SBS), LEVA-EU continuously informs members—particularly SMEs—about standardisation developments and their implications. Our regularly updated Briefing on Standardisation for Light Electric Vehicles has become a key reference point for the industry.
Influencing Battery and Waste Legislation
LEVA-EU is actively involved in the European Commission’s Waste Expert Group, contributing directly to the Implementing Acts under the new Battery Regulation. To translate these complex requirements into practical guidance, we have also established a dedicated internal working group focused on battery compliance and EN 50604-related challenges.
Defending Fair Trade Conditions
LEVA-EU has been at the forefront of engagement in EU anti-dumping and anti-circumvention cases affecting bicycle components from China and therefore also assembly of electric cycles in the EU. We have supported companies unfairly targeted by measures that fail to reflect the realities of the LEV supply chain, clearly communicating to EU institutions the structural lack of alternative component sourcing and the impracticality of certain origin and assembly requirements. Our ongoing advocacy seeks trade defence measures that protect European industry without causing unjustified disruption to the market.
Standing Firm Against Restrictive National Frameworks
At national level, LEVA-EU has actively opposed initiatives such as the proposed Dutch LEV framework, continuing to petition for its withdrawal due to its disproportionate and damaging impact on the sector.
Why Membership Matters
LEVA-EU’s work is made possible by its members. By joining and supporting the association, companies ensure that the LEV industry speaks with one strong, informed, and credible voice in Brussels and beyond. Membership means direct access to regulatory intelligence, technical expertise, and representation at the highest policy and standardisation levels—resources that no individual company could realistically replicate alone.
As the LEV sector continues to grow in strategic importance for Europe’s mobility transition, the need for effective, professional representation has never been greater. LEVA-EU stands ready to meet that challenge—together with its members.
Join us in shaping the future of light electric mobility in Europe.
For more details on LEVA-EU membership, contact Laurent Guérisse, laurent@leva-eu.com, or if your company is in Italy, contact Luca Destra, luca@leva-eu.com.
An updated micromobility law came into force in Finland on June 18, which includes a minimum age of 15 for the riding of e-scooters capable of speeds over 15 km/h, and tightens rules on drunk driving and riding, and rental regulations. The laws are designed to improve road safety and clarify micromobility accountability.
If an underage rider is stopped by police, whether on a private or rented e-scooter, their parent or guardian will receive a traffic violation fine of €60 – an increase from the previous €40 fine. In the case of rented scooters, the rental companies can also be fined if it is found they knowingly provide e-scooters to underage riders.
Alcohol limits
The updated law outlines clear penalties for riding e-scooters or other vehicles, including bicycles, while intoxicated. Those found to have a blood alcohol level of 0.5ppm, or to be under the influence of drugs, may receive a fine of €200. A refusal to take a breathalyser text will be viewed as insubordination.
Municipal control over rental operators
The law introduces a permit system for shared micromobility, giving municipalities enhanced control over rental companies’ activities. Local authorities are now able to regulate speed limits, parking rules, and operating hours and areas for rented e-scooters and other micromobility devices.
Helmet use is strongly recommended for all riders of LEVs including e-scooters, and is now officially aligned with the recommendations for cyclists, with the hope of boosting the use of helmets and enhancing rider safety.
Comments Off on LEVA-EU Statement on ZIV Position on E-bikes
On behalf of its members active in the e-bike sector and across the broader European Light Electric Vehicles (LEV) industry, LEVA-EU expresses its strong opposition to the position put forward by the German Bicycle Industry Association (ZIV) on 7 April 2025, titled “E-bikes – Active Mobility as Success Factor.”
ZIV’s proposal is based on the incorrect assumption that EPACs (Electrically Power Assisted Cycles) owe their market success to an alleged legal equivalence with bicycles. On this flawed basis, ZIV seeks to impose additional technical restrictions on EPACs, including limits on motor power, assistance ratios, and vehicle weight. Specifically, ZIV proposes to divide EPACs into two categories governed by separate legal frameworks:
EPACs that would remain excluded from L-category type approval under Regulation 168/2013, provided they meet all of the following criteria: – Assistance limited to 25 km/h – Maximum continuous rated power < 250W – Peak power < 750W – Assistance factor < 4 – Weight < 250 kg for single-track carrier cycles – Weight < 300 kg for multi-track carrier cycles
All other EPACs exceeding any of the above thresholds would become subject to the L-category vehicle type approval under Regulation 168/2013. This includes: Electrically assisted (mountain) cycles with assistance factor > 4 and/or peak power > 750W Electrically assisted carrier cycles exceeding 250 kg (single-track) or 300 kg (multi-track)
LEVA-EU strongly opposes this proposal, as it would create a deeply unfair regulatory divide. EPACs that remain excluded from type approval would continue to enjoy a favourable legal and technical status under the Machinery Directive. In contrast, EPACs falling outside ZIV’s narrow definition would be forced into the L-category type-approval system, which is overly complex, prohibitively expensive, and technically unsuitable for these vehicles. This would effectively eliminate their development and market viability.
