Measures to address shortage of HGV drivers - removal of car and trailer (B+E) tests

Sep 18, 2026

Uploaded by Sarah

Impact assessment and RPC scrutiny summary for proposed secondary legislation removing the requirement for car drivers to take the additional B+E test when towing a trailer above a specified maximum authorised mass. The proposal aims to increase vocational driving test availability at DVSA to help reduce the HGV driver shortfall and clear car test backlogs. RPC rates the package fit for purpose as de minimis, while identifying areas to clarify the counterfactual baseline, monetise road-safety benefits and improve wider impact assessment, including trade and EU licence recognition.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryExam

FormatPDF

Pages7

Reading Time18 min

AccessFree to download

Summary of proposal

RPC opinion summary

EANDCB

SaMBA

Rationale and options

Cost-benefit analysis

Wider impacts

Monitoring and evaluation plan

Baseline and counterfactual considerations

Measures to address shortage of HGV drivers – removal of car and trailer (B+E) tests | Lead department | Department for Transport | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Summary of proposal | The proposal removes the requirement for those driving a car with a trailer to take a ‘B+E’ test. | | | | Submission type | Impact assessment (IA)– 25 November 2021 | | | | Legislation type | Secondary legislation | | | | Implementation date | December 2021/early 2022 | | | | Policy stage | Final | | | | RPC reference | RPC-DfT-5137(1) | | | | Opinion type | Formal | | | | Date of issue | 16 December 2021 | | | | RPC opinion | | | | | Rating 1 | RPC opinion | | | | Fit for purpose | The assessment that the direct impacts on business is below the de minimis threshold is fit for purpose. The IA provides a balanced and transparent assessment of potential societal impacts. It could be improved by clarifying the baseline and providing further assessment of some wider impacts. | | | | Business impact target assessment | | | | | | | Department
assessment | RPC validated | | Classification | | Non-qualifying regulatory provision (de minimis) | Non-qualifying regulatory provision (de minimis) | | Equivalent annual net direct cost to business (EANDCB) | | Not quantified | N/A | | Business impact target (BIT) score | | N/A | N/A | | Business net present value | | Not quantified | | | Overall net present value | | Not quantified | | | | | | | 1 The RPC opinion rating is based only on the robustness of the EANDCB and quality of the SaMBA, as set out in the Better Regulation Framework. The RPC rating is fit for purpose or not fit for purpose. RPC summary | Category | Quality | RPC comments | | --- | --- | --- | | EANDCB | Green | The IA provides sufficient evidence that the proposal is de minimis, partly because a high proportion of the direct benefits are expected to fallon individuals rather than business. It would benefit from clarifying the counterfactual/baseline. | | Small and micro business assessment (SaMBA) | Not
required | The IA provides a useful discussion of impacts on small and micro businesses (SMBs) , in particular on training schools. | | Rationale and options | Satisfactory | The IA presents a clear rationale but would benefit from further differentiating between shorter and longer-run objectives. The IA usefully describes non-statutory ‘mitigation’measures being progressed alongside the proposal. It would benefit from further consideration of alternative options to free up DVSA resource or more widely to address the HGV driver shortage. | | Cost-benefit analysis | Good | The IA provides a thoughtful and balanced discussion around possible road safety impacts, making use of a range of existing data. The IA includes a useful break-even analysis but could be improved by discussing the economic benefits of reducing HGV driver shortages and risks and uncertainties. | | Wider impacts | Weak | The IA would benefit significantly from further assessment of trade impacts and potential impactson mutual recognition and exchange of licences in EU countries. | | Monitoring and evaluation plan | Good | The IA provides a structured post implementation review (PIR) plan , usefully summarising the data tobe collected, evaluation approaches and research questions. | Summary of proposal Currently, car drivers who passed their standard (category B) driving test after 1 January 1997 must pass an additional test, in a car and trailer combination, if they wish to tow a trailer above a certain maximum authorised mass. This test is known as ‘category B+E’. The test is commonly undertaken by the DVSA and during the three years 2017/18 to 2019/20 around 29,400 tests were conducted. The proposal removes the requirement for this test. The policy objective is to increase the availability of vocational driving tests at the DVSA for drivers wanting to enter the logistics industry, thereby helping to reduce the HGV

FAQs

What change does the proposal make regarding the B+E test?

It removes the requirement for those driving a car with a trailer to take the additional B+E test when towing above the stated maximum authorised mass.

Why is the change intended to support the HGV driver shortage?

By removing B+E testing demand, DVSA capacity can be reallocated to increase vocational driving test availability for drivers entering the logistics industry.

What does the assessment conclude about whether the proposal is de minimis?

The assessment finds the direct impacts on business fall below the de minimis threshold and that the measure is non-qualifying against the BIT, though monetisation of all impacts is not fully completed.

Sep 18, 2026

Uploaded by Sarah