LAWSUITS, REGULATIONS, AND TARIFFS CONTINUE TO IMPACT INDUSTRY
By Jay Townley
05 12 26: “Woman files wrongful death suit against Rad Power Bikes after fire kills husband.” Bicycle Retailer and Industry News: “A woman filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Rad Power Bikes and an authorized dealer in Florida after one of the brand's e-bikes ignited in her garage and killed her husband. The lawsuit officially lists as a defendant New Summit Collective Inc., which was Rad Power's parent company before the brand was acquired by Life Electric Vehicles Holdings Inc. in March through bankruptcy proceedings. According to the lawsuit, the e-bike was defective, and ‘in its aggressive push for a greater share of the e-bike market, Rad Power Bikes knowingly released into the stream of commerce a product powered by unstable lithium-ion battery technology known to trigger thermal runaway events.’ Located in Pensacola, Florida, retailer The Cycle Joint Inc. is named as a defendant because it assembled the e-bike. The shop serves customers in the Alabama-Florida border region. A fire investigator said the blaze originated from the e-bike's battery pack, the lawsuit states. Additionally, a ‘nationally recognized battery expert has conducted an evaluation of the e-bike battery pack and determined it to be defectively designed. Had Rad Power Bikes incorporated appropriate and available design features, the fire — which originated from the e-bike battery pack — would more likely than not have been contained within the battery pack and prevented from spreading. This event was foreseeable. More importantly, it was preventable,’ according to the lawsuit. Less than a month before filing for bankruptcy, Rad Power said it could not afford a recall on some of its older lithium-ion batteries that the Consumer Product Safety Commission declared unsafe. The CPSC issued the warning because it said some batteries can unexpectedly ignite and explode, especially when the battery or harness has been exposed to water and debris. Rad Power Bikes did not agree to ‘an acceptable recall,’ according to the CPSC, and the brand told the agency that, ‘given its financial situation, it can't offer replacement batteries or refunds to consumers.’ New owner Life EV has said in March it will address that issue by implementing a program to replace the approximately 120,000 recalled batteries at 50 percent discount. The recall involved mostly older batteries before Rad Power obtained UL certification for its Safe Shield-branded battery, which features a special resin coating around the cells to mitigate thermal runaway.” HPS ANALYSIS: As a growing number of wrongful death and injury lawsuits involving e-bikes and lithium-ion batteries are reported by the media, the U.S. bicycle industry is still scrambling to find its collective footing to help brands and manufacturers mount effective defenses. In too many cases, the defendant manufacturers or brands simply have not done a proper and complete job of testing and certification to the applicable standards. HPS urges the industry to carefully examine its policies and positions on voluntary and mandatory standards, including definitions and the safest possible certification to the most stringent applicable standards.
05 13 26: “Did China Cycle 2026 signal a seismic shift in the bicycle industry?” Bike Europe: “China Cycle was a four-day event held from 5-8 May in Shanghai. As China looks to cross the threshold from being 'big' to becoming 'strong,' China Cycle showed that that shift is already happening. Once a domestic event known for wacky products and cheap copies, 2026 marked a new evolution for the show as it looks to lead the global bicycle market. With a noticeable increase in the number of international visitors, many left wondering how long other nations will be able to compete with the nation's pace of innovation and manufacturing prowess. The China Bicycle Association revealed its ambition to become the industrial powerhouse for the bicycle industry on the eve of the 34th China Cycle Show in Shanghai. ‘Over these past five years, we have not only maintained the world’s largest industrial scale, but also revitalized the national calling card of China’s two-wheeled vehicles with new brilliance,’ said Zheng Xiaoling, director of the industry development department at China Bicycle Association. She was there to introduce China’s new five-year plan. This is a high-level, state-led blueprint detailing strategic, social, and economic development goals for the nation, with the 15th Plan (2026-2030) officially approved in March 2026. Technology and branding are the future: ‘Glory belongs to the past, while the road ahead remains long and challenging. Global industrial chains are being restructured, trade barriers are rising higher and involution-style competition still exists. Our past advantages were built largely on scale and cost, but our future success must be built on technology and branding.’ To respond to change and lead the future, the China Bicycle Association is tasked with supporting the development of the bicycle and e-bike industry within the new five-year plan. ‘We will stay firmly focused on the core of new quality productive forces, resolutely move away from involution and low-end competition, and launch a full-scale drive toward intelligence, green development, and internationalization,’ confirmed Xialong, as the country looks to shift from being a manufacturing hub to ‘a global trendsetter.’” HPS ANALYSIS: It should be clear by now that China has outflanked the U.S. and the EU as concerns international trade. The U.S. has a few more cards to play, but at the end of the day, China and Chinese-owned and controlled entities have a better than even probability of coming out on top as the leading suppliers of bicycles, e-bikes, scooters, and related products to the import-dependent North American market. The current HPS analysis indicates that China will continue to be far ahead of the American bicycle business as concerns export to the rest of the commercially viable world. As concerns imports and re-shoring to the Western hemisphere, China, according to HPS’s current analysis, is both better positioned and strategically prepared to execute its Five-Year Plan.
05 14 26: “FTC announces ‘Made In The USA’ enforcement sweep.” mondaq Legal500 Intelligence: “On April 14, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission announced a coordinated ‘Made in the USA’ enforcement sweep, including three settlements and two investigation closing letters concerning ‘Made in America,’ ‘Made in the USA,’ and similar U.S.-origin claims. The announcement follows an Executive Order the Trump administration issued on March 13, 2026 (See April 2026 GT Alert) that directed the FTC and other federal agencies to protect both consumers and legitimate U.S. manufacturers, including by prioritizing enforcement actions for improper ‘Made in America’ claims. The Enforcement Actions: The FTC announced three settlements with companies that allegedly violated Section 5(a) of the FTC Act1 and the Made in the USA Labeling Rule2 by making unqualified statements that their products were ‘Made in the USA’ despite relying on foreign manufacturers for component parts. One of the settlements also resolved alleged violations of the Textile Fiber Products Identification Act and related rules. Three In total, the companies agreed to pay a collective $867,743 toward consumer redress. Takeaways for Businesses: The timing of the FTC’s announcement and the details of the enforcement actions underscore that ‘Made in the USA’ labeling claims are a priority for the agency. Notably, the enforcement sweep targeted unqualified claims that products were ‘Made in the USA,’ and such claims may face a higher risk of enforcement in the future. In addition to regulatory actions, there is also a risk of class action lawsuits. Companies making U.S.-origin claims – explicit or implied – may see increased scrutiny from the FTC and other federal agencies, as well as potentially significant monetary consequences for noncompliance. Sellers on digital marketplaces in particular may face an uptick in scrutiny due to the Executive Order’s emphasis on online misrepresentation.” HPS ANALYSIS: “Made In The U.S.A.” is not the biggest labeling issue the American bicycle business is embroiled in, but it has popped up regularly over the years. It also remains as one of the labeling issues that American-based assemblers of bicycles and e-bikes find themselves arguing with Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) about, often leading to advisory opinions and/or settlements that may or may not be relied upon going forward. All of the past history is our window, and the Trump Administration issued an Executive Order on March 13 of this year ordering the FTC to conduct a coordinated “Made in the USA” enforcement sweep from April 14 of this year forward. This is good news for those companies and brands that are legitimately Made In The U.S.A.
