Existing law generally regulates classes of insurance, including automobile liability insurance. Existing law prohibits classifying a private passenger motor vehicle as a commercial vehicle, for-hire vehicle, permissive use vehicle, or livery solely because its owner allows it to be shared, if specified criteria are met. In the event of a loss or injury that occurs during any time period when the vehicle is under the operation and control of a person other than the vehicle owner, existing law requires the personal vehicle sharing program to assume all liability of the owner and is considered the owner of the vehicle for all purposes.

Existing law requires a personal vehicle sharing program to provide insurance coverages for the vehicle and operator at a minimum of $45,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $90,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $15,000 for property damage, and, on and after January 1, 2031, to provide liability coverage at least 3 times the minimum insurance requirements for private passenger vehicles.

This bill would, instead of requiring a personal vehicle sharing program to assume all liability of the owner, require the program to assume liability of the owner for bodily injury or property damage to injured third parties resulting from personal vehicle sharing in amounts stated in the personal vehicle sharing program agreement, and not less than $250,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $500,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $100,000 for property damage. The bill would make these provisions inapplicable if the vehicle owner acts in concert with a shared vehicle driver who fails to return the shared vehicle pursuant to the terms of the personal vehicle sharing program agreement.

Existing law generally regulates classes of insurance, including automobile liability insurance. Existing law prohibits classifying a private passenger motor vehicle as a commercial vehicle, for-hire vehicle, permissive use vehicle, or livery solely because its owner allows it to be shared, if specified criteria are met. In the event of a loss or injury that occurs during any time period when the vehicle is under the operation and control of a person other than the vehicle owner, existing law requires the personal vehicle sharing program to assume all liability of the owner and is considered the owner of the vehicle for all purposes.

Existing law requires a personal vehicle sharing program to provide insurance coverages for the vehicle and operator at a minimum of $45,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $90,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $15,000 for property damage, and, on and after January 1, 2031, to provide liability coverage at least 3 times the minimum insurance requirements for private passenger vehicles.

This bill would, instead of requiring a personal vehicle sharing program to assume all liability of the owner, require the program to assume liability of the owner for bodily injury or property damage to injured third parties resulting from personal vehicle sharing in amounts stated in the personal vehicle sharing program agreement, and not less than $250,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $500,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $100,000 for property damage. The bill would make these provisions inapplicable if the vehicle owner acts in concert with a shared vehicle driver who fails to return the shared vehicle pursuant to the terms of the personal vehicle sharing program agreement.

Existing law generally regulates classes of insurance, including automobile liability insurance. Existing law prohibits classifying a private passenger motor vehicle as a commercial vehicle, for-hire vehicle, permissive use vehicle, or livery solely because its owner allows it to be shared, if specified criteria are met. In the event of a loss or injury that occurs during any time period when the vehicle is under the operation and control of a person other than the vehicle owner, existing law requires the personal vehicle sharing program to assume all liability of the owner and is considered the owner of the vehicle for all purposes.

Existing law requires a personal vehicle sharing program to provide insurance coverages for the vehicle and operator at a minimum of $45,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $90,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $15,000 for property damage, and, on and after January 1, 2031, to provide liability coverage at least 3 times the minimum insurance requirements for private passenger vehicles.

This bill would, instead of requiring a personal vehicle sharing program to assume all liability of the owner, require the program to assume liability of the owner for bodily injury or property damage to injured third parties resulting from personal vehicle sharing in amounts stated in the personal vehicle sharing program agreement, which shall not be less than the minimum coverage amounts described above. The bill would make these provisions inapplicable if the vehicle owner engages in specified actions, including making an intentional or fraudulent material representation to the personal vehicle sharing program before the car sharing period in which the loss occurred. and not less than $250,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $500,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $100,000 for property damage. The bill would make these provisions inapplicable if the vehicle owner acts in concert with a shared vehicle driver who fails to return the shared vehicle pursuant to the terms of the personal vehicle sharing program agreement.

