China probes OTA battery locking

Chinese EV software is running into a new kind of regulatory wall. The issue is “battery locking” — software changes pushed after sale that can cap charging speed, usable battery capacity, or power output. That sounds technical, but the stakes are simple: if a car loses range or performance after you bought it, regulators start treating that less like a feature update and more like a product, warranty, and disclosure problem. Reports on May 9 said Chinese regulators had called in eight automakers over the practice, but several big names quickly denied they had been summoned. (technode.com) ### What is “battery locking,” exactly? Basically, it means the carmaker changes how much of the battery pack the driver can actually use. The pack may physically still be there, but software can limit peak charging, reduce available state-of-charge windows, or pull back power delivery. Carmakers usually frame that as battery protection — less stress, less heat, longer life. Owners hear something else: I paid for one car and woke up with a slower one. (technode.com) ### Why is China looking at this now? Because complaints piled up fast. The May 9 reporting tied the scrutiny to about 12,000 complaints on China’s 12315 consumer platform, up 273% year over year. Separately, China’s market regulator said it received 3.1 million? No — 3.1 *ten-thousand* consumer defect reports in 2025, with 1.2 *ten-thousand* involving new-energy vehicles, while companies also reported 1,904 OTA upgrade filings covering 140 million vehicle-upgrade instances. That is a huge software-governance surface area. (technode.com) ### What did regulators already change? This part matters more than the rumor fight. In February 2025, China’s industry ministry and market regulator tightened rules for smart vehicles and OTA updates. The notice says companies must file OTA activity, keep upgraded vehicles compliant with laws and technical standards, and avoid using OTA to conceal defects or dodge responsibility. If an OTA fix is really a defect remedy, the company has to handle it under recall rules — and may need product-change approval before resuming production. That is a pretty direct warning shot. (miit.gov.cn) ### So were eight automakers really summoned? Maybe — but the public record is messy. TechNode said the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the State Administration for Market Regulation, and the State Administration for Market Regulation’s defect center had summoned eight EV makers. Then CnEVPost and CarNewsChina said several companies, including BYD, Tesla, Zeekr, Xiaomi EV, Li Auto, XPeng, and Nio, denied being called in, with BYD threatening legal action over what it called false reporting. That does not prove no regulatory contact happened. But it does mean the headline version is disputed. (technode.com) ### Why does this matter beyond one rumor? Because OTA software changed the old bargain of car ownership. A car used to be mostly fixed at delivery. Now the manufacturer can keep tuning core behavior after sale — range, charging, driver-assist logic, thermal management. That is great when software fixes bugs. The catch is that the same mechanism can quietly reduce performance, and then every update becomes a legal question: Was the owner told? Was consent clear? Was this maintenance, a recall, or a downgrade? China’s rules are moving toward treating those as regulated product changes, not just app updates. (miit.gov.cn) ### Why are automakers so sensitive about this? Because “locking” sounds deceptive even when the engineering case is real. Battery packs do degrade. Thermal incidents are expensive. A company may honestly think a more conservative charging curve prevents failures. But if the company does that after sale without plain disclosure, it looks like it sold headline specs first and clawed them back later. In a brutally competitive EV market, that is reputational poison. (technode.com) ### What should we watch next? Watch for three things — formal regulator notices, recall filings tied to OTA changes, and clearer disclosure rules at purchase. China already logged 13 OTA-related recalls covering 1.756 million vehicles in 2025, so the system for treating software as a recall tool is already in place. The unresolved question is whether battery-performance limits will now get pulled fully into that framework. (samr.gov.cn) ### Bottom line? The real story is not whether one meeting happened on one Friday. It is that China is drawing a harder line around post-sale vehicle software. Once a carmaker can change battery behavior remotely, “the car you bought” stops being a fixed object — and regulators start insisting that software power come with recall duties, filing duties, and plain-English disclosure. (miit.gov.cn)