05 15 26: “Hundreds of illegal motorbikes bulldozed in New York City crime crackdown.” The City Reporter: “The New York Police Department bulldozed more than 200 scooters, mopeds, and motorbikes in Staten Island on Tuesday as part of the city's crackdown on illegal and unregistered bikes.The NYPD said at least 5,700 'dangerous illegal vehicles' had been seized so far since the start of 2026, a 10 percent increase compared to the same period in 2025. It comes after a seven-month-old was killed by a stray bullet in a drive-by shooting in Brooklyn on 1 April, where the suspects fled the scene on an illegal moped.” HPS ANALYSIS: If you have not already seen the pictures, let me know, and I will send them to you. The New York City political dignitaries, including the Police Commissioner, lined up to condemn illegal e-motos and motorbikes as they are bulldozed into little pieces of scrap metal. This, in all probability, makes the politicians attending feel better – but the real enforcement still falls in whole or part on New York City retailers – including bike shops. As this is being written, the state legislature is considering a bill that will require retailers of electric bicycles, including e-bikes and e-motos to install sprinkler systems and/or lithium-ion fire suppressant systems. The NBDA and HPS are actively involved in advising a company developing an appropriate fire suppressant system that can be used for battery storage and charging. The NBDA is working with a member of its board of directors to provide a demonstration retail site while the company involved is focusing on funding for the demonstration and keeping the New York legislature, the New York City Fire Department, and the Mayor’s office informed and involved.
05 15 26: “The challenge of creating value in the bicycle industry.” Bike Europe: “Investors expect their investments to appreciate in value. Over the past decade, well-managed private equity funds have generally doubled the capital invested for their investors over the term of the investment, after deducting their own, usually very attractive, fees. However, this requires that the company's value also rise sharply during the investment period, more than doubling. These average times-two money multiples also include investments that perform poorly or even fail, for example, due to insolvency. What is the secret behind investment funds' value creation? Investment funds do not possess any secret knowledge regarding value creation either, but they generally bring experience from numerous investments in companies across various sectors. This also applies to investment funds that have invested or are currently investing in companies in the bicycle and e-bike sector, such as Ardien, Naxicap, Riverside, EQT, KKR, Teslin, Boromin, DPE, Bregal, Jebsen Capital, Porsche Ventures, Rivean Capital, GIMV, and others. Investment thesis: An investment usually begins with a so-called investment thesis, which typically identifies attractive potential for value growth in the target company that needs to be realized over the investment horizon, usually spanning three to six years. In most cases, after entering a company, investors work with management to develop a so-called value-creation plan, which is then implemented over the investment horizon. As investors come from outside the company, they often bring a fresh, unbiased perspective on the company and the industry, which helps management focus, increase efficiency, and optimise organisational and process-related aspects. The role of operating partners: Most investment funds have so-called operating partners for implementation who are in close contact with the respective company and its management. In addition, an advisory board comprising external experts is usually established to advise both management and investors. Is this a guarantee of value creation for investments in companies such as Stromer, YT, Accell Group, Little John, Green Mobility Holding, E-Motion, Woom, Fazua, or Lupine? No, this is not a guarantee of value creation of the invested capital, but the aforementioned measures generally increase the chances of value creation. However, other factors can also work against value creation. For example, if an industry is in an ‘investment trend’ — as was the case with the bicycle and e-bike industry between 2019 and 2022 — companies will achieve significantly higher valuations. But every trend comes to an end, and afterwards, company valuations return to normal levels as investors pursue new investment trends. For example, we are currently seeing investments in the defence industry and in artificial intelligence. Exit scenarios: In addition to operational value-enhancing measures for a successful investment, the timing of the purchase and sale of the equity stake is also crucially important. This is why professional investment funds consider the sale right from the purchase stage and incorporate so-called exit scenarios into the value creation strategy from the outset, to ensure, as far as possible, that there are potential buyers for the company at the end of the investment period. This is because, unlike strategic investors, financial investors want to sell their holdings at a high profit. Investors’ value creation plans do not always succeed. In particular, a downturn such as the one our industry experienced between 2023 and 2025 negatively impacts value-creation plans, and enterprise value multiples also fall significantly during such periods. Investment thesis and assumptions regarding market developments were also often greatly overestimated in the past. Here, privately-owned companies have the advantage, as they are traditionally not influenced by investment trends and generally pursue longer-term and more conservative growth strategies. Back to basics strategy: At present, the best and safest way for a company to increase its value is probably to focus on a so-called ‘back to basics’ strategy, which essentially means concentrating more on its core strengths, such as product design, quality, product availability, costs, margins, and customers: No frills. Family-owned or listed companies with a long history in the industry, such as CUBE, Orbea, Jobrad, Shimano, Giant, and Bike24, etc., are usually better at this, as they have successfully navigated crisis situations in this way in the past. In the medium- to long-term, there is still significant potential for increasing the value of companies in our sector, particularly through the use of artificial intelligence and robotics in our products. It will be interesting to see who will be able to realise this value potential.” HPS ANALYSIS: This is a long and, in HPS’s opinion, very interesting and timely article. One of the primary challenges for the largest corporate entity to the smallest specialty bicycle retailer is the challenge of creating value. What is the value of your business enterprise now, at the end of this business year, and going forward into the future? There are different types of investors, from private equity to banks to private investment firms to public companies to individual investors. As the article points out, they each have their own reasons for investing along the timeline of the global economy, specific consumer market, and the specific brand identity, and as the article rightly points out, the potential of the investment opportunity along the timeline.