Existing law generally regulates classes of insurance, including automobile liability insurance. Existing law prohibits classifying a private passenger motor vehicle as a commercial vehicle, for-hire vehicle, permissive use vehicle, or livery solely because its owner allows it to be shared, if specified criteria are met. In the event of a loss or injury that occurs during any time period when the vehicle is under the operation and control of a person other than the vehicle owner, existing law requires the personal vehicle sharing program to assume all liability of the owner and is considered the owner of the vehicle for all purposes.

This bill would, instead of requiring a personal vehicle sharing program to assume all liability of the owner, require the program to assume liability of the owner for bodily injury or property damage to injured third parties resulting from personal vehicle sharing in amounts stated in the personal vehicle sharing program agreement, in amounts not less than the $15,000, $30,000, and $5,000 described above. which shall not be less than the minimum coverage amounts described above. The bill would make these provisions inapplicable if the vehicle owner engages in specified actions, including making an intentional or fraudulent material representation to the personal vehicle sharing program before the car sharing period in which the loss occurred.

Existing law generally regulates classes of insurance, including automobile liability insurance. Existing law prohibits classifying a private passenger motor vehicle as a commercial vehicle, for-hire vehicle, permissive use vehicle, or livery solely because its owner allows it to be shared, if specified criteria are met. In the event of a loss or injury that occurs during any time period when the vehicle is under the operation and control of a person other than the vehicle owner, existing law requires the personal vehicle sharing program to assume all liability of the owner and is considered the owner of the vehicle for all purposes.

Existing law limits the liability of a private owner to the amount of $15,000 for the death of or injury to one person in any one accident and, subject specified circumstances, $30,000 for the death of or injury to more than one person in any one accident, and $5,000 for damage to property of others in any one accident.

This bill would, instead of requiring a personal vehicle sharing program to assume all liability of the owner, require the program to assume liability of the owner for bodily injury or property damage to injured third parties resulting from personal vehicle sharing in amounts stated in the personal vehicle sharing program agreement, in amounts not less than the $15,000, $30,000, and $5,000 described above.

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 2361

Author:(Pacheco)

As Amended Ver:June 18, 2026

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Reduces a Personal Vehicle Sharing Program (PVSP) from unlimited liability to liability for bodily injury or property damage to injured third parties resulting from personal vehicle sharing in the amounts stated in the PVSP agreement, but no less than $250,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $500,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $100,000 for property damage (250/500/100).

Senate Amendments

1. Increase liability limits imposed by the bill from $45,000 for bodily injury or death of one person, $90,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $15,000 for damage to property, to $250,000, $500,000, and $100,000, respectively.
2. Remove exemption from these limits if the vehicle owner makes an intentional or fraudulent material misrepresentation or omission to the PVSP before the car sharing period in which the loss occurred.
3. Divorce the vicarious liability limits prescribed by the bill from the amount of minimum liability coverage a PVSP must generally maintain for the vehicle and operator under existing law (i.e. financial responsibility).

COMMENTS

In 2010, AB 1871 (Jones) created PVSPs, also known as peer-to-peer car sharing. The bill specified that a PVSP is an entity that facilitates personal vehicle sharing, provides liability insurance for private vehicles, and provides disclosures to the vehicle owner about the law and the terms and conditions of the transaction. California was the first state to establish PVSPs. PVSPs allow car owners to make their vehicles available to others to rent for periods of time. Car owners list their vehicles on a platform, then prospective renters can search the platform and select a vehicle to rent.

Every driver in California must show "financial responsibility," i.e. insurance. Financial responsibility (FR) shows that a driver is financially able to provide monetary protection to those injured or vehicles damaged due to an accident, regardless of fault. Current FR limits for private passenger vehicles stand at $30,000 for injury/death to one person/$60,000 for injury/death to more than one person /$15,000 for damage to property. The FRLs increase in 2035 to $50,000/$100,000/$25,000. PVSPs must provide a minimum of $45,000/$90,000/$15,000. Starting in 2031, PVSPs will have to provide three times the limit.

