Minimum transport fare: VSPV criticizes decision in Mettmann

The Association of Private Commercial Road Passenger Transport in North Rhine-Westphalia (VSPV) is sharply criticizing the Mettmann District Council's decision not to introduce a minimum fare for platform-mediated rental cars. According to the association, the reason is the justification documented by CDU parliamentary group chairman Waldemar Madeia on Westdeutscher Rundfunk on May 11, 2026.

In the association's view, the rejection rests on two factual confusions as well as a fundamental structural misunderstanding of the role of taxis in public passenger transport.

Misunderstanding of the Minimum Fare Instrument

The central point of criticism is the assumption that a minimum-price regulation is not verifiable with dynamic app prices. However, a minimum fare does not define a fixed price, but merely a binding price floor. Different final prices of 14, 18 or 23 euros are, from the association's perspective, immaterial as long as they do not fall below the established minimum formula.

The digital documentation of app-mediated rides, according to the association, would even facilitate monitoring, since all trip data would be electronically available. The instrument has already been introduced in other districts and cities and is enforceable.

“Whoever misunderstands the MBE as a fixed price has not read the instrument he rejects,” explains Sascha Waltemate, managing director of the VSPV. “Practice in increasingly more districts and cities in Germany shows that minimum fares are verifiable and enforceable. What is missing in the Mettmann district is not the actual possibility, but the regulatory will.”

A tariff corridor does not replace a minimum fare

The association also does not regard the reform of taxi regulations, with the possibility of cheaper prices, as a substitute for a minimum fare. The tariff corridor available since the 2021 amendment to the Passenger Transport Act allows binding fixed prices for advance bookings. The aim is primarily predictability for passengers, not a general downward price competition.

Tariff corridor and minimum fare pursued different purposes and complemented each other. While the corridor addresses the perception of price differences, the minimum fare is intended to limit structural distortions of competition.

Cross-financing as the basis of public service provision

The VSPV also points to the special status of taxis. According to the consistent case law of the Federal Constitutional Court, the taxi is part of public local passenger transport. It is subject to operating, transport and tariff obligations and guarantees availability even at night, on Sundays or in fringe areas.

This availability obligation is financed by internal cross-financing. High-revenue trips during times of strong demand finance the keeping of vehicles available during low-demand periods. Platform-mediated rental cars without a price floor could, on the other hand, concentrate on lucrative trips and thus put pressure on the system.