05 16 26: “USTR's Section 301 hearings: reflections from a witness.” mondaq Legal500 Intelligence: “In February 2026, the U.S. Supreme Court dealt a blow to the president's trade policy agenda when it struck down the sweeping, worldwide tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). The administration's pivot was immediate. The very same day, it imposed temporary tariffs under Section 122. Weeks later, it launched processes to implement more permanent replacement tariffs under Section 301. The headlines this week have focused on the Court of International Trade's invalidation of the administration's Section 122 tariffs. But another important trade policy event – one much less widely reported – also just concluded. For the past two weeks, my former colleagues at the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) heard testimony from companies, trade associations, and other stakeholders as part of Section 301 investigations of 60 countries. I was one of the 175 witnesses who testified. In this post, I share reflections on my experience and thoughts on why participation in these proceedings is (and perhaps might not be) valuable for stakeholders. What Are These Hearings Like? Section 301 hearings are held on the ground floor of the International Trade Commission in a hearing room roughly the size of a middle school gymnasium. The layout resembles a standard appellate courtroom, with a panel of eight or so U.S. government officials holding forth from behind an imposing, dark wood dais. Panels of five to seven witnesses take turns delivering oral statements, after which the U.S. government officials question the witnesses. This week's witnesses ranged from well-known trade advocates like Ed Brzytwa of the Consumer Technology Association, to my former USTR colleague and data guru John Corrigan, to multiple representatives from artificial Christmas tree manufacturers. All were welcome, all voices were heard. Why Is Participation in Section 301 Investigations Worth Your Time? The stakeholder engagement process is a critical aspect of Section 301 investigations. USTR relies on the industry expertise, data, and nuanced know-how stakeholders provide to develop the factual record on which it bases Section 301 findings. Over the past two weeks, the government officials leading the Section 301 hearings were engaged and active, asking nuanced questions of each stakeholder witness. The questions were meant to elicit the specific types of evidence USTR will need to support its investigations – namely, information on industrial overcapacity and the importation of goods made with forced labor. USTR reviews the input it receives during these hearings and considers that information as it reaches its conclusions. This level of direct, face-to-face public participation in U.S. trade policy formulation is rare. For example, when the administration imposed sweeping tariffs under IEEPA last year, no formal public input was solicited or required. But Why Might Participation in These Section 301 Investigations Be Less Worth Your Time? The administration has been clear about the purpose and goal of the current Section 301 investigations: to levy new tariffs that replace, at least in part, the IEEPA tariffs the Supreme Court struck down in February. If USTR follows this path, it would mean:
USTR concludes that the forced labor- and overcapacity-related acts, policies, and practices of the 60 countries under investigation are actionable under Section 301, and
Based on those determinations, the administration imposes broad Section 301 tariffs that resemble the now-defunct IEEPA tariff regime
If the administration is determined to use Section 301 tariffs to replace much of the IEEPA tariff structure, no amount of stakeholder engagement is likely to change that basic, overall approach. But that does not mean stakeholders have no voice in the current Section 301 processes. The nuance here is that USTR may feel compelled – perhaps in part to strengthen its legal position in anticipation of future litigation – to create some daylight between the old IEEPA tariffs and the new Section 301 tariffs. If so, USTR will likely look to stakeholder input (including the testimony it heard from me and others over the last two weeks) for guidance on how to structure any revised tariff regime to best serve U.S. interests.” HPS ANALYSIS: While this article leans a bit optimistically, it does make it clear that the USTR and the Administration have in place a plan to replace the IEEPA tariffs that were struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court with the new Section 301 tariffs being developed out of the hearings and submissions required by law. HPS is providing this article because the bicycle business, including specialty bicycle retailers, needs to know and better understand the process and what role they may be able to play in the future when there are more resources available. For now, specialty bicycle retailers and their suppliers also need to understand that by the fourth quarter of 2026, the American bicycle industry is going to be paying for import tariffs that are going to be equivalent to the import tariffs paid by the industry during the first quarter of 2026. The only difference is going to be the uncertain mess left by the refunds paid under the IEEPA tariffs.
05 18 26: “Bentonville welcomes new SGS Bicycle, eMobility and Transit Packaging Testing Lab.” Bicycle Retailer and Industry News: “SGS, the world's leading testing, inspection and certification company, opens its new Bicycle, eMobility and Transit Packaging Testing Laboratory in Bentonville, Arkansas – expanding its global network and strengthening support for manufacturers serving North American and international markets. Located at 2310 SW 14th Street, the facility officially opens on May 18 with a ribbon-cutting ceremony and community open house attended by local partners and industry stakeholders. The new lab will focus on quality, development, and safety testing to global regulatory standards for U.S. bicycle and e-bike suppliers, assemblers, and manufacturers. Strengthening the cycling industry in a strategic location: Bentonville has rapidly emerged as one of the leading cycling destinations in the United States, attracting businesses, events, and investment linked to the sport and outdoor recreation. SGS's new lab adds advanced ISO/IEC 17025 and ISTA-accredited testing capabilities that support both local and international companies developing bicycles, e-bikes, and transit packaging. In addition to its economic impact, the facility will help manufacturers ensure their products and transit packaging meet safety and performance standards before reaching consumers, supporting safer cycling experiences nationwide. Comprehensive bicycle and e-mobility testing services: The Bentonville lab offers testing services for bicycles, e-bikes, components, safety equipment, and transit packaging, helping companies meet regulatory requirements and bring products to market efficiently. It joins SGS's network of bicycle testing laboratories established across Europe, China, Taiwan, and Vietnam, and is equipped with the latest EFBE® bicycle testing instrumentation (EFBE was acquired by SGS in August 2025). The lab will also serve as the central transit packaging testing facility (e.g., ISTA) for SGS in North America.” HPS ANALYSIS: HPS had the pleasure of attending the NBDA Central Summit in Bentonville, Arkansas, June 9-11, and Bike Fest on June 12. SGS is one of the top three testing, inspection, and certification laboratories in the world, along with TUV and UL. HPS partners have worked with all three over the last decade, but UL has been the most involved recently with HPS and NBDA relative to both CPSC regulations and UL voluntary e-bike and lithium-ion battery regulations. All three, SGS, UL, and TUV operate thousands of laboratories located in manufacturing countries around the world with technical staff of thousands. SGS’s new lab in Bentonville is, in HPS’s opinion, testament to the growing importance of Walmart and its requirements for testing and certification to U.S. mandatory and voluntary product standards, including bicycles and e-bikes.