Host Vehicle Requirements: Before determining liability limits, it is important to understand the precautions and requirements before a vehicle is allowed onto a platform. TURO, for example, requires their "hosts" (owner of the vehicle) to get an annual vehicle safety inspection from a qualified mechanic, and the inspection must be submitted to TURO no more than 14 days after the inspection is complete. If a host misses this inspection, TURO will remove the vehicle from the platform. TURO, also, requires vehicle standards which include: vehicles must be equipped with working air conditioning and heating systems; battery should be five years old or newer; batteries more than five years old must be able to pass a 12.1v test using a multimeter; brake pads must be at least 3 mm thick; no dashboard lights that indicate the vehicle requires immediate attention should be lit; including but not limited to, lights indicating low tire pressure, check engine, or low oil; the vehicle's horn must be in working condition; interior components, such as seat adjusters, window levers, glove compartment, and other control mechanisms and features must be in working order; all adjustable mirrors must be in working order and free of cracks, chips, and scratches; all seatbelts must be in working order; tires must have a tread depth of at least 4/32" or 3.175mm; tires must show no signs of dry rot; tires must be free of air bubbles, gashes, and other defects; tires must be less than six years old; headlights, tail lights, brake lights and turn indicator lights must be operable and clean; front and back windshield should be free of cracks, chips, or other damage; if otherwise, cracks, chips, or other damage must be smaller than 1" or 25.4mm; windshield wipers must be in working order. Further, only certain vehicles are eligible to be listed on the platform. Vehicles cannot be more than 12 years old with exceptions made for classic or specialty vehicles and vehicles must have less than 130,000 miles. Once listed, vehicles that reach or exceed 130,000 miles may remain listed if they are in excellent condition and continue to meet all legal, safety and mechanical standards. Vehicles must also have a clean title and can never have been declared a total loss. 

Lastly, under existing law, PVSPs are prohibited from facilitating the use of a vehicle with an open manufacturer recall within 48 hours of notification. Hosts cannot list or share recalled vehicles until the vehicle has been repaired, and the federal NHTSA database shows the repair is complete.

NCOIL: In 2019, NCOIL adopted a PVSP Model Act. This act, so far, has been adopted in 30 other states. This Model Act provided, as it relates to AB 2361:

"Insurance Coverage During Car Sharing Period Sec. 1. (a) A peer-to-peer car sharing program shall assume liability, except as provided in subsection (b) of this chapter, of a shared vehicle owner for bodily injury or property damage to third parties or uninsured and underinsured motorist or personal injury protection losses during the car sharing period in an amount stated in the peer-to-peer car sharing program agreement which amount may not be less than those set forth in (State's financial responsibility law). (b) Notwithstanding the definition of "car sharing termination time" as set forth in Chapter 3 or 4 of this Act, the assumption of liability under subsection (a) of this subsection does not apply to any shared vehicle owner when: (1) A shared vehicle owner makes an intentional or fraudulent material misrepresentation or omission to the peer-to-peer car sharing program before the car sharing period in which the loss occurred, or (2) Acting in concert with a shared vehicle driver who fails to return the shared vehicle pursuant to the terms of car sharing program agreement."

FRLs vary state to state; Maine with the highest limits stands at 50/100/25. California just recently increased the FRLs to 30/60/15 on January 1, 2025, and will increase to 50/100/25. PVSPs FRLs are currently at 45/90/15 and will increase to three times that amount on January 1, 2031.

According to the Author

California is an outlier; no other state applies uncapped vicarious liability for peer-to-peer vehicle sharing platforms. Assembly Bill 2361 ensures continued consumer protection by requiring that minimum insurance coverage always remains available while eliminating California's unchecked vicarious liability exposure that applies only to PVSPs. By aligning liability with fault while preserving strong insurance protections for injured parties. While keeping car sharing affordable and viable for hosts.

