WASHINGTON, D.C.—A D.C. Council Committee heard seven hours of testimony Monday on legislation that would reign in rogue ride-hailing services like Empower and overhaul the District’s for-hire-vehicle laws.
Introduced by Councilmember Brianne K. Nadeau, D-Ward 1, the bill would equalize the regulatory burden on taxis and ride-hailing services like Uber and Lyft, establish simpler and clearer definitions based on types of service, and ensure autonomous vehicles used for pre-arranged rides are covered by for-hire vehicle laws.
It would require more transparency so that drivers know what they will be paid for rides, better enforce against geographic discrimination, and establish first-in-the nation service standards for wheelchair accessible vehicles and provide subsidies to support accessible vehicles and their drivers.
“We’re modernizing and cleaning up an over-complicated law that’s been tweaked and contorted to address technologies and service models that were not anticipated when the original law was written,” Nadeau said. “This new law will work better for companies, operators, riders, and regulators, and puts tools in place to better handle future innovations.”
Public witnesses at the hearing called for greater access for riders who use wheelchairs, improvements to consumer protection and price transparency, and better support for workers.
Nadeau introduced the legislation last month, following a report released by her Committee, which found that the District’s current for-hire vehicle laws are vulnerable to exploitation by bad-faith actors and that they are not equipped to deal with an industry that has innovated and evolved rapidly over the past 15 years.
B26-0818, the For-Hire Passenger Service Reform Act of 2026, would make clear that all for-hire vehicle activity is covered by the law, even if some or all of a trip in the District is free of charge – an attempted loophole employed by ride-hailing company Empower. It also clarifies in law that companies are responsible for the safe operation of vehicles using its digital services – that is, they cannot shift that burden to drivers themselves. The bill gives the District strong tools to investigate and enforce regulations against unlicensed and illegal operators.
The bill also would increase the minimum dollar amount of insurance required of drivers, to ensure that when passengers or drivers are injured in an accident, they are fully compensated.
“Companies that offer ride-hailing services have an obligation to protect their drivers and their riders,” Nadeau said. “We’ve offered solutions to do that; it’s my hope that Uber and others will come to the table with the same goal in mind.”
###
B26-0818 – For-Hire Passenger Service Reform Act of 2026
BILL SUMMARY
The For-Hire Passenger Service Reform Act of 2026 is a comprehensive package that modernizes the District’s laws governing for-hire vehicles to protect consumers and the public, streamline regulations, and ensure that the District has strong tools to investigate and enforce unlicensed and illegal operators. This text was developed based on lessons learned from the Committee’s oversight roundtable and report on “The State of the For-Hire Vehicle Industry” held on May 26, and June 3, 2026, and after an extensive review of comparable for-hire statutes and regulations in more than 20 other jurisdictions, including peer cities and states as well as international best practices. Read the Committee’s preliminary report based on that roundtable and issued in September 2026.
Simplifies definitions
- Simplifies over a dozen intertwined definitions and service types into a single definition of “for-hire passenger service” with two classifications: “pre-arranged” and “street hail.”
- “Pre-arranged” = what are currently considered ride-hailing apps, limousines, and trips dispatched by phone or radio
- “Street hail” = “traditional” taxi service, including taxi stands
Applies the same standards to the entire market
- Insurance, vehicle inspections, licensing and registration, background checks – identical types of service would be subject to the same set of rules.
- Street hail trips would have some higher standards for driver training and regulated fares, since passengers don’t have as much up-front information before they get into a vehicle.
Strengthens enforcement tools
If it looks like a ride-hailing company and acts like a ride-hailing company, it’s a ride-hailing company.
- Ensures clarity on who is subject to the law and holds unlicensed companies and operators accountable.
- Strengthens DFHV’s cease-and-desist authority.
- Unlicensed activity is categorically treated as a public harm.
- All vehicles would be given the same for-hire emblem, making street enforcement easier.
Lowering barriers to entry for taxi drivers
- Loosens the color scheme requirement currently imposed on taxis and requires DFHV to consider costs imposed on operators when creating aesthetic vehicle requirements.
- Eliminates outdated provisions (antiquated training requirements, e.g.) that make it challenging to apply to be a taxi driver right now.
Significantly improves accessible (WAV) service
- Establishes a new “level-of-service” standard to hold companies more accountable for providing equal service to passengers requesting wheelchair-accessible vehicles (WAVs).
- Creates a new “Accessible Passenger Service Fund” to support access to WAVs (subsidies, grants to operators, vehicle purchase, etc.). Funded by a 10-cent surcharge on non-WAV trips. The fund is modeled after successful programs in other cities, such as Chicago and Seattle.
Meaningfully addresses underserved neighborhoods
- DFHV currently has authority to designate areas of the District as “underserved” but that currently has no teeth.
- The bill would provide tools to determine whether certain neighborhoods are receiving sub-standard, unequal, or discriminatory for-hire service.
Upfront pricing for everything
- Even a passenger hailing a ride on the street could request an upfront price based on destination, similar to one you would get if you booked through an app. No need to rely solely on the meter.
Bans “surveillance pricing”
- In response to reports and research showing customers getting different fare estimates, even when requesting the same trip at the same time.
Greater fare transparency
- In line with Councilmember Nadeau’s recent updates to the consumer protection law, the bill would require a clear breakdown of the fare being charged and create more transparency around “surge pricing.”
More predictable driver pay
- Drivers would be given more information about their estimated pay for a trip, receive an equal share of any surge pricing, and be guaranteed 100% of tips.
Creates a special license category for “Emerging Markets”.
- Two-year probationary license meant for any new for-hire business model that doesn’t cleanly fit within the existing law, as determined by DFHV.
- Intended to prepare for the next “disruption” – something we are not able to foresee in a rapidly-evolving industry; not intended for companies claiming innovation, while operating more-or-less like existing ride-hailing services.
- Allows DFHV to remain nimble and respond more quickly to ever-changing industry practices.
Allows DFHV to set “geofencing” rules
- DFHV would be authorized to require pick-ups or drop-offs at specific curb locations a reasonable distance from a destination.
- This is already a capability of ride-hailing apps, and it is done voluntarily for big events like baseball games and concerts.
Replaces various for-hire taxes and surcharges with a single “VMT charge”
- Currently, “digital dispatch” companies pay 6% of gross receipts, and taxi trips have a 50-cent passenger surcharge. But lines have been blurred between which tax applies to which types of trips, especially with some operators who do both pre-arranged and street-hail. There is also a variable surcharge on digital dispatch to incentivize low-emissions vehicles and electric vehicles.
- These would be replaced with a simplified “vehicle-miles traveled charge” (VMT) for all for-hire activity. This is not intended to generate new revenue – the VMT charge rate would be set at an amount equal to the revenue currently collected by the taxes it replaces
Works in tandem with a similar tax on autonomous vehicle fleets proposed in B26-0684, the “Autonomous Vehicle Deployment Authorization Amendment Act of 2026”.