05 19 26: “UPDATED: United Wheels pauses Niner and Buzz, refocuses on entry-level brands.” Bicycle Retailer and Industry News: “United Wheels is refocusing on its Huffy and Batch brands as it pauses Niner Bikes and its Buzz e-bike brands. Bruno Maier, the CEO of United Wheels, told BRAIN on Tuesday that the moves came after a ‘review of who we are and where we want to go,’ and the challenges in the market. ‘We’re really immediately focusing on what we’re extremely good at, which is making great quality product for a really good price,’ he added. The company sees opportunities with Huffy, both in the U.S. and in global markets, including Europe and China. Huffy was sold exclusively in the U.S. for the first 130 years of its history — until 2022, he said. ‘It took us a while to make that transition,’ he noted wryly. Now Huffy is seeing growth in Europe, Latin America, and in China, where the brand is sold through retailers and consumer direct and through the brand’s own brick-and-mortar stores. And Batch, an entry-level product for the specialty retailer market, also has high potential for growth in the U.S. and globally, he said. Buzz, a low-priced e-bike line, will be shuttered, with some of its bike models moved into the Batch and Huffy lines. ‘(With Buzz) we just had overlap within our product lines; it didn’t make sense to support three brands when we could do it with two,’ he said. Niner's pause: ‘An extremely thoughtful transition … Discounting, high inventory, and a shift toward electric mountain bikes led to the decision to close Niner temporarily,’ he said. ‘We are looking at it as a product line for the future,’ he said. ‘Right now we want to rethink how we take that brand to market because there’s still a great following for it,’ he added.” HPS ANALYSIS: United Wheels isn’t mentioned as often as its bicycle and e-bike brands, and it is a registered Hong Kong company. The CEO, Bruno Maier, has been in senior management of bicycle companies for decades and is well known in the trade. Huffy, one of United Wheels’ most widely known brands, has been and still is prominent in Walmart stores. Niner, on the other hand, has been a prominent boutique mountain bike brand in specialty bicycle dealer stores. I have known Bruno Maier for decades and consider him to be one of the best managers in our business. With this said, I also look at this as an announcement of strategic significance.
05 21 26: “Walmart plans price cuts using tariff refunds as shoppers get skittish.” National Public Radio npr: “Walmart will likely put its tariff refunds toward lowering store prices, executives said on Thursday, as they described shoppers who are increasingly anxious about the rising cost of fuel. In recent weeks, visitors to Walmart's gas stations have begun to fill up with fewer than ten gallons for the first time since 2022, Chief Financial Officer John David Rainey told investors on an earnings call. ‘That's an indication of stress,’ he said. ‘We see with our customers that the high-income customer is spending with confidence while the lower-income consumer is more budget-conscious and perhaps navigating financial distress.’ The U.S. government last week began refunding tariff payments to importers that paid higher customs fees imposed by President Trump last year, before the Supreme Court struck down most of them. Walmart is now the largest retailer to suggest that it will put those refunds toward potential price cuts”. HPS ANALYSIS: HPS is aware and has made a point of publishing in this newsletter the information and business intel made public by Walmart in recent months. Walmart senior management deserves credit for its courage in telling the truth as they see it and, more importantly, sharing that truth in its monthly shareholder calls with the media. Walmart makes it clear that it is sharing its opinion, but as America’s largest retailer, its opinion is helpful in understanding consumers and the buying habits that underpin their sentiments. The tariff refund mess has triggered a variety of reactions from retailers, large and small, and their customers. Walmart has carved out one possible response to consumers who want to know what they can expect if Walmart does receive tariff rebates. Specialty bicycle retailers can consider the Walmart response of offering any tariff refunds from suppliers to lower store prices.
05 22 26: “Inflation Angst Spreads as Rising Gas Bills Spook Consumers.” Bloomberg: “Summer is shaping up to be bleak for the U.S. consumer. Americans have been struggling for months with high gas prices and persistent inflation, and consumer sentiment has hit a record low. The boost some got from tax refunds is fading. Now retailers, including Walmart Inc. and Lowe’s Cos, are warning that fuel costs driven by the Iran war may begin to show up in prices of products on their shelves. When? It’s tough to predict, according to Home Depot Inc.’s chief financial officer, Richard McPhail. ‘There’s a lot that is changing every day,’ he said in an interview. ‘We’re just focused on being able to adjust as necessary.’ So far, there are few forecasts that the storm of macroeconomic forces is likely to let up anytime soon. ‘We are concerned that the consumers have less ability to spend,’ even now, said Joe Feldman, an analyst at Telsey Advisory Group. Looking ahead, ‘the lower-income consumer is going to become even more challenged.’ At Walmart, Chief Financial Officer John David Rainey said the company has seen some habits change: consumers bought fewer gallons per visit at Walmart pumps in the first quarter, with the average number falling below 10 for the first time since 2022. ‘That’s an indication of stress,’ he said Thursday. ‘At some point, swelling shipping expenses will simply have to be passed on,’ said Michael Skordeles, head of U.S. economics at Truist Advisory Services Inc. Transportation-cost increases are ‘real and stacking up.’ But inflation concerns are still hitting consumer sentiment. The University of Michigan’s final May sentiment index decreased 5 points to 44.8 from April, according to the survey released Friday. That’s weaker than all projections in a Bloomberg survey of economists as well as the preliminary reading of 48.2. ‘It feels like we’re heading in a direction where there’s going to be these pressures on people,’ said Andrew Harig, a vice president with the grocery-industry trade group FMI. Already, the budget-conscious consumer ‘feels kind of worn out.’ HPS ANALYSIS: As I write this newsletter, I am aware that there are more distractions from increasing prices at the checkout and increasing financial pressure on consumers, including me, my family, and neighbors. I live six miles from Wisconsin Dells, one of the largest vacation destinations and recreation regions in the upper Midwest. This was very much on purpose when my family owned a commercial campground from 1980 until 2003. Today, it is a constant reminder of how inflation impacts prices and how tariffs impact inflation. The six miles also puts my house in a large farm community where the cost of planting corn went up $150 an acre at the end of May, and 15 farms went bankrupt in the state of Wisconsin. Bike shops serving the communities around me are looking hard at service work and making sure their labor rates are profitable. They are also thinking hard about maximizing gross margin and inventory turnover, and used bicycles and e-bikes. The NBDA has already done the research, and can provide the dealers in Wisconsin with suggestions for shoring up their business plans and creating monthly budgets – and putting some of the fun back into selling and riding bicycles.