Arguments in Support

According to the sponsor of the measure, TURO, "Today, no other state applies uncapped vicarious liability to PVSPs. This bill maintains strong consumer protections by requiring that minimum insurance coverage always remains available – including access to additional coverage – while eliminating California's unchecked vicarious liability exposure that only applies to car-sharing platforms. Under current law, PVSPs are subject to a distinct and more expansive form of vicarious liability. Pursuant to Insurance Code Section 11580.24(d), a car-sharing platform must assume the vehicle owner's legal responsibility for any claims that arise while a car is being shared. Unlike individual vehicle owners, whose liability is capped under Vehicle Code Section 17151, a platform’s liability is unlimited. As a result, a PVSP can face unlimited financial exposure even when it followed the law, acted in good faith, and had no ability to prevent an incident. This bill ensures continued consumer protection by requiring that minimum insurance coverage always remains available while eliminating California’s unchecked vicarious liability exposure that applies only to PVSPs."

Arguments in Opposition

According to Consumer Attorneys of California, "AB 2361, as currently drafted, risks shifting the financial consequences of unsafe vehicles onto injured consumers while allowing platforms to continue profiting from each rental transaction. If the Legislature intends to clarify liability rules for peer-to-peer car-sharing platforms, any limitation must still ensure adequate protection for individuals harmed by negligent entrustment or unsafe vehicle maintenance. For these reasons, CAOC must oppose AB 2361 unless amended to require peer-to-peer car-sharing platforms to maintain at least $1,000,000 in coverage when stepping into the shoes of the vehicle owner."

FISCAL COMMENTS

Unknown.

VOTES:

ASM INSURANCE: 16-0-1

YES: Calderon, Wallis, Addis, Alvarez, Ávila Farías, Berman, Ellis, Gipson, Hadwick, Harabedian, Krell, Nguyen, Ortega, Petrie-Norris, Michelle Rodriguez, Valencia

ABS, ABST OR NV: Chen

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 15-0-0

YES: Wicks, Hoover, Bauer-Kahan, Calderon, Caloza, Ellis, Fong, Mark González, Krell, Pacheco, Pellerin, Sharp-Collins, Solache, Ta, Tangipa

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 65-0-15

YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Ahrens, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Ávila Farías, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Bonta, Bryan, Caloza, Carrillo, Castillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, DeMaio, Elhawary, Ellis, Flora, Fong, Gipson, Jeff Gonzalez, Mark González, Hadwick, Haney, Harabedian, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Johnson, Krell, Lackey, Lowenthal, Macedo, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Patel, Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Ramos, Ransom, Michelle Rodriguez, Rogers, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Schultz, Sharp-Collins, Solache, Soria, Ta, Tangipa, Valencia, Wallis, Wilson, Zbur, Rivas

ABS, ABST OR NV: Boerner, Calderon, Dixon, Gabriel, Gallagher, Garcia, Jackson, Kalra, Lee, Quirk-Silva, Celeste Rodriguez, Schiavo, Stefani, Ward, Wicks

SENATE FLOOR: 39-0-1

YES: Allen, Alvarado-Gil, Archuleta, Arreguín, Ashby, Becker, Blakespear, Cabaldon, Caballero, Cervantes, Choi, Cortese, Dahle, Durazo, Gonzalez, Grayson, Grove, Hurtado, Jones, Laird, Limón, McGuire, McNerney, Menjivar, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Padilla, Pérez, Richardson, Rubio, Seyarto, Smallwood-Cuevas, Stern, Strickland, Umberg, Valladares, Wahab, Weber Pierson, Wiener

ABS, ABST OR NV: Reyes

UPDATED

VERSION: June 18, 2026

CONSULTANT: Kathleen O'Malley / INS. / (916) 319-2086 FN: 0004091

CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS

CSA1 Bill Id:AB 2361

Author:(Pacheco)

As Amended Ver:June 18, 2026

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Reduces a Personal Vehicle Sharing Program (PVSP) from unlimited liability to liability for bodily injury or property damage to injured third parties resulting from personal vehicle sharing in the amounts stated in the PVSP agreement, but no less than $250,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $500,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $100,000 for property damage (250/500/100).

