EMA Journal • Fall 2025 • At the Agencies

EPA Moves to Rescind Vehicle GHG Standards: What It Means for EMA Marketers?

On July 29, 2025, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a proposed rule that could reshape the regulatory landscape for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from motor vehicles. Specifically, the agency proposed to rescind its 2009 GHG “Endangerment Finding” for mobile sources and repeal all associated GHG emissions standards for light-, medium-and heavy-duty vehicles and engines under the Clean Air Act.

This proposal matters for EMA marketers. EMA has long been engaged in litigation and advocacy around federal vehicle emissions standards, given their direct impact on fuel supply, consumer demand and retail economics. If finalized, the EPA’s action would reverse nearly two decades of regulatory policy on mobile-source GHGs and create new opportunities — and uncertainties — for the liquid fuels marketplace.

The 2009 Endangerment Finding is the legal foundation for treating six GHGs — including carbon dioxide and methane — as “air pollutants” under the Clean Air Act. Once established, it obligates the EPA to regulate motor vehicle GHG emissions, leading to increasingly stringent standards for passenger cars, light-duty trucks and heavy-duty engines. These standards accelerated automaker investment in advanced powertrains, efficiency technologies and electric vehicle development.

By proposing to rescind the Endangerment Finding in the automotive context, the EPA is not only challenging its prior legal interpretation but also seeking to repeal all vehicle and engine GHG regulations. That means eliminating test procedures, fleet-average requirements and related compliance mechanisms. In a nutshell, if finalized and upheld by the courts, the rescission would establish a vacuum for GHG regulation in mobile sources.

Importantly, the EPA emphasizes that pollution controls under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards and the Hazardous Air Pollutants programs are not affected, nor are fuel economy requirements administered by the Department of Transportation. Still, the removal of mobile-source GHG rules would represent a dramatic shift in federal climate policy and may have ripple effects for the automotive and fuel sectors.

The EPA advances several legal reasons for rescinding the Endangerment Finding. First, the agency argues that the Clean Air Act was never intended to authorize regulation of globally mixed GHGs based on climate change concerns. In its view, Section 202(a) of the statute addresses localized or regional threats to public health and welfare, not broad global impacts. Additionally, the EPA points to recent Supreme Court rulings — Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024) and West Virginia v. EPA (2022) — which narrowed agency discretion and emphasized that major policy questions must be clearly authorized by Congress. According to the EPA, regulating GHGs as pollutants falls into that “major questions” category and therefore exceeds its existing authority.

In the alternative, the EPA questions the validity of the 2009 Endangerment Finding, citing uncertainties in climate science, alleged flaws in methodology, and the failure to conduct an adequate cost-benefit regulatory analysis. In other words, the agency does not believe there is enough evidence to sustain the original endangerment determination.

On the question of preemption — how the proposed rescission would affect state regulation — the EPA concludes that states would not be allowed to set their own GHG standards for vehicles because the Clean Air Act would continue to preempt state actions on new motor vehicles and engines. This remains an ongoing debate, as recent state climate measures, such as New York’s Superfund laws, are testing the limits of preemption doctrines in GHG regulation.

• Market Outlook: The removal of federal GHG standards could slow the pace of electrification and advanced fuel mandates, reducing downward pressure on demand for liquid fuels.

• Regulatory Uncertainty: Even if EPA finalizes the rule, litigation is inevitable. Environmental groups, states and possibly industry stakeholders will challenge the rescission in federal court.

• State-Federal Tensions: While EPA asserts that preemption remains intact, California and other states may test the boundaries through litigation or new initiatives. EMA has historically opposed a patchwork of state regulations, and the coming legal battles may revive that fight.

EPA’s proposal to rescind the GHG Endangerment Finding for motor vehicles marks a pivotal moment in environmental policy. For EMA marketers, the potential repeal of vehicle GHG standards could reduce regulatory pressure on the liquid fuels market, but it also opens a period of intense legal and political uncertainty.

EMA will remain engaged on behalf of fuel marketers to ensure that any policy shift preserves consumer choice and a level playing field for the industry.

Jeff Leiter, EMA's Regulatory Counsel, Bassman, Mitchell, Alfano & Leiter Chtd.

Jorge Roman, EMA's Associate Regulatory Counsel, Bassman, Mitchell, Alfano & Leiter Chtd.