05 26 26: “Tariff refund today, lawsuit tomorrow: a new target for consumer class actions.” mondaq Legal500 Intelligence: “Brands eager to capitalize on potential tariff refunds should proceed cautiously, as not only will retail and wholesale customers have their hands out, but consumers will also be looking for their share. Consumer class actions are beginning to target brands and retailers that raised prices due to tariffs. Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s February 2026 decision striking down certain tariff measures and the resulting push toward refunds, plaintiffs are now going directly to companies to recover alleged overcharges rather than waiting for any government process. For additional background on the Supreme Court’s decision and the broader tariff landscape, see our prior alert, Unpacking the U.S. Supreme Court’s IEEPA Tariff Decision: The Outlook for Future Disputes. The premise is simple: brands and retailers passed on the cost of tariffs and were made whole by imposing higher prices on consumers. Any tariff refunds going to these brands and retailers are accordingly alleged to be a windfall to the brands and retailers. The reality, however, is more complex. Many brands absorbed a significant portion of tariff costs, passing through only limited price increases. These lawsuits are already increasing and are expected to continue, particularly as U.S. Customs and Border Protection moves forward with its tariff refund process. Early cases have already been filed against large retailers, including entities that serve as importers of record. In the event of a lawsuit, brands do have defenses. They may be able to argue that customers agreed to arbitration or waived the right to bring class actions, which may limit these claims. They can also point to the fact that most of the tariff costs were not passed on and that price increases were lawful and justified at the time, and therefore not unfair. The strength of these claims will be highly fact-specific, depending on the nuances of each company’s practices, contracts, terms, and tariff strategy.” HPS ANALYSIS: It is a fact of business life for those of us in the bicycle business that the only people who are guaranteed a windfall out of the tariff debacle are lawyers. It is probably too late to get a law degree, but we can become better informed so that we waste as little precious coin as we possibly can, while doing the best we can to gain as much as we can from the chaos and confusion. Bike shops should contact their primary suppliers and ask (and also follow up) if they anticipate receiving any tariff refunds, and if they are additionally planning to offer any tariff refunds to bike shop customers. Next, listen carefully to customers to ascertain if they are expecting or are going to ask for any refunds of the tariffs they paid in retail prices. Based on what your suppliers tell you, formulate your response to your customers. Your customers may expect to receive nothing, so don’t bring the subject up. If customers do bring the subject up, have an answer prepared for you and your staff. If you can actually give back some kind of actual refund, great, and more power to you. If you can’t, and consumers push, you might consider Walmart’s plan of providing a special limited discount on future purchases. If you come up with a better plan, let HPS and the NBDA know.
05 28 26: “Americans are sick of high prices. Companies are finally doing something about it.” The Wall Street Journal: “Companies from CloroxCLX (-0.94%decrease) to Kraft HeinzKHC (0.37% increase) are finally realizing that half of American consumers can’t afford what they are selling. To appeal to cash-strapped and inflation-weary shoppers, the companies are launching smaller and cheaper products, pitching value packages and, in some cases, reversing price increases. Coca-Cola is selling soda in skinnier, cheaper bottles. Target has new offerings in its toy department for $5. Automaker Stellantis is planning two new car models that will sell for under $30,000. Not even the venerable six-pack is safe. Boston BeerSAM (-1.64% decrease), the maker of Samuel Adams and other beverages, is now offering a four-pack of 16-ounce Twisted Tea drinks to make sure it has an offering under $10. The new affordability efforts are aimed at consumers who have less money in their pockets, stung by rising prices at the gasoline pump and the grocery store. Consumer prices rose 3.8 percent in April compared to a year earlier, but the problem isn’t just one year’s worth of rising costs. Americans have been smarting for years over how much more expensive everything from coffee to cars has become. Walmart Chief Financial Officer John David Rainey said last week that higher-income shoppers continue to spend with confidence, but lower-income consumers are ‘navigating financial distress.’ In the most recent quarter, Walmart customers filled their gas tanks with an average of less than 10 gallons for the first time since 2022, he said. ‘That’s an indication of stress,’ Rainey said. While consumers are feeling pinched, the biggest U.S. public companies are feeling flush. With more than 90 percent of S&P 500 companies reporting results for the first quarter so far, year-over-year growth in earnings per share is up about 29 percent, the sixth quarter in a row that it has exceeded 13 percent, according to estimates from financial-data firm LSEG. And that is before much of the expected windfall from tariff refunds kicks in. An estimated $166 billion in tariffs collected over the past year—plus interest—is due to flow back to the companies that paid the levies the Supreme Court struck down in February.” HPS ANALYSIS: This is about inflation and tariffs going forward, not rebates. This is also about what some companies and brands are doing in an attempt to make consumers feel somewhat better about the increased cost of products and services that are showing up as increased earnings and stock prices of some companies. HPS has not seen this to any degree in the bicycle business, but we have observed this in the service businesses and supply side, providing services to the bicycle business.
05 28 26: "Forecasting still industry's biggest challenge: how Orbea assesses the GBPI.” Bike Europe: “‘Forecasting is very difficult and can cause major problems for the industry when done incorrectly. We have learned that in recent years,’ said Orbea Supply Chain Chief Officer Pablo Trujillo. As the bicycle industry strives to better synchronise supply chains with market demand, access to reliable market intelligence has become increasingly important. The Global Bicycle Purchasing Index (GBPI) addresses this need by providing sourcing insights and a medium-term market outlook through an indicator that anticipates future industry trends. In a conversation with Bike Europe, Trujillo explains how they manage the challenge of forecasting. In charge of Orbea's supply chain, Trujillo oversees strategic-level conversations with existing and future suppliers. ‘Market intelligence plays an important role for our procurement team in the negotiations with potentially new suppliers, but also in the allocation of orders to our regular suppliers. Market intelligence, in general, is also an important tool for informing our organisation about what’s happening in the supply chain, regarding market trends, and updates on our competitors. At the operational level, the purchasing department handles ordering and logistics. Our ERP system provides the order quantities based on the production planning. Finally, our demand planning team gathers all possible information from internal and external sources on the market expectations. Based on that information, they determine the production volumes for each bicycle model. Our ERP system breaks those forecasts into purchasing orders. Negotiations on product specifications and expected quantities are handled by the procurement team. The exact timing and ordering is done by the purchasing department.’ Is the Global Bicycle Purchasing Index a reliable tool for you? ‘Forecasting is very difficult and can cause major problems for the industry when done incorrectly. We have learned that in recent years. As I mentioned earlier, we relied on data and commentary from major suppliers, yet they were wrong. Even when the data is collected from multiple companies, each of us can make mistakes in our own way. Bringing all that information together will generally help reduce the overall margin of error, because the mistakes of one supplier may offset those of another. However, the overall result can still be inaccurate. That is why I believe it is important to regularly verify the data's reliability. For us, it has become very important to check the reliability of any source, and we need to see whether the market data over the previous two years correlates with the Global Bicycle Purchasing Index. HPS ANALYSIS: HPS has observed over the last decade a growing difference in the data sets collected and utilized by the American and European bicycle businesses. Forecasting is very difficult and is a key element of profitability and the ability to service customers throughout a channel of distribution. HPS opines that the European Global Bicycle Purchasing Index is a reliable business tool. It is, unfortunately, not a tool used in North America – at least yet. In the American bicycle business, we have competition for retail sales data between two of the trade associations, with very different objectives and benefits to bike shops. HPS advocates for the bike shops and the NBDA data capture program, and feels strongly that brands and manufacturers should join and support this dealer program to bring fairness and equity to this channel of trade.