Senate Amendments

1. Increase liability limits imposed by the bill from $45,000 for bodily injury or death of one person, $90,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $15,000 for damage to property, to $250,000, $500,000, and $100,000, respectively.
2. Remove exemption from these limits if the vehicle owner makes an intentional or fraudulent material misrepresentation or omission to the PVSP before the car sharing period in which the loss occurred.
3. Divorce the vicarious liability limits prescribed by the bill from the amount of minimum liability coverage a PVSP must generally maintain for the vehicle and operator under existing law (i.e. financial responsibility).

COMMENTS

In 2010, AB 1871 (Jones) created PVSPs, also known as peer-to-peer car sharing. The bill specified that a PVSP is an entity that facilitates personal vehicle sharing, provides liability insurance for private vehicles, and provides disclosures to the vehicle owner about the law and the terms and conditions of the transaction. California was the first state to establish PVSPs. PVSPs allow car owners to make their vehicles available to others to rent for periods of time. Car owners list their vehicles on a platform, then prospective renters can search the platform and select a vehicle to rent.

Every driver in California must show "financial responsibility," i.e. insurance. Financial responsibility (FR) shows that a driver is financially able to provide monetary protection to those injured or vehicles damaged due to an accident, regardless of fault. Current FR limits for private passenger vehicles stand at $30,000 for injury/death to one person/$60,000 for injury/death to more than one person /$15,000 for damage to property. The FRLs increase in 2035 to $50,000/$100,000/$25,000. PVSPs must provide a minimum of $45,000/$90,000/$15,000. Starting in 2031, PVSPs will have to provide three times the limit.

Host Vehicle Requirements: Before determining liability limits, it is important to understand the precautions and requirements before a vehicle is allowed onto a platform. TURO, for example, requires their "hosts" (owner of the vehicle) to get an annual vehicle safety inspection from a qualified mechanic, and the inspection must be submitted to TURO no more than 14 days after the inspection is complete. If a host misses this inspection, TURO will remove the vehicle from the platform. TURO, also, requires vehicle standards which include: vehicles must be equipped with working air conditioning and heating systems; battery should be five years old or newer; batteries more than five years old must be able to pass a 12.1v test using a multimeter; brake pads must be at least 3 mm thick; no dashboard lights that indicate the vehicle requires immediate attention should be lit; including but not limited to, lights indicating low tire pressure, check engine, or low oil; the vehicle's horn must be in working condition; interior components, such as seat adjusters, window levers, glove compartment, and other control mechanisms and features must be in working order; all adjustable mirrors must be in working order and free of cracks, chips, and scratches; all seatbelts must be in working order; tires must have a tread depth of at least 4/32" or 3.175mm; tires must show no signs of dry rot; tires must be free of air bubbles, gashes, and other defects; tires must be less than six years old; headlights, tail lights, brake lights and turn indicator lights must be operable and clean; front and back windshield should be free of cracks, chips, or other damage; if otherwise, cracks, chips, or other damage must be smaller than 1" or 25.4mm; windshield wipers must be in working order. Further, only certain vehicles are eligible to be listed on the platform. Vehicles cannot be more than 12 years old with exceptions made for classic or specialty vehicles and vehicles must have less than 130,000 miles. Once listed, vehicles that reach or exceed 130,000 miles may remain listed if they are in excellent condition and continue to meet all legal, safety and mechanical standards. Vehicles must also have a clean title and can never have been declared a total loss. 

Lastly, under existing law, PVSPs are prohibited from facilitating the use of a vehicle with an open manufacturer recall within 48 hours of notification. Hosts cannot list or share recalled vehicles until the vehicle has been repaired, and the federal NHTSA database shows the repair is complete.