ZIV claims that the legal status of EPACs is under threat and must be safeguarded through stricter definitions. This claim is entirely unfounded. The current legal framework—based on Article 2.2(h) of Regulation 168/2013 and the Machinery Directive—has provided a clear, stable, and effective basis for the development and market placement of EPACs. Harmonised European standards such as EN 15194, EN 17404, and EN 17860 ensure technical compliance and safety. There is no indication from the European Commission that this framework is inadequate or that EPACs are at risk of reclassification. The assertion of legal uncertainty is therefore misleading and does not justify the proposed restrictions.
It is also important to consider the underlying motivations behind ZIV’s proposal. ZIV represents major manufacturers of traditional bicycles and pedelecs, many of whom rely on specific drivetrain technologies that dominate the current 25 km/h – 250W market. The proposal appears designed to protect these incumbents by preserving the legal status of their products while restricting the growth of more powerful or innovative LEVs. This approach risks stifling competition, innovation, and the development of new vehicle types that serve broader mobility needs, including logistics, accessibility, and sport.
LEVA-EU firmly states that EPACs are Light Electric Vehicles, not bicycles, as defined by the Vienna Convention on Road Traffic. Bicycles are vehicles with at least two wheels, propelled solely by muscular energy, typically via pedals or hand-cranks. EPACs, by contrast, are electrically assisted and fall outside this definition. Their development and legal status should not be dictated by the bicycle industry.
Technical legislation such as Regulation 168/2013 and the Machinery Directive is intended to ensure that vehicles placed on the market are technically safe. These frameworks are not meant to prescribe vehicle characteristics, regulate user effort, or define mobility behaviour. The suggestion that EPACs risk being classified as motor vehicles unless assistance ratios and weight limits are imposed is legally baseless.
The ZIV proposal would: – Severely hinder the development of EPACs for logistics, accessibility, and sport – Discriminate against elderly, disabled, and physically weaker users – Undermine the EU’s climate and mobility goals by reducing modal shift potential and innovation – Misrepresent the purpose of technical legislation, which is not to define active mobility or enforce physical effort
The real legislative priority should be the creation of a dedicated LEV regulatory framework, developed in close consultation with the LEV industry. Such a framework should ensure fair, inclusive, and technically justified rules for all types of Light Electric Vehicles. In its current form, the ZIV position promotes a narrow industrial agenda that conflicts with broader EU goals for competitiveness, sustainability, and inclusive mobility.
China has passed a new electric vehicle (EV) battery safety regulation, becoming the first country to mandate that battery packs must not catch fire or explode, even in the event of internal thermal runaway.
Effective from mid-2026, this regulation will require EV manufacturers to meet significantly enhanced safety standards. Currently, EV manufacturers are required to include warning systems that alert users to thermal incidents at least five minutes before they become dangerous. This is typically achieved through extensive sensor systems that detect abnormalities and trigger automatic shutdowns or alerts.
Under the new regulation, manufacturers must now demonstrate that battery packs will not ignite, explode, or release smoke into vehicle cabins under a variety of stress conditions. The testing requirements include a new safety evaluation following a fast-charging cycle, as well as an external short-circuit test after 300 fast-charging cycles – neither of which may result in fire or explosion.
Wider e-mobility industry implications
Although the regulation is primarily targeted at electric cars, it applies to all electric vehicles, raising potential implications for the broader e-mobility sector, including e-bikes. The new standard, GB38031-2025, titled Safety Requirements for Power Batteries of Electric Vehicles, may influence battery suppliers and technologies across related industries due to shared components and manufacturing practices.
While the regulation may lead to increased compliance costs, particularly challenging for smaller or mid-sized suppliers, it is expected that larger battery manufacturers, many of which already supply reputable e-bike brands, will be able to adapt. Many companies in the bicycle industry have already been voluntarily improving battery safety standards.
Research from UK testing facilities has indicated a clear relationship between product cost and adherence to safety standards. For the bicycle industry, failure to adopt robust safety practices may present significant risks, particularly as incidents involving poorly regulated battery products continue to attract public and regulatory scrutiny.
Recent restrictions by transport operators and property managers have often followed media coverage of e-bike battery fires. However, investigations frequently trace such incidents to aftermarket conversion kits, which are commonly sold directly to consumers without rigorous safety oversight, rather than to mass-produced e-bikes from established brands.
