GM to pay $220 million to resolve claims it sold driving habits data
General Motors has agreed to pay $220 million to settle claims by 36 US states that it illegally shared drivers’ habits and location data with data brokers. The agreement requires GM to limit the driving information it collects and get drivers’ express consent before collecting it.
The claims concern GM’s discontinued Smart Driver programme, which recorded details such as acceleration, braking and trip length. States said drivers were not told they were enrolled, and that insurers could buy the data and use it to raise premiums. The settlement follows a separate $12.75 million agreement over similar claims in California.
In short
- GM will pay $220 million to settle claims from 36 US states.
- The case involved driving data collected through its Smart Driver programme.
- GM must limit collection and obtain drivers’ express consent.
Steelman: both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
States’ case is that drivers should know when sensitive information about their movements and driving behaviour is being collected and sold, and should give clear consent first. If insurers can use that data to raise premiums, undisclosed sharing risks harming people who had no meaningful chance to refuse or challenge its use.
The case against
GM could argue that driving data can support useful services and risk assessments, and that sharing it with insurers may help distinguish safer drivers or improve pricing. A settlement resolves the states’ claims without necessarily establishing every allegation, and strict limits or consent requirements may reduce those benefits or add friction for drivers who would willingly participate.
Explained simply
Modern cars can record information about how they are driven, including how quickly they accelerate or brake and how far they travel. General Motors ran a programme called Smart Driver that collected these details, alongside location information.
The dispute centres on whether drivers knew their information was being collected and shared. US states said some data went to brokers and could be used by insurers when setting premiums; GM has agreed to limits on collecting such information and to seek drivers’ express consent. The case matters because it raises questions about how much control drivers have over data generated by their cars.