Highway Robbery? A Brief Analysis of Over-the-Air Vehicle Subscriptions

3:15 PM, Feb. 1, 2026

In 2026, you’d be hard-pressed to find someone that isn’t paying a subscription for something. A staggering number of industries utilize subscription services, spanning from media companies like Netflix, software suites from Microsoft or Adobe, monthly food shipments by companies like HelloFresh, and many more. Ironically, there are even subscription-based apps designed to help consumers keep track of all their other subscriptions. With the prevalence of subscriptions in consumers’ day-to-day lives, it may be unsurprising to hear that by 2033, the global subscription economy market size is expected to reach $1.5 trillion.

With subscription services as successful and lucrative as they are, the automotive industry wants a slice of the pie. Many drivers are not strangers to some subscriptions commonly found in vehicles, such as OnStar roadside assistance or SiriusXM satellite radio. However, recent over-the-air subscriptions tied to pre-installed physical features have faced widespread consumer backlash.

One of the most notorious examples dates back to BMW’s 2020 schemes. The German car manufacturer announced plans to implement a subscription whereby drivers would pay $18 a month to access their vehicles’ heated seats, which were already physically installed in the cars from the factory. This announcement immediately garnered criticism from consumers, and BMW pumped the brakes on the idea. In an interview following the controversy, BMW executive Pieter Nota stated the company would instead move its focus towards subscriptions related to “software and service-related products,” like driving assistance and parking assistance, citing the fact that many consumers felt they paid double in order to access their heated seats.

While BMW heeded consumer complaints, other manufacturers are still moving forward to take similar subscriptions to market. One of the most recent controversies concerns Volkswagen’s plans for its electric vehicle, the ID.3. The ID.3 will be sold from the factory registered as producing 228 horsepower. When customers receive the car, however, it will come with a software lock limiting its power output to just 201 horsepower. In order to access this latent horsepower, drivers will need to fork over $22 a month. As expected, people aren’t overly thrilled about this idea. As one reporter sarcastically put it, “[VW’s ID.3 announcement] was greeted with anger by much of the automotive media, which is apparently still [laboring] under the old-fashioned misapprehension that actually buying and owning a whole thing is somehow better than renting a bit of it.”

With the rising prevalence of over-the-air subscriptions and corresponding consumer backlash, states have begun proposing laws that would attempt to keep these subscriptions in check—to varying degrees. Massachusetts has taken a fairly strict consumer protection approach, introducing a bill that would completely bar subscriptions for any feature that “utilizes any components and hardware already installed on the motor vehicle at the time of purchase or lease,” so long as the feature’s function does not present an ongoing cost to the dealer or manufacturer.

A proposed North Carolina law would take a different approach, instead focusing on how profits are split between automotive manufacturers and dealerships. Profits from over-the-air-subscriptions normally go straight back to the manufacturer, but this proposed law would ensure that dealerships are not cut out of the earnings.

The law must respond to the automotive industry’s newfangled consumer tactics, and legislators must kick it into high gear to reach a a uniform agreement.

Bills largely mirroring Massachusetts’s restrictive approach have been vetoed in New York but enacted in Arizona. However, the different approaches to over-the-air subscription regulations could lead to numerous issues, such as confusion among consumers and logistical compliance nightmares for manufacturers. Additionally, even in light of proposed legislation, most vehicle subscriptions are likely here to stay. Increasingly, automotive companies are focusing on less controversial “convince” software subscriptions, such as hands-free driving. This is unsurprising given the potential profits. For example, General Motors reported that it made $2 billion from software subscriptions in 2021 and expects that number to rise to $25 billion by 2030.

However, there is a double-yellow line where consumers will no longer accept increasing monthly charges, and the automotive industry is inching closer towards it. Subscriptions focused on pre-installed vehicle features have slowly been working their way into the market and have increasingly caught the eyes of critics and legislators alike. The law must respond to the automotive industry’s newfangled consumer tactics, and legislators must kick it into high gear to reach a a uniform agreement.

Tim Greene

Tim received his undergraduate degree from UNC Asheville, where he majored in economics and minored in legal studies. As a 2L at UNC Law, Tim is a JOLT staff member and serves on the board of the Environmental Law Project. Outside of law school, he enjoys hiking, cycling, and camping.