In parallel, China is advancing the adoption of sodium-ion battery technology, which is inherently non-toxic and non-flammable, reducing the risk of thermal incidents. While sodium-ion batteries are currently less energy-dense and larger than their lithium-ion counterparts, they are gaining traction in applications where size and weight are less critical, such as cargo bikes. For instance, AKKU Energie has supplied Deutsche Post with sodium-ion batteries for its delivery fleet.
Continued advancements in sodium-ion battery performance suggest increasing viability in a wider range of electric vehicles. As China expands its use of this chemistry, it may influence global battery technology trends.
A recent study conducted by consultancy DTV, commissioned by the the Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Water Management, has concluded that creating a separate vehicle category for fat bikes would be ineffective and impractical. The findings suggest that fat bikes do not warrant distinct legislation, as their defining features are either easy to bypass, not significantly different from electric bicycles, or actually contribute to improved safety.
The report, titled Fatbikes as a Separate Vehicle Category, was shared with the House of Representatives on 15 January by Minister Barry Madlener. The study was prompted by a motion passed on 11 September advocating for a minimum age and helmet requirement for fat bike riders.
Challenges in defining a Fat Bike category
DTV’s research examined whether it would be feasible to legislate fat bikes separately or impose specific regulations on them. To explore this, the consultancy engaged with key stakeholders, including BOVAG, RAI Vereniging, the Cyclists’ Union, the Inspectorate for the Environment and Transport, RDW, SWOV, TNO, the police, and fat bike manufacturers Brekr and Phatfour, both of whom are part of the Safe Fatbikes Covenant.
One of the primary characteristics considered was tyre width, as fat bikes typically feature wider tyres than standard electric bicycles. However, DTV found that this characteristic could easily be circumvented by manufacturers simply reducing tyre width by 1 mm, rendering any legal distinction meaningless. Additionally, wider tyres were determined to enhance stability and safety, making it illogical to impose stricter regulations based on this feature.
“For almost all other characteristics of the fat bike, the traffic safety arguments for stricter rules are also lacking, that stricter rules would also affect other bicycles, or that they are easy to circumvent,” stated Hans Godefrooij, a bicycle and safety expert at DTV and lead researcher.
Identifying the core problem
The study also questioned whether fat bikes themselves are the source of road safety concerns. According to Godefrooij, many traffic incidents involving bicycles are being wrongly classified as a “fat bike problem,” when in reality, they stem from broader road safety issues that are not specific to fat bikes.
“Many of road safety problems are now lumped as a “fatbike problem”, while in principle they have nothing to do with the type of bike. Only when we agree with each other exactly what problem we want to solve can we see which measures can best be taken.” adds Godefrooij.
Need for improved enforcement
Rather than introducing new fat bike-specific rules, the report highlights the importance of better enforcement of existing laws, particularly regarding tuned electric bicycles, which are already prohibited under Dutch law and classified as unapproved mopeds.
DTV recommends further data collection on bicycle accidents to analyse risk differences between various bike types, usage patterns, and user demographics. This approach would allow policymakers to make evidence-based decisions on whether additional regulations are needed and, if so, which types of vehicles or users should be targeted.
Conclusion
The study ultimately concludes that separating fat bikes into their own legal category would be a misguided approach. Instead, enforcing existing laws and gathering more data on bicycle accidents would be more effective in improving road safety.
The findings are expected to inform future policy discussions on micromobility regulations in the Netherlands, as the government seeks to balance safety concerns with sustainable urban transport solutions.
Minister of Infrastructure, Jimmy Gasore, announced the ban which aims “to promote the use of cleaner, more efficient energy and reduce gas emissions“.
Rwanda has announced plans to discontinue the registration of petrol-powered motorbike taxis starting next year, as part of its efforts to transition to electric vehicles (EVs). According to Minister of Infrastructure Jimmy Gasore, the initiative aims to promote cleaner energy use and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
This policy will apply specifically to motorbike taxis operating in Kigali, where they are a primary mode of public transportation. Rwanda has introduced various incentives to encourage electrification, such as reduced electricity costs for charging, and tax exemptions for battery manufacturers.
Government estimates indicate that the country has approximately 110,000 motorbikes, of which 70,000 are used as taxis, including 30,000 in Kigali.
Eve Kayiranga, manager of SAFI Universal Link, a Rwandan company specialising in electric bikes, described the move as a “significant step forward for a greener city.” She highlighted its role in reducing emissions and supporting the development of e-mobility infrastructure.
Drivers have also expressed support for the shift to electric motorbikes. Alfonse Mbarabuceye, 32, reported a 50% increase in his daily income since transitioning from a petrol-powered bike in 2022. “It has significantly reduced the cost of maintaining the bike, as all I have to do now is change its battery once or twice a day,” he noted.
