F. Schlehuber (CLEPA): “Without fair access to data, competition will remain a pipe dream”

Frank Schlehuber: The spare parts market remains more resilient than the automotive sector as a whole. Growth was solid up until mid-2025, before slowing down against a more uncertain backdrop. For 2026, growth of 2 to 3 per cent is no longer a certainty. The ageing vehicle fleet — averaging around 13 years — could support business, but motorists are becoming more reluctant to invest in maintenance. We are already seeing a shift towards private-brand products or low-cost options. The geopolitical context is exacerbating this caution: lower mileage, increased price sensitivity, and the first signs of a slowdown in workshops.

F.S.: Manufacturers are strengthening their presence in the after-sales market and rolling out more schemes to retain their customers. Connectivity and access to vehicle data are at the heart of this strategy. For independent repairers, the rise in technological complexity poses a major challenge. While some workshops are investing in training, particularly in electric vehicles and ADAS, a large proportion remain focused on traditional repairs, at the risk of losing ground.

F.S.: It will all depend on the future level of competition. The transition to connected, automated and cyber secure vehicles strengthens manufacturers’ control over the ecosystem. If this balance is disrupted, costs could rise sharply for consumers. The situation is not yet critical, but it requires regulatory vigilance and appropriate investment to preserve an open market.

F.S.: Progress has been made. The RMI legislation and the Delegated Act announced for May/June 2026 was a “major step forward” for independent workshops. It has improved their access to repair and maintenance information, enabling them to carry out certain operations that were previously restricted. More recently, SERMI certification has provided a secure framework, traceability of work carried out, and the assurance that the operator is a certified professional, which is positive for the sector. It was time to integrate safety aspects into the aftermarket. 
However, these developments are accompanied by increased control from manufacturers. For many operations, even simple ones, repairers must now connect to OEM servers, creating greater dependency. Furthermore, manufacturers can restrict certain access, particularly via OBD. This is a structural change.

F.S.: We need to distinguish between two realities. Access to RMI and OBD data has improved, although its implementation still needs to be monitored. On the other hand, the access to in-vehicle generated data, progress is very limited. Three major obstacles remain. Firstly, access costs are too high, in some cases exceeding 30EUR per month and vehicle with some high-end manufacturers. This is well above an acceptable level, which should be below €3! The second sticking point is the lack of harmonisation in manufacturers’ data offerings. Each manufacturer provides a different set of data, in varying qualities, patterns, latencies and at different frequencies, making it difficult to use by third party service providers. Finally, the lack of clarity regarding the scope of accessible data – due to the absence of a clear definition distinguishing between raw, pre-processed and derived data – creates legal uncertainty. Without a clear and harmonised framework, investments will remain limited and the market will continue to be dominated by manufacturers. Thus, unless a common set of around 40 to 50 data points is provided at a cost well below €3 per car per month, no substantial investment will be made a digression, and the market will remain in the hands of manufacturers.

F.S.: That is exactly what is happening. Manufacturers have direct and privileged access to data, unlike other players. The Data Act, in its current form, remains insufficient to redress the balance. The recommendations in the Guidance papers of the EU Commission are not binding and lack effectiveness. That is why Clepa is calling for specific sector-specific regulation, which is necessary to ensure a level playing field.

F.S.: Absolutely. We support open global competition and free trade. However, it must be fair. Without corrective measures, Europe could lose up to 23% of its added value in the automotive sector and around 350,000 jobs by 2030, according to a recent study by Roland Berger. The Industrial Accelerator Act represents an important first step in the right direction by recognising the strategic nature of automotive suppliers, but its scope will remain limited if it does not sufficiently target European production by enabling all international trade partners without having conducted any risk assessments. The swift adoption of the proposed Industrial Accelerator Act is essential. This regulation will provide the certainty our industry needs to invest, innovate and remain competitive on a global scale. As for the aftermarket, we are seeing a growing number of low-cost spare parts from China flooding our market and putting pressure on remanufacturing companiesAlthough this particular issue has not yet been discussed in Brussels, this debate needs to be opened.
 

F.S.: They will be able to adapt. The real question is not their survival, but their roots. Where will they produce? Where will they invest? Where will they create value? The issue goes beyond mere competitiveness: it also concerns employment, innovation and European industrial sovereignty.