NCOIL: In 2019, NCOIL adopted a PVSP Model Act. This act, so far, has been adopted in 30 other states. This Model Act provided, as it relates to AB 2361:

"Insurance Coverage During Car Sharing Period Sec. 1. (a) A peer-to-peer car sharing program shall assume liability, except as provided in subsection (b) of this chapter, of a shared vehicle owner for bodily injury or property damage to third parties or uninsured and underinsured motorist or personal injury protection losses during the car sharing period in an amount stated in the peer-to-peer car sharing program agreement which amount may not be less than those set forth in (State's financial responsibility law). (b) Notwithstanding the definition of "car sharing termination time" as set forth in Chapter 3 or 4 of this Act, the assumption of liability under subsection (a) of this subsection does not apply to any shared vehicle owner when: (1) A shared vehicle owner makes an intentional or fraudulent material misrepresentation or omission to the peer-to-peer car sharing program before the car sharing period in which the loss occurred, or (2) Acting in concert with a shared vehicle driver who fails to return the shared vehicle pursuant to the terms of car sharing program agreement."

FRLs vary state to state; Maine with the highest limits stands at 50/100/25. California just recently increased the FRLs to 30/60/15 on January 1, 2025, and will increase to 50/100/25. PVSPs FRLs are currently at 45/90/15 and will increase to three times that amount on January 1, 2031.

According to the Author

California is an outlier; no other state applies uncapped vicarious liability for peer-to-peer vehicle sharing platforms. Assembly Bill 2361 ensures continued consumer protection by requiring that minimum insurance coverage always remains available while eliminating California's unchecked vicarious liability exposure that applies only to PVSPs. By aligning liability with fault while preserving strong insurance protections for injured parties. While keeping car sharing affordable and viable for hosts.

Arguments in Support

According to the sponsor of the measure, TURO, "Today, no other state applies uncapped vicarious liability to PVSPs. This bill maintains strong consumer protections by requiring that minimum insurance coverage always remains available – including access to additional coverage – while eliminating California's unchecked vicarious liability exposure that only applies to car-sharing platforms. Under current law, PVSPs are subject to a distinct and more expansive form of vicarious liability. Pursuant to Insurance Code Section 11580.24(d), a car-sharing platform must assume the vehicle owner's legal responsibility for any claims that arise while a car is being shared. Unlike individual vehicle owners, whose liability is capped under Vehicle Code Section 17151, a platform’s liability is unlimited. As a result, a PVSP can face unlimited financial exposure even when it followed the law, acted in good faith, and had no ability to prevent an incident. This bill ensures continued consumer protection by requiring that minimum insurance coverage always remains available while eliminating California’s unchecked vicarious liability exposure that applies only to PVSPs."

Arguments in Opposition

According to Consumer Attorneys of California, "AB 2361, as currently drafted, risks shifting the financial consequences of unsafe vehicles onto injured consumers while allowing platforms to continue profiting from each rental transaction. If the Legislature intends to clarify liability rules for peer-to-peer car-sharing platforms, any limitation must still ensure adequate protection for individuals harmed by negligent entrustment or unsafe vehicle maintenance. For these reasons, CAOC must oppose AB 2361 unless amended to require peer-to-peer car-sharing platforms to maintain at least $1,000,000 in coverage when stepping into the shoes of the vehicle owner."

FISCAL COMMENTS

Unknown.

VOTES:

ASM INSURANCE: 16-0-1

YES: Calderon, Wallis, Addis, Alvarez, Ávila Farías, Berman, Ellis, Gipson, Hadwick, Harabedian, Krell, Nguyen, Ortega, Petrie-Norris, Michelle Rodriguez, Valencia

ABS, ABST OR NV: Chen

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 15-0-0

YES: Wicks, Hoover, Bauer-Kahan, Calderon, Caloza, Ellis, Fong, Mark González, Krell, Pacheco, Pellerin, Sharp-Collins, Solache, Ta, Tangipa

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 65-0-15

YES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Ahrens, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Ávila Farías, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Bonta, Bryan, Caloza, Carrillo, Castillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, DeMaio, Elhawary, Ellis, Flora, Fong, Gipson, