Will Trump’s rollback of vehicle-emission rules really make cars $2,400 cheaper — or will it cost more in the long run?

Monique Danao

Fri, February 20, 2026 at 10:30 PM GMT+9 5 min read

The Trump administration says rolling back federal vehicle greenhouse-gas regulations could cut the price of a new car by about $2,400.

At the center of the policy shift is the administration’s decision to reverse the 2009 federal “endangerment finding,” a scientific determination that greenhouse gases threaten public health.

According to the BBC, that ruling has served as the legal foundation for federal emissions limits across industries, especially the automotive industry (1).

By removing it, the White House argues automakers will face fewer compliance costs, which officials say could lower vehicle prices by roughly $2,400 per unit.

But whether drivers actually save money depends on a more complicated equation than sticker price alone — one that includes fuel costs, efficiency standards and how long a vehicle stays on the road.

Must Read

Thanks to Jeff Bezos, you can now become a landlord for as little as $100 — and no, you don't have to deal with tenants or fix freezers. Here's how

Dave Ramsey warns nearly 50% of Americans are making 1 big Social Security mistake — here’s what it is and 3 simple steps to fix it ASAP

Robert Kiyosaki says this 1 asset will surge 400% in a year — and he begs investors not to miss its ‘explosion’

Jason Schwartz, legal director at New York University’s Institute for Policy Integrity, told Reuters that the $2,400 savings on the price of less-efficient cars will be cancelled out by the cost of gas.

He notes that the Department of Transportation’s own estimates point to this (2).

“As for just how quickly any upfront savings will evaporate in the face of more money spent at the gas pump, very quickly indeed,” Schwartz said

Administration officials also claim the broader rollback could save the economy more than $1 trillion by reducing regulatory burdens and lowering energy costs.

However, NHTSA argues the proposal would increase fuel consumption by around 100 billion gallons through 2050.

Here’s a closer look at whether the rollback will really save drivers money over the long haul.

The math behind the $2,400 claim

Fuel-economy rules — such as Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards set by the U.S. Department of Transportation — require automakers to improve fuel economy across their fleets.

These rules often push manufacturers to add efficiency technology, which can increase production costs but reduce fuel consumption over time.

According to Environmental Protection Agency data, newer vehicles typically achieve significantly higher fuel economy than models from a decade ago — so drivers don’t have to buy as much gas (3)

Story Continues  

The average 2023 model car reached a record fuel efficiency of 27.1 miles per gallon, up from 24 miles per gallon in 2015.

Let’s compare what it would cost an American to drive just such a fuel-efficient car versus what it would cost to drive a less fuel-efficient car.

Cost of fuel-efficient car versus less efficient car over a year

Our assumptions:

Our hypothetical driver travels 13,500 miles a year (4)

Gas costs $3.50 per gallon

With a fuel-efficient car (operating 27.1 miles per gallon), they’ll spend $1,743.54 on gas.

With a less fuel-efficient car (operating at 22 miles per gallon), they’ll spend $2,148 on gas, and pay at least $400 more yearly in gas than the driver with the more efficient vehicle — adding up to $2,400 extra cost in six years.

Read More: The average net worth of Americans is a surprising $620,654. But it almost means nothing. Here’s the number that counts (and how to make it skyrocket)

Why does the real cost depend on drivers

Whether deregulation saves or costs money varies widely based on driving habits, fuel prices and vehicle lifespan.

Drivers who keep cars for only a few years, drive fewer miles annually or buy efficient vehicles are likely to benefit from lower upfront prices.

In contrast, drivers that cover long distances, keep cars for a decade or more, or buy less efficient models are exposed to rising fuel costs.

Manufacturers selling vehicles globally must still meet stricter standards in European countries and other regions (5).

That could limit how much companies actually reduce efficiency for U.S. models, potentially shrinking the projected price drop.

Legal challenges may further complicate the timeline.

The BBC reports that courts are likely to review the rollback, meaning the policy’s long-term impact on vehicle pricing and design could remain uncertain for years.

What to consider when purchasing a car

Households that want to save money on a car must consider the total cost of ownership.

That includes:

purchase price

fuel spending

maintenance

resale value

Even if deregulation lowers the initial price tag, reduced fuel efficiency could erase those savings over time. A $2,400 discount does not automatically mean a cheaper car in the long run.

For consumers, the smartest approach is to estimate how much fuel a vehicle will use over its lifetime and compare that figure with any upfront savings.

Only then can drivers tell whether the rollback actually puts money in their pocket — or quietly takes more out.

You May Also Like

Turning 50 with $0 saved for retirement? Most people don’t realize they’re actually just entering their prime earning decade. Here are 6 ways to catch up fast

Vanguard reveals what could be coming for U.S. stocks, and it’s raising alarm bells for retirees. Here’s why and what you can do

Robert Kiyosaki has a grim warning for baby boomers. Many could be ‘wiped out’ and homeless ‘all over’ the country. How to protect yourself now

Non-millionaires can now buy into this $1B private real estate fund for as little as $10. Here's how to get started in minutes

Join 250,000+ readers and get Moneywise’s best stories and exclusive interviews first — clear insights curated and delivered weekly. Subscribe now.

Article sources

We rely only on vetted sources and credible third-party reporting. For details, see our editorial ethics and guidelines.

BBC (1); Reuters (2); Environmental Protection Agency (3); Car and Driver (4); European Commission (5)

This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.

Terms and Privacy Policy

Privacy Dashboard

More Info