According to the UN Environment Programme, transportation is the fastest-growing source of global greenhouse gas emissions and is projected to contribute over 30% of future emissions. It is also a major source of short-lived climate pollutants.
Rwanda has set ambitious goals for its electrification strategy, aiming to have 20% of buses, 30% of motorcycles, and 8% of cars powered by electricity by 2030. These efforts are part of the country’s broader objective to achieve carbon neutrality.
UK Transport Secretary Louise Haigh announced the Government’s intention to legalise private e-scooters on public roads, acknowledging the need for regulatory changes.
Currently, privately owned e-scooters are prohibited on roads and pavements under laws applicable to motorbikes and cars, with exemptions granted only to Government-backed e-scooter rental schemes.
Need for E-Scooter Legislation
Ms. Haigh emphasised the urgency of addressing the current regulatory gap, stating that introducing e-scooter legislation is “clearly required.” While confirming there is no parliamentary time or relevant Bill in the current session to address this, she assured that future legislation is planned. “It’s not good enough that it’s been left in this situation for too long,” she added.
E-scooters, she noted, could play a significant role in an integrated transport strategy, potentially benefiting individuals with reduced mobility. However, she highlighted challenges such as parking, street clutter, and understanding the behavioural impacts of e-scooter usage.
Previous Legislative Efforts
Although plans to legalise e-scooters were included in the Queen’s Speech in 2022, they did not progress due to political changes, including the resignation of then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson.
Safety and Usage Concerns
Shared-use e-scooters are currently restricted to speeds of 15.5 mph and are available for hire to individuals over 18. However, Department for Transport data from 2022 revealed 12 fatalities, 1,480 injuries, and significant safety concerns for riders, pedestrians, and cyclists.
Industry Challenges
Despite trials of rental e-scooter schemes in various UK towns and cities, the industry has faced setbacks. Companies like insurance provider Zego and operator Dott have exited the UK market, citing regulatory uncertainty and challenges posed by unregulated e-bikes. Additionally, some e-scooter providers have collapsed in recent years.
The Government’s forthcoming legislative efforts aim to address these issues and provide clarity for e-scooter use on public roads.
The House of Representatives of the Netherlands recently passed several motions aimed at addressing the issues posed by fat bikes and enhancing the safety of young e-bikers.
Key measures include setting a minimum age of 14 for riders and mandating helmet use for fat bikes. These decisions contradict the advice of Minister Barry Madlener, who had cautioned against such motions due to concerns over their legal viability.
Despite Madlener’s previous hesitations, the House is urging him to consider the proposed age limit and helmet requirement for fat bikes. A motion put forth by parties VVD and NSC to explore these regulations received majority support, and it is anticipated that the Senate will also back these initiatives. Madlener’s primary concern lies in the legal differentiation between fat bikes and other types of e-bikes. He worries that manufacturers might alter their designs to evade compliance with the new regulations, resulting in a “cat-and-mouse game” that complicates the establishment of specific rules for fat bikes.
It remains uncertain whether the minister will heed the House’s requests. Previously, he stated that creating a legal distinction was impractical and suggested implementing uniform regulations for all electric bicycles. However, the House of Representatives rejected this approach.
Additionally, the House has approved a motion empowering the police to verify whether fat bikes are properly registered by accessing their electronic systems, which would aid in enforcing the new regulations.
Here’s how the House of Representatives cast their votes:
1. Motion NSC/CDA (Olger van Dijk/Vedder) proposed that the government explore the feasibility of implementing a type approval system for all electric bicycles equipped with pedal assistance, potentially establishing a quality mark. This motion was APPROVED by the House of Representatives.
2. Motion VVD/NSC (Veltman/Olger van Dijk) called for the government to set a minimum age of 14 years and mandate helmet use specifically for fat bikes, with a request to update the House of Representatives on this matter before the Christmas break. This motion was APPROVED by the House of Representatives.
3. Motion VVD/CDA (Veltman/Vedder) sought to empower the police to access the menu of fat bikes during inspections, enabling them to identify violations and impose penalties on the spot. This motion was APPROVED by the House of Representatives.
4. Motion GL/PvdA & D66 (de Hoop/Bamenga) urged the government to assess the possibility of extending a registration requirement to all motorized road traffic, including e-bikes, fat bikes, and other current or future vehicles on public roads. This motion was REJECTED by the House of Representatives.
5. Motion BBB (van der Plas) requested the government to explore the potential use of geofencing in the Netherlands to enhance road safety in public areas. This motion was APPROVED by the House of Representatives.