Ask AutoGuide: Will Cars Really Change After Emissions Deregulation?

On February 12, 2026, the EPA proudly announced it was formalizing the largest deregulation in U.S. history by rescinding the 2009 Greenhouse Gas endangerment finding.

In doing so, the agency effectively chopped down the Clean Air Act and eliminated emissions standards for cars, trucks, and anything else that emits greenhouse gases and particulates into the air.

We’ve had a month to digest and discuss the news—now the AutoGuide team is taking a look at what these changes might functionally mean for car shoppers now and in the future.

The EPA claims the move will save US consumers $1.3 trillion; we’ll see about that. It’s unlikely we see automakers drastically alter their product mix at least right away—vehicle timelines are measured in years, not Truth Social posts. We definitely won’t suddenly see a proliferation of V8-powered station wagons, as much as the government might want that to happen.

Michael Accardi, Content Manager:

What’s possible is that we could see subtle shifts beneath the surface that could improve user experience or reliability. It would be relatively easy for automakers to alter fuel mapping or boost pressures from a software point of view, ditto for transmission shift logic.

Water-thin oils have been in the news lately, partially being blamed for the gargantuan number of engine recalls last year. Thinner oils have been a manufacturer's go-to for fractionally improving the efficiency of a vehicle’s powertrain when it gets run through the EPA’s fuel economy test cycle. But one of the problems with thin oils is that they aren’t as robust under high temperatures—the kind of temps you might see in a smaller, turbocharged engine working hard to move a large vehicle—nor can they absorb or tolerate any kind of manufacturing imperfection in surface finish.

Speaking of high temperatures, if manufacturers are able to move to a ‘fatter’ fuel mix, that could potentially lower combustion temperatures, which, in addition to being better for oil longevity, could also contribute to a reduction in harmful NOx emissions. Of course, when you run richer, there's a greater chance of oil dilution and more carbon dioxide, so that's probably moot.

Another area manufacturers could easily change is the tires offered from the factory—although those are as much a matter of content cost as they are efficiency.

Could there be an increase in manual transmission offerings? Maybe, but that’s even less likely as it would also require the new engine and gearbox combo to be homologated—besides, if the projected sales aren’t there, the automakers aren't going to go for it regardless.

But those V8-powered station wagons, I'd like to hear more about those, please.

Mike Schlee, Managing Editor:

There’s a reason why the EPA usually announces changes to emission and efficiency policies years in advance: to allow automotive manufacturers time to prepare to meet the new regulations. Suddenly changing the standards is not going to have any immediate effect; in fact, it most likely won’t have much mid-term effect either.

For manufacturers, product plans and product cycles take years to bring from initial concept to full-blown production. It’s not easy to suddenly change plans, even if it might look as simple as bringing back an engine/transmission/drivetrain from the past.

What we might see are a few minor changes, like the HEMI V8 ending up in the Charger quicker, or Mercedes expanding the brand’s larger-engined AMG portfolio.

What we aren’t likely to see is a slew of new products, using big displacement engines that drastically reduce new car prices. Even if a manufacturer is ready to go all-in with these new regulations, there’s a very high chance emission standards could completely change again in 3 years, before any of these products even reach the showroom.

Kyle Patrick, Road Test Editor:

Mike nailed a lot of my thoughts—ones that I’ve already at least partially shared in the EPA deregulation and start-stop stories. I’ll also add that American Big 2.5 aside, every other brand has a pretty global presence, so a sudden change in one country’s policy is unlikely to significantly impact long-term plans. And that’s before we even get into the challenges from California and other states, which align with the Golden State’s more stringent standards.

One aspect that shouldn’t be ignored is the cost savings argument. Like a whole lot of other moves from the current administration, this is unlikely to significantly help the average consumer’s wallet, but it might help big businesses increase profit margins. A quick hypothetical: why would an automaker slash prices on vehicles now that they ship without start-stop?

On a broader scale, my concern about this obsession with living in the past is that North America will be left behind in automotive development.

Look to Europe, where sales of EVs were greater than those of gasoline-powered vehicles for the first time in December 2025. I’ve gone on record saying I don’t believe 100-percent BEV is feasible, and I stand by it, but electric cars are going to be a major part of the market moving forward. America refusing to accept that will only put domestic brands further behind in the next decade—and provide consumers with increasingly expensive gas models, not cheaper.

Greg Migliore, Editorial Director:

I think the effect will be fairly minimal for now and likely in the future. You can’t wave a magic wand and change product strategy. That’s why, despite the Trump Administration's ending of the federal tax credit for EVs last year, 2026 is shaping up to be an excellent year for launches of new electric cars. Given the lengthy product cycles, it’s too tough to pivot. Also, why would you—the next U.S. presidential election is 2.5 years away.

Think about it, does a hypothetical President Newsom keep things this way?

Become an AutoGuide insider. Get the latest from the automotive world first by subscribing to our newsletter here.