05 28 26: “KHS distribution business closing for good this week.” Bicycle Retailer and Industry News: “The KHS U.S. distribution business is closing down for good this week, seven months after the company announced it would close unless it found a buyer. The company’s founders, Wen and Susah Hsieh, are retiring after a half-century running the business. Since the announcement last October, KHS operated more or less normally until January, then began selling down its inventory at a discount. Wayne Gray, vice president, said the majority of the sales were to KHS’s existing 2,700 dealer network. ‘The last container load of new inventory arrived Thursday, with its contents all pre-sold,’ he said. Following the closure, the KHS bike brand will continue to be manufactured in Taiwan and sold in other markets, but the brand will not have a U.S. distributor. In the October announcement, Gray said the owners were open to selling the business. ‘We negotiated with a whole bunch of people, but none of them came to fruition for a million different reasons,’ he said Thursday. Besides bike riding, Gray said he plans to spend his retirement fishing. He leaves on a saltwater fishing trip on June 8. ‘We’re all done, and we’re all looking forward to retirement,‘ he said.” HPS ANALYSIS: I have known Wen and Susah Hsieh and Wayne Gray since they founded KHS in the U.S. Wayne has always been ready and willing to help anyone in the business, and when Schwinn (the original company) had a problem, large or small, Wayne and Wen were always willing to help by providing merchandise or information. Thank you for all you and KHS have done over the years. You will be missed!
05 29 26: “Taiwan bicycle industry labour reforms speeding up, but not there yet.” Bike Europe: “Besides the inventory crisis affecting demand and external markets nipping at export market share, the Taiwanese bicycle industry has also been forced to look inwards at its manufacturing practices following an exposé report on migrant workers' conditions. Now, 15 months later, a new follow-up report has been published, specifically focused on the bicycle industry. It details how at least 10 manufacturers have adopted no-fee policies in 2025, but there is still a long way to go in transforming policy into practice. ‘While the largest Taiwanese bicycle industry manufacturers are introducing stronger measures, most industry-wide developments remain at the policy level, consisting primarily of commitments and audits. The industry is speeding up, but reaching the finish line will require translating policies into practice,’ writes investigative journalist Peter Bengtsen, who has been tracking the developments and exposed the original unethical recruitment by Taiwanese bicycle and component manufacturers. Focus on the bicycle industry: The Danish journalist has followed up on his original ‘Speed Up’ report, which marked a starting point for manufacturers to change their policies for migrant workers' rights when hired for production jobs in various sectors in Taiwan. In his second report, ‘Speeding Up,’ he focuses exclusively on the bicycle industry. ‘The bicycle industry has been speeding up at a significant scale. I have not seen comparable industry-wide efforts in Taiwan’s electronics, automotive, or other manufacturing industries,’ Bengtsen told Bike Europe on the release of his latest report. He points to a ripple effect of change since the United States import ban on Giant Manufacturing around half a year ago. So far, an estimated $10 million (€8 million) has been reimbursed to migrant workers in 2025 and early 2026.” HPS ANALYSIS: While the story is uplifting as seen through some eyes, it is unfortunate from a business standpoint. Yes, this is a story of guest workers from Southeast Asia being recruited and taken advantage of in Taiwan over several decades. It is also the story of a major brand of high-end, good-quality bicycles and e-bikes not being able to import any merchandise to the U.S. from its plants in Taiwan since September 2025. This is despite the fact that Giant has made every effort to comply with what the U.S. government has said it wants from Giant as concerns its recruiting and employment of guest workers in its manufacturing facilities in Taiwan. I don’t pretend to know any of the details – but I do know, from personal experience, the principals and senior managers of Giant Manufacturing Company are honest and sincere and making every effort to satisfy every aspect of the demands being made by the U.S. government. It is my conviction that the U.S. government is making it as difficult as it can for Giant to import its products manufactured in Taiwan into the U.S. This, in turn, is unnecessarily harming some U.S. bike shops.
05 29 26: “U.S. to appeal judge’s order for broad refund of Trump tariffs.” Bloomberg: “The Trump administration said it will appeal a judge’s authority to order across-the-board refunds of all tariffs ruled illegal by the US Supreme Court, potentially injecting legal chaos into a claims process that’s already underway. The Justice Department filed notice on Friday that it will appeal a court order compelling customs authorities to recalculate all import taxes that the administration collected under President Donald Trump’s use of a 1970s-era emergency powers law. U.S. Customs and Border Protection launched a new online portal to process refund claims on April 20, signaling that it intended to repay at least some of the approximately $166 billion in levies struck down by the Supreme Court earlier this year. But even as the administration has moved forward with that plan, the Justice Department declined to concede that a judge could exercise nationwide power to order CBP to reprocess entries that had already been finalized via a process called liquidation, leaving open the possibility of another legal fight. ‘CBP has no authority to reliquidate or refund money without a court order,” the Justice Department said in the court filing Friday. At the heart of the dispute is whether the judge has authority to order refunds nationwide for all importers who paid tariffs issued under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, even if they did not file suit in the trade court.” HPS ANALYSIS: As we have said on numerous occasions, the tariff refund issue is a mess that is only being made worse by the U.S. government and the Justice Department. I included this article because it highlights the willingness of the current administration to make it as difficult as possible for its own agencies, in this case Customs and Border Protection (CBP), to move forward with processing refunds of the IEEPA tariffs found to be illegal by the Supreme Court earlier this year. HPS analysis indicates the Administration wants to refund as little of the $166 billion as it possibly can and will appeal any court order that would expedite any portion of the refund process.
05 29 26: “When fatbike pedals don't go round and round.” Bike Europe: “In the Netherlands, fatbikes have become the new scooters. Not legally: a fatbike is still not a separate vehicle category. If it meets the rules for an electrically assisted bicycle, it is an e-bike. If it does not, it may quickly become something else, such as a moped. Socially, fatbikes have found their audience: teenagers. Add parents who assume that every cheap bicycle ordered online from China complies with EU legislation, and the problem becomes predictable. Many of these bikes turn out to be too powerful, easy to tune, fitted with a throttle, or otherwise non-compliant. From fat to thin: Fatbike riders are increasingly associated with nuisance, speeding, and unsafe behaviour. Amsterdam has now banned fatbikes from the Vondelpark. I understand the frustration, but I doubt whether banning fatbikes solves the problem. The first ‘thinbikes’ have already been spotted. The issue is not tyre width. The issue is speed, behaviour, and illegal modification. This debate recently landed on my desk in a very concrete way. I was appointed by a court in the Netherlands as an expert in a case about a seized fatbike. The police had observed the rider travelling at approximately 30 km/h. A roller bench test had apparently shown that the motor assistance did not cut off at 25 km/h. In addition, the rider did not appear to make full pedal rotations; instead, he seemed to move the pedals up and down in a limited motion. What is pedalling? The bike was not a no-name import from China. It came from a brand that presents itself as compliant. After inspection, road tests, and a roller bench test, my conclusion was simple: the bike was not tuned. The motor assistance stopped around 25 km/h. The fact that an e-bike can ride faster than 25 km/h does not mean the motor is still assisting. It may simply be muscle power, momentum, wind, or a police officer pedalling into another dimension. The more interesting question was whether ‘pedalling’ requires a full 360-degree rotation. My conclusion was that Dutch law gives no clear basis for that requirement. It does not say that pedalling must be a perfect circle. Technically, this matters. Many cheaper e-bikes use a cadence sensor rather than a torque sensor. A torque sensor measures force. A cadence sensor detects pedal movement. Limited up-and-down movement may be enough to activate assistance. But then again, even on a normal bicycle with a freewheel, you can move forward with limited pedal movements. It may not be pretty, but it is still pedalling.” HPS ANALYSIS: This story is either tragic or humorous, depending on which side of the growing controversy over e-bikes and their designs and relative speed capabilities and limits you are on. The question of what “fat bike” pedaling is, or what pedaling a fat bike is – actually was the subject of expert testimony in a Dutch court, and it was determined and encoded by that court’s decision. They do not have to go round and round.
06 02 26: “E-bike market share in Europe stalls far below predictions.” Bike Europe: “The e-bike market share could reach as high as 80 percent, according to past predictions. Since the start of the sales boom more than a decade ago, it was uncertain what market share the e-bike would eventually take of the total bicycle market in Europe. The 80 percent outlook now seems exaggerated, as the Europe-wide market share remains stuck at just under 40 percent. What has put a stop to the growth of the e-bike market? The combined market reports of European industry organisations clearly show that market growth has halted in most countries. The growth rate already slowed in 2023, while in most countries the 2025 market share was equal to that of 2024. In most countries, bicycle and e-bike sales declined in 2025, and the market lost momentum in units. When looking specifically at e-bikes, only Spain, Belgium, and the UK reported growth in sales volume in 2025. 50 percent volume is the maximum in some markets. An e-bike market share of just over 50 percent sales volume appears to be the highest currently achievable in some markets, such as Germany, the Netherlands, and Austria. The other key markets, including France, Italy, Switzerland, and Spain, are lagging even further behind. In the UK, the e-bike market share has reached its peak at 9 percent for two consecutive years. An overview of market data from 2022 to 2025 reveals a worrying picture. Virtually all indicators are in the red. The total e-bike market volume, market value, and average retail price are all in decline. Even the e-bike market share is no longer increasing, while the sales volume of regular bicycles is dropping even faster than that of e-bikes.” HPS ANALYSIS: This article was an eye-opener – at least for me. Europe has been predicting for several years now that e-bikes are on their way to dominating the market and becoming the number one product category in every country/market. This was the same prediction for the U.S. market. This is reality setting in, driven by consumer demand. E-bikes haven’t gone away, nor have they been replaced in the fabric of bicycling in Europe. However, they have taken their place in the transportation matrix of each country/market, along with all the other categories of bicycles and e-bikes. So too will e-bikes find their place in the fabric of bicycling in the U.S. However, e-bikes are meeting a different kind of resistance that is wrapped up in aspects of safety and utility that traditional, acoustic bicycles have never faced or been subjected to. It is also a lesson in what we have to learn about demographics and data analysis from the brethren in Europe.
06 03 26: “Florida man suing Amazon, bike brand, after battery explodes, causing injuries, damage.” Bicycle Retailer and Industry News: “A Florida man is suing Amazon and a Chinese direct-to-consumer ‘e-bike’ brand sold on its website for injuries and damages after the battery exploded and caused a residential fire two years ago. According to the lawsuit, Saul Santiago Hernandez purchased a Bigniu BG10, manufactured by Bigniu Technology Inc., in May 2024. While the lawsuit claims it's an e-bike, Amazon's listing of the bike in question, the ‘BG-X Electric Bike for Adults,’ has a 1,500-watt motor capable of speeds exceeding 34 mph. E-bikes are classified as having a maximum of 750 watts and capable of speeds no greater than 28 mph assisted. Two months after purchasing the bike, Hernandez was charging the battery at his Boca Raton home. The complaint says it ‘suddenly exploded and caught the plaintiff's room and body on fire, causing the plaintiff to sustain serious, permanent burns, injuries, and damage.’ Hernandez filed the lawsuit on May 1, before it was transferred on Monday from the Circuit Court of Palm Beach County to the U.S. Southern District Court, West Palm Beach Division.” HPS ANALYSIS: Here is another example of how e-bikes are emerging differently from a safety and security standpoint. At the height of the industry battles about the proposed mandatory CPSC bicycle safety regulations years ago, we never had to face a lithium-ion battery that exploded, causing injuries and damage. There we have, of course, accident, injury, and fatality data and statistics. But, our industry never had to face the reality of an inertia mass that can achieve speeds of 20 miles per hour, or in excess of that, or was propelled by drive systems powered by lithium-ion batteries that could explode and burn, emitting toxic fumes. This and a wave of other product liability cases are going to force the bicycle industry and business to define what a bicycle is and what it is not. In so doing, we as an industry are going to decide and regulate the safety of the products we sell to consumers.
