California SB 712 smog exemption

[vinceg101]

I thought we cynics were united, Mike

I do agree in that CA has come a LONG way since the '60's & '70's all due to a strict SMOG program (and other industrial restrictions as well) and that it has improved the lives of everyone in the state. Don't get me wrong, I'm not against the program or it's continued enforcement; I'm thrilled that they are seeing they can make modifications to the program to allow certain classes of vehicles to be exempt and still be able to meet their mandates.

Perhaps my cynicism got the better of me, but you can't deny that the current program doesn't generate money (SMOG fees, testing licenses, equipment leases, higher registration fees & taxes, etc.) and is tilted toward new car ownership vs. older fleets. Yes newer vehicles are more efficient and do a better job of meeting the state's goals of cleaner air, that is undeniable. I just hold the belief that there is a mindset in CARB and other agencies that would do just about anything to rid the state of older cars and hence the need for these exemptions in the first place.

Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe not.

[Mike W.]

No, I have plenty of cynicism about the program. I think it's totally unreasonable to require cars to be cleaner and cleaner as they age. I think the "Test Only" program is outrageous, it's a circular arguement, they have found test only stations fail cars more often so use that as justification for sending certain cars to test only stations. They set the standards so X percentage fail. If too many cars pass, they ratchet the standards tighter. I'm uncertain however if they loosen the standards if too many fail, I doubt it. Given that so few stations even want to test pre 2000 cars anymore I can even see that as a reasonable cutoff date, I mean that's now 26 model years.

I do have a slightly different view of those at CARB, for the most part, they're just going to work and doing their job as instructed. However the directors at CARB likely get pretty direct influence and pressure from the state legislature, and they in turn are the ones really setting policy, as directed by their bosses.

But I don't think the state directly profits from the program. Shops yes, equipment manufactures, yes, software companies, yes.

And I have no idea what to do about vehicles like those up the street that make my eyes water a block away. I mean that level of pollution is not reasonable or even needed from a performance perspective, they're just too lazy to set it up right. But how many hundreds of thousands or millions of cars do you test every year, at what total cost, to get the super polluters in line? I think the only answer is life is imperfect, there is no fair answer.

[vinceg101]

No, I have plenty of cynicism about the program. I think it's totally unreasonable to require cars to be cleaner and cleaner as they age. I think the "Test Only" program is outrageous, it's a circular arguement, they have found test only stations fail cars more often so use that as justification for sending certain cars to test only stations. They set the standards so X percentage fail. If too many cars pass, they ratchet the standards tighter. I'm uncertain however if they loosen the standards if too many fail, I doubt it. Given that so few stations even want to test pre 2000 cars anymore I can even see that as a reasonable cutoff date, I mean that's now 26 model years.

Given that under the Star Program they went so far as to fine the test stations that didn't meet the failure quotas for their areas, I am as dubious as you on this program and what their real motives are. I talked to several operators who sold their businesses and/or were forced out under this policy. It further reinforces your circular argument statement.

I do have a slightly different view of those at CARB, for the most part, they're just going to work and doing their job as instructed. However the directors at CARB likely get pretty direct influence and pressure from the state legislature, and they in turn are the ones really setting policy, as directed by their bosses.

Yes, no argument. I guess I'm not saying CARB is 'evil' but they certainly are mission-specific and seem to follow the "ends justifying the means" mentality. So they will do whatever it takes to meet their directives; without that dedication we wouldn't be enjoying the cleaner environment we have today.

But I don't think the state directly profits from the program. Shops yes, equipment manufactures, yes, software companies, yes.

We will just have to agree to disagree on this point; I don't have the empirical evidence to prove my point so I'll stay neutral for the time being.

And I have no idea what to do about vehicles like those up the street that make my eyes water a block away. I mean that level of pollution is not reasonable or even needed from a performance perspective, they're just too lazy to set it up right. But how many hundreds of thousands or millions of cars do you test every year, at what total cost, to get the super polluters in line? I think the only answer is life is imperfect, there is no fair answer.

