LEVA-EU has filed its response to the Dutch consultation on rules for Light Electric Vehicles (LEVs), mainly e-cargocycles and e-scooters. Our position is clear: the proposed LEV framework conflicts with both Dutch and EU law, duplicates a regime that already works, and would do serious harm to LEV manufacturers and suppliers.

A national approval the law does not allow

The framework would require national type approval for vehicles that EU law deliberately exempts from type-approval — including standard pedal-assist e-cargocycles up to 25 km/h and 250 W and e-scooters. These vehicles are also explicitly exempt in Dutch legislation, under the Netherlands’ own Regeling Voertuigen (Article 3.10.1(d)), which points to the European exemptions in Regulation (EU) 168/2013. Forcing them into an Article 21.1 approval (Wegenverkeerswet) therefore contradicts the Dutch government’s own rules.

Nor does it help that the government has quietly taken certain vehicle types off that national exemption list, apparently to bring them under a national type approval. Doing so changes nothing under EU law: every LEV excluded from 168/2013 falls automatically under the Machinery Directive (and, from January 2027, the Machinery Regulation), alongside the EMC, Low Voltage, Radio Equipment, RoHS, WEEE, Batteries, Cyber Resilience and Market Surveillance rules. It is that EU regime — not the Dutch list — that determines what the Netherlands may require. These are comprehensively regulated products, not a gap waiting to be filled.

“Road admission” does not change what a requirement is

The framework regulates these vehicles through a national approval — the road-admission route. But in EU law the substance counts, not the label: a product-safety requirement does not escape the Machinery Directive by being renamed. The Directive’s Annex I already covers these vehicles’ safety in full, and Article 6(1) forbids Member States from layering a second national approval on top of CE marking. CE marking carries a presumption of conformity the Netherlands must respect; where a product is genuinely unsafe, the proper tool is market surveillance, not blanket prior type approval.

The same problem applies to the proposal to capture vehicles up to 25 km/h and 1,250 W maximum continuous rated power that run without pedal assist. These are no faster than the exempt e-cargocycles — they simply work differently — and they already fall under existing 168/2013 categories (L1e-A, L1-B, L2e or L6e). A parallel national regime collides directly with that Regulation.

The existing regime already works

Millions of e-cargocycles and e-scooters are on Europe’s roads without structural technical problems. The issues that do arise come from illegal, non-compliant vehicles — a market-surveillance task — and from inadequate infrastructure and unbalanced traffic, not from a lack of national approval.

A contradiction in the Dutch position

In December 2025, the Netherlands warned the EU Transport Council (see 17h30) — backed by 15 Member States — against having “27 different national rules” and called for European harmonisation! Yet it has spent years building exactly such a national framework. The country warning against fragmentation is contributing to it. The sector is entitled to ask which route the Netherlands is actually taking.

There is also a deeper point. The Commission’s own TRL studies already concluded that type approval under 168/2013 is unsuitable for LEVs and recommended a separate, sector-tailored framework. Proposing a new “type-approval-like” system without acknowledging that — and without consulting the industry — risks repeating a problem that has already been identified.

What the sector should ask for instead

LEVA-EU has long argued for a dedicated EU LEV Regulation that covers all LEVs with essential safety requirements, with categorisation and conformity methods worked out in consultation with the sector. The Commission’s Expert Group on Urban Mobility recommended exactly this in 2024 — a recommendation still unanswered.

The constructive path is straightforward: the Dutch ministry should shelve the national framework and open a dialogue with Commissioner Séjourné and DG GROW on a dedicated LEV Regulation and a LEV Expert Group to guide the work.

Safety and harmonisation: yes — but with the right instrument, and together with the sector that knows these vehicles best. That serves light electric mobility not in one Member State, but in all 27.