Trump administration relied on flawed logic to justify scrapping vehicle emission rules, study says

A peer-reviewed study published Thursday in the journal Science concludes the Trump administration’s economic justification for scrapping U.S. vehicle greenhouse-gas emissions standards is fundamentally flawed. A dozen economists from Yale, MIT, and other universities found that correcting errors in the Environmental Protection Agency’s cost-benefit analysis—specifically how it values fuel savings and excludes environmental benefits—would reverse the claimed $600 billion to $790 billion in consumer savings. Instead, the researchers estimate the rollback would cost the country approximately $670 billion. The EPA credits car buyers with only $0.23 of benefit for every $1 in fuel savings, a treatment the authors say wrongly excludes billions in consumer benefits. The Trump administration rescinded the endangerment finding on Feb. 12, 2026, eliminating federal tailpipe emissions standards. The EPA defended its analysis, stating it “stands by its economic analysis” and will not “push an EV mandate”. The administration faces multiple lawsuits from states and environmental groups over the repeal.