I'm with you on this; I can't tell you how many beat up pick-ups, work trucks, and other beaters I've been behind that have me turning green. Even perfectly restored '60's-'70's muscle cars that are spewing un-spent hydrocarbons from unleaded fuel are noxious beyond tolerance sometimes. (And yes, the irony of this is not lost on me as I sit there in traffic with my un-catalyzed M30 in the M535i behind them).

[Karl Grau]

I'm still not getting my hopes up but the Bill made it through another hurdle today and will be moving on to the full Senate for a vote. If I'm understanding today's changes correctly, collector's car insurance and California 'Historical Vehicle' license plates will be required. I don't have an issue per se with the historical plates except that they're incredibly fugly.




"Leno’s Law advances with bipartisan support in California Senate
By Sacramento Standard
May 23, 2025


Senate Bill 712, known as Leno’s Law, has advanced through the Senate Appropriations Committee with bipartisan support. Sponsored by comedian and automotive collector Jay Leno, the bill aims to exempt classic vehicles, 35 model years or older, from outdated smog check requirements.

Senator Shannon Grove expressed enthusiasm for the bill's progress: “I’m excited to see SB 712 advance through the Senate Appropriations Committee with strong bipartisan backing.” She emphasized that these vehicles represent craftsmanship and culture and play a role in protecting small businesses and preserving California's heritage.

While the committee introduced new language to the bill, Senator Grove remains hopeful about refining it further. “The Senate Appropriations Committee has added new language to the bill, which I look forward to reviewing. While I have concerns about the amendments, I remain optimistic that we can work to improve the language as the bill continues through the legislative process,” she stated.

Jay Leno highlighted California's contribution to car culture: “California helped invent car culture, from lowriders in East L.A. to muscle cars in the Central Valley. These cars tell our story.” He believes SB 712 will help preserve this legacy by recognizing that collector vehicles are driven only occasionally.

The approval of SB 712 by the committee is significant for California’s specialty automotive aftermarket industry, valued at $40.44 billion and supporting over 149,000 jobs. The Specialty Equipment Market Association (SEMA) notes that easing smog check requirements could alleviate financial burdens on collectors and small businesses while maintaining California's automotive history.

“This bill ensures California remains a home for car enthusiasts—whether you’re restoring a ‘76 Trans Am, cruising in a lowrider, or enjoying a local car show,” Senator Grove added.

SB 712 will proceed to a full floor vote in the Senate next."

[Karl Grau]

It Passed!

While not ideal in the amended form, it's still a game changer.

[MyE21]

It’s not a game changer yet, is it?
Doesn’t it now need to go to, and be passed by, the Assembly?

[DavidE9]

Karl, I appreciate your attention to this matter.

[vinceg101]

As we were texting last night (a group text chat amongst a bunch of us here), there are a bunch of unresolved issues with the current writing of the law. You know, the devil is in the details kind of thing. Two annoying issues are the Collectors Insurance Policy requirement and the other is the Historic Vehicle license plate requirement. The latter item is contentious for serious collectors who wish to retain their original period correct CA license plates (if they're lucky enough to have them). They will have to forfeit them (at least legally for road driving) to join the program.

One issue I am completely unsure of is how I am going to get my car to comply with program since it's been legally registered in a non-biennial smog county for the past 4 years. To comply with the program, the cars need to have a working emissions system (for it's year, make & model) installed and pass a visual gas cap & fuel leak test.

How do they plan on verifying the 'working emissions system' if they don't run a SMOG test?

If that's the case that they will do a mandatory SMOG test before allowing cars into this program, then they are going to require the car to be smogged just so you don't have to smog the car again? The implications are that if the car fails a recent SMOG test, it won't be allowed into the program until you make it pass. And don't forget, you have to have CARB compliant CAT's, so no cheap after-market CAT just to get through the test (provided they do the visual inspection which in my nearly 30 years of SMOG testing cars in CA, I have yet to have a station do this).

The other option is they just rely on the last test. But in my case, the last test will have been 6 years before which I'm sure won't fly (and I'm sure I won't be the only one in this situation). What happens if someone brings in a car from out of state with no CA SMOG history?

I am thrilled the state finally saw some reason with this issue, but like all government bodies, common sense with the actual text of the law remains bewildering. Maybe the final text of the law will iron out some of these issues.

[Karl Grau]

Doesn’t it now need to go to, and be passed by, the Assembly?

No, it's a done deal. It goes into effect January 1, 2027.

Karl, I appreciate your attention to this matter.

[kojo96]

I glanced at the bill today, and I'm not sure how to get into the program, it seems that once that's done there is no smog testing moving forward on the car. And, it reads that holds true for a transfer too. Getting my HOV plate was easy, maybe that'll stay the same hopefully. 
Hopefully, 1 more test for me in '26, starting to aquire parts for a head build...

[Mike W.]

I'm not sure yet. Newsom's a wild card and I haven't seen that he's signed it yet. Quoting from a June 5 article,

with only Governor Gavin Newsom’s ultimate decision being an unknown thanks to him being a primary supporter of California environmental laws and supporting the phase out of gas-powered vehicles.

https://californiaglobe.com/fr/lenos-la ... es-senate/

And while a, I assume, a rolling 35 is much better than the current 50 and ever increasing, the earliest any E28s will be eligible is in 2 years. A step in the right direction, but still relatively modest.

[kojo96]

J. Leno is going to use the autopen... Newsom is preoccupied scurrying around trying to save the high speed rail money CA is about to loose 

[Karl Grau]

I'm not sure yet. Newsom's a wild card and I haven't seen that he's signed it yet.

Oh crap! I didn't know this still requires the guv's sig.

the earliest any E28s will be eligible is in 2 years.

Uhm, someone needs to check some basic math here.

Something else that I haven't seen brought up is, will all the pre '76 cars that used to have a free ride now be required to switch to historical plates, collector insurance policies and do the gas cap/fuel leak tests?

[Mike W.]

I'm not sure yet. Newsom's a wild card and I haven't seen that he's signed it yet.

Oh crap! I didn't know this still requires the guv's sig.

Well I assume, like everything else...

the earliest any E28s will be eligible is in 2 years.

Uhm, someone needs to check some basic math here.

Wadda ya mean, this is 2015 isn't it?

[Karl Grau]

^^

[MyE21]

I don’t see how it can be a done deal, how can a law be passed by the Senate without the Assembly?

Anyway, the bill is being further refined before heading to the Assembly, here’s an article from today (June 6):

“Senator Shannon Grove is revved up to announce that Senate Bill 712, also known as Leno’s Law, has successfully passed off the Senate Floor with strong bipartisan support. Sponsored by legendary comedian and automotive collector Jay Leno, this landmark legislation exempts classic vehicles 35 model years or older from outdated smog check requirements, preserving California’s rich automotive culture for future generations.

“I’m thrilled to see Leno’s Law clear the Senate Floor, marking a significant step for car enthusiasts across California,” said Senator Shannon Grove. “Leno’s Law would give collectors the option to have a smog check exemption and that is a win for many enthusiasts!

”Unfortunately, there were duplicative requirements added by the last committee, such as mandating classic car insurance and historical license plates,” added Senator Grove. ‘These provisions could create barriers for collectors, including the need to own a locked garage in order to qualify for the smog check exemption.”“I will continue to amplify the voices of collectors who simply want to enjoy restoring and driving their vehicles on special occasions, ensuring it’s a reasonable process to preserve California’s iconic automotive heritage,” concluded Senator Grove.

Senator Grove remains dedicated to refining the bill to ensure it fully supports California’s car enthusiasts while preserving the state’s vibrant automotive history.

Leno’s Law will now move forward to the Assembly Transportation Committee. For more information, follow @ShannonGroveCA or call (916) 651-4014.”

[MyE21]

I’d like to be optimistic, but this has a long, hard road ahead of it, and I doubt it will make it.

[Karl Grau]

I don’t see how it can be a done deal, how can a law be passed by the Senate without the Assembly?

I stand corrected, you're right. I'm very embarrassed at my obvious lack of understanding of how the California legislative process works.
I also agree that there is almost zero chance this bill will make it through the assembly. *sigh*

[MyE21]

Well, idk about zero chance!

oddly, there is no info or predictions about how it will fare in the Assembly. I get that it needed to pass the Senate first so there hasn’t been focus on the Assembly, but still, it would be nice to have some idea. If it’s DOA in the Assembly then this has all been yet another tease.

it was clear it was going to pass the senate bc the bill had 20 sponsors there and only needed 25 votes.

But the Assembly is more, umm, “radical” and anti-car, so that makes me not optimistic. On the other hand, the fact that it passed the senate with broad bipartisan support is maybe helpful. Having Leno’s name on it is also helpful imo.

either way, there’s a ways to go. The Assembly could just reject it, or amend it and pass it, then it would go back to the Senate for reconciliation etc.

then it would have to not be rejected by newsom.

but it’s still alive as of today, so there’s still a chance.

[MyE21]

As of now, SB712 is essentially dead, or dying.

As I expected, the nutty Assembly isn’t going along with it. They amended it to make it so that there’s no smog on transfer of ownership, but the 2 year smog requirement remains.

which basically makes it useless.

its still pending and under discussion, the deadline is I believe mid August, so there’s some small chance something meaningful can come out of this. But, being California, I wouldn’t hold my breath.

[MyE21]

Deleted

[MyE21]

It passed the Assembly Transportation Committee today with amendments.

basically:

1975 and older unchanged as before.

As of 2027, 1976-80 will no longer need smog on transfer or renewal, but those need to have collector car insurance and historic vehicle plates.

Then it goes rolling again. In 2028, 1981 cars will be included. 2029 will be 1982s, etc. That will continue to 2023, when 1985 cars will be included, and it ends there. 

Now it goes to full Assembly vote. Seems like it will pass there, but idk.
 

[vinceg101]

It passed the Assembly Transportation Committee today with amendments.

basically:

1975 and older unchanged as before.

As of 2027, 1976-80 will no longer need smog on transfer or renewal, but those need to have collector car insurance and historic vehicle plates.

Then it goes rolling again. In 2028, 1981 cars will be included. 2029 will be 1982s, etc. That will continue to 2023, when 1985 cars will be included, and it ends there. 

Now it goes to full Assembly vote. Seems like it will pass there, but idk.
 

So if I understand it, you will still need to SMOG the car if it's a new registration (e.g. if you bring a car into CA for the first time from elsewhere)?
And the '85's won't reach this status until 2032 (you wrote that incorrectly)?

I'm with you: I'm not holding my breath.

[MyE21]

Good question on the first one. I think the answer is no, you wouldn’t need to get it smogged if it’s coming from out of state. It specifically says no smog needed on renewal OR transfer. You’d just initially register as a collector car and provide proof of collector insurance.

And correct, 1985 cars not exempt until 2032.

[vinceg101]

Good question on the first one. I think the answer is no, you wouldn’t need to get it smogged if it’s coming from out of state. It specifically says no smog needed on renewal OR transfer. You’d just initially register as a collector car and provide proof of collector insurance.

And correct, 1985 cars not exempt until 2032.

Again, I'm speculating, but I wouldn't count on that. Since the bill, and subsequent law, has text in it that states that any of these vehicles must have a working emissions system for that car & age, I suspect they will still require a recent SMOG test for newly CA registered vehicles. The transfers wording I believe is for in-state/same-family title transfers for cars already registered in CA. For instance, if I were to change the registration of my car from it's current non-biennial SMOG county (Mono) back to a biennial SMOG one (Los Angeles), they would likely not demand a SMOG certificate (at least that would be my hope).

But I could be wrong, who knows.