Overview
Around September 15, 2026, nine ministries including MIIT and NDRC issued the 15th Five-Year Plan for Intelligent Connected New-Energy Vehicles, calling for deeper reform of NEV auto insurance and optimization of commercial auto base rates. Industry sources indicate a key step: the independent pricing coefficient band for NEV commercial auto insurance will be further relaxed and is expected to fully align with gasoline cars by end-September.
Gasoline commercial auto pricing coefficients currently range 0.5–1.5; NEVs have run a narrower 0.55–1.45 and are converging. Observers note that, with leading insurers already achieving underwriting profit on NEV books, the next reform phase targets “pricing risk accurately” to lift NEV insurance quality overall.
Why it matters: NEV insurance has turned from an industry loss-maker into the key engine of auto-premium growth—premiums rose from RMB 24.6bn in 2020 to RMB 140.9bn in 2024 (≈55% CAGR), with share of auto insurance climbing from 3% to about 15%. The reform directly affects premium fairness for tens of millions of owners and insurers’ profitability.
Background & Interpretation
1. Regulatory & Industry Context
The relaxation follows the January 2025 four-ministry Guidance on deepening supervision and promoting high-quality NEV insurance development, which proposed a high-loss risk-sharing mechanism, a stable broadening of the pricing-coefficient band, richer products and better base rates. To backstop high-loss risks, the “Good Insurance Platform” built by the Shanghai Insurance Exchange with industry-association support launched in January 2025 and in its first year underwrote 1.322m NEVs, providing RMB 1.33tn of coverage—a key infrastructure for hard-to-place risks.
2. Core Drivers & Underlying Mechanisms
The core logic shifts from “price-mechanism reform” to “risk-pricing capability building.” Aligning the coefficient band with gasoline cars is not merely wider pricing room; it lets insurers apply their own data and risk models to price by model and risk level, so premiums better reflect vehicle, customer and risk differences. The deeper driver is NEVs’ distinct risk structure: batteries, ADAS and repair costs (especially integrated casting and proprietary parts) far exceed gasoline cars, demanding finer models and data. The industry is advancing a vehicle-risk grading system and exploring linking it to premiums.
3. Market Structure & Operator Impact
Liberalization accelerates divergence. Leading insurers have crossed the underwriting breakeven: PICC underwrote 8.061m NEVs in H1 (+30.9%); Ping An 6.78m, with NEV premium RMB 26.415bn (+21.5%); CPIC NEV premium RMB 12.812bn (+20.9%), ~24% of auto; ZhongAn’s NEV premium surged 105.7%, ~36.5% of its auto book. Players with digital risk, pricing and claims capability show resilience, while weak-risk, fee-reliant ones face pressure. McKinsey projects NEV insurance premiums to reach about RMB 480bn by 2030, over 40% of auto premium.
Implications & Outlook
Near term, the band relaxation should land smoothly without sharp NEV price swings; medium term, the focus moves from price mechanism to risk-pricing capability—vehicle-risk grading, repair-cost databases and ADAS risk models become the competitive keys. Watch: end-September implementation细则, the formal vehicle-risk grading system, sustained improvement in leaders’ NEV combined ratios, and how ADAS accident data feeds back into pricing.
Takeaways for Industry Participants
For P&C insurers: build NEV-specific risk databases and pricing models incorporating batteries, ADAS and repair-network costs into actuarial frameworks, winning on risk pricing rather than fee play. For OEMs and repair ecosystems: transparent, standardized repair costs and parts systems are the basis for lower claims and better underwriting—broad room for data co-building with insurers. For insurtech: vehicle-risk grading, UBI/telematics and intelligent claims are the core incremental demand of NEV insurance digitalization.
This column compiles industry information and shares technical perspectives; it does not constitute investment advice.