06 03 26: “U.S. announces new tariffs over forced labour concerns.” British Broadcasting Corporation bbc: “The U.S. has announced new tariffs of 10-12.5 percent on dozens of countries, accounting for almost all its imports, over concerns they are not doing enough to tackle forced labour. It is the second time President Donald Trump's administration has announced new import taxes since the U.S. Supreme Court struck down many of his previous duties in February. The U.S. Trade Department said these countries will face the tariffs because of their failure to address the importation of goods made with forced labour. The UK said it is tackling forced labour, China denied that goods are made with forced labour, and the EU said the tariffs were unjustified. Meanwhile, an Indian analyst said the move was a pressure tactic as trade negotiations between the countries continue. Human rights groups say forced labour does exist in China and that the UK and other countries need to do more on making sure firms do not have forced labour in their supply chains. However, they questioned the effectiveness of U.S. tariffs as a way of dealing with the problem. The 60 trading partners listed, including the UK, the EU, Canada, India, and Japan, account for almost all of the goods sold to the U.S. The U.S. government's stance is that trading with countries that buy things made with forced labour is unfair to the U.S. U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said it ‘creates a dynamic where American workers are forced to compete globally on an unlevel playing field.’ The tariffs announced have not yet been enforced. The Trump administration will need to go through a process to do so. The proposed tariffs come after an investigation launched in March by Greer into the 60 trading partners and whether those countries had failed to act on prohibiting forced labour. The report into the investigations concluded that 54 of the countries had ‘failed to impose a legal prohibition on the importation of goods produced wholly or in part with forced labour and to effectively enforce such a prohibition.’ It said six other trading partners, Canada, the EU, Ecuador, Indonesia, Mexico, and Pakistan, had ‘failed to effectively enforce a forced labour import prohibition.’ The trade department said it would impose 10 percent tariffs on imports from Canada, the EU, Britain, Indonesia, Mexico, Pakistan, Argentina, Bangladesh, Cambodia, El Salvador, Guatemala, Malaysia, and Taiwan. The remaining 45 countries, which include China and India, would face 12.5 percent duties.” HPS ANALYSIS: Going back to the beginning of this newsletter, HPS predicted that this was going to happen. We have reached the early days of June, and the prediction has become fact. The USTR, on behalf of the Administration, has announced new tariffs over forced labor concerns, based on two weeks of hearings. The new tariffs will replace the IEEPA tariffs struck down by the Supreme Court, and they will be levied against 60 of our trading partners at the rate of either 10 percent or 12.5 percent and will be stacked on the existing Most Favored Nation (MFN) tariffs. There is also an additional Section 301 investigation of 16 of our trading partners for structural excess capacity that may result in additional punitive tariffs that will be announced in late June or July. As HPS opined, American importers of record of bicycles and e-bikes and related PA&R will pay the same import tariff in the fourth quarter of 2026 that they paid during the first quarter of 2026, plus they will have to clean up the mess left from the tariff refund fiasco.
06 04 26: “Fast e-scooters are a menace. Don’t lump e-bikes with them.” Bloomberg: “A couple of years ago, early in my time as an e-bike owner, I was cruising down an unprotected Manhattan bike lane at 17 or 18 miles (27 to 29 kilometers) per hour when a car suddenly pulled out into my path a few car lengths ahead of me. If I had been much closer, I thought, I wouldn’t have been able to stop in time to avoid it. That changed my approach to on-street e-bike riding. Since then, I’ve generally kept the power setting at three (out of five) on my bike’s electric motor and my speed below 15 mph. Many other people have been making similar discoveries about the risks of e-bikes and e-scooters as their use has exploded over the past few years, occasionally breaking bones or even losing their lives in the process. E-mobility comes with lots of benefits. In my case, it’s the ability to ride to work through lovely, hilly Central Park on warm summer mornings without arriving at the office drenched in sweat. But there’s a learning curve involved with safely using electric two-wheelers that I’m still not sure I’m on the right side of, and I don’t think local governments in the U.S. and elsewhere are anywhere close to striking the right balance of rules, enforcement, training, and infrastructure adjustments. Moreover, a backlash against e-bikes is brewing that states and cities should resist. That backlash stems in large part from a new generation of electric two-wheelers that have no business traveling on bike paths, bike lanes, or possibly anywhere at all. Last week, a high-speed stand-up scooter was involved in a head-on crash with a bicycle on New York City’s Ed Koch Queensboro Bridge that killed both riders. No one knows for sure how fast the rider of the Teverun Blade GT II was going as he veered out of his lane on the bridge’s narrow bike path to pass a slower cyclist, but the vehicle’s Chinese manufacturer boasts that it has a top speed of 53 mph and is ‘inspired by the raw power and bold contrast of race machines.’ I can’t think of any balancing of risks and benefits in which a stand-up scooter that can go 53 mph comes out ahead, and, in fact, the Blade GT II and superfast scooters like it are illegal in New York, although because they look just like legal scooters that max out at 15 to 20 mph, the ban isn’t easy to enforce. The same goes for ‘e-motos,’ high-speed e-bikes that are basically motorcycles and often not allowed on public roads. They have been involved in recent fatal crashes in New Jersey, California, the UK , and elsewhere. Even most two-wheeler advocates want nothing to do with these vehicles and have been calling for a crackdown in New York. Targeting manufacturers and retailers is one approach, with Amazon.com Inc. recently halting sales of e-motos on its marketplace in California in response to uproar there. Removing existing illegal vehicles from the streets is tougher because it’s hard to tell they’re illegal until you see them going 50 mph, at which point chasing after them isn’t exactly a public-safety victory. Police in the Netherlands are now equipped with portable devices that can detect whether a vehicle’s electric motor is more powerful than allowed by law, so maybe that’s what U.S. law enforcement will have to resort to as well. At the moment in the U.S., most of the political activity seems to be in the direction of cracking down on all electric two-wheelers. The carve-out for low-speed e-bikes successfully advocated by People for Bikes, which is backed by bike manufacturers, is at risk of breaking down, not in New York City, probably, but definitely in its suburbs and elsewhere. HPS ANALYSIS: This editorial from Bloomberg is fitting to close this month’s newsletter, because it is from an active e-bike owner and rider who lives and rides his e-bike in New York City, and has an interesting perspective on the issues of safety and regulation of bicycles and e-bikes. This article, and the Op Ed piece it is based on, are worth reading. My takeaway, which has kept me awake: “At the moment in the U.S, most of the political activity seems to be in the direction of cracking down on all electric two-wheelers. The carve-out for low-speed e-bikes successfully advocated by People for Bikes, which is backed by bike manufacturers, is at risk of breaking down — not in New York City, probably, but definitely in its suburbs and elsewhere.”
Contact Jay Townley: jay@humanpoweredsolutions.com