This past week, I attended the EV Charging Infrastructure USA 2025 conference, where discussions centered on enhancing the user experience with EV chargers and meeting consumer needs to drive market growth. While these are critical conversations, one key aspect seemed noticeably absent: consumer protection. Shouldn’t this be a fundamental component of any discussion about consumer-facing technology, particularly when it involves financial transactions and energy delivery?

The Push for End-of-Line Testing

A significant topic of conversation was the California lobbying effort by manufacturers advocating for a shift in current legislation. Specifically, there is a push to allow end-of-line testing of EV chargers for accuracy certification rather than requiring testing at the point of service during charger commissioning, prior to go-live, as part of charger registration.

I understand the manufacturers’ and OEMs’ perspective—commissioning tests in the field demand time, resources, and added expenses. It’s a rigorous process, and I don’t take that lightly.

I also applaud manufacturers for wanting to test their chargers in end-of-line testing. They should ensure their product meets regulatory standards before leaving the manufacturing floor. This is brand security that reassures the market that they care about the product they are selling.

But if you ask me, end-of-line testing alone is not the answer.

Why End-of-Line Testing Fails Consumers

Once a charger leaves the manufacturing floor, it undergoes:

• Shipping
• Potential storage
• Installation in diverse infrastructure settings
• Configuration by different installers

These factors introduce multiple variables that can affect the charger’s accuracy, reliability, and functionality. Furthermore, network setup—both automated and manual—plays a critical role in determining the final pricing structure. Price accuracy, one of the most essential consumer protections, cannot be effectively verified in an end-of-line test.

To put it simply, end-of-line testing is like taste-testing a cookie before mixing all the ingredients. Until the charger is installed and fully operational, it is not “baked” and ready for real-world use.

Where does consumer protection fit into this model? If testing does not happen at the point where the consumer actually interacts with the charger, where pricing and accuracy directly affect them, then we are failing to safeguard their interests.

The Path Forward

I do agree that California needs consistency in enforcement and procedure to meet regulatory demands. But if we want to address the challenges in a meaningful way, the conversation with legislative leaders should focus on ensuring effective and standardized enforcement of consumer protection measures, rather than shifting the burden away from where it truly matters.

The industry must balance growth and innovation with accountability, and that begins with ensuring that every EV charger on the market operates with transparency and accuracy for the consumer.

What are your thoughts? Should consumer protection be the top priority in EV charging legislation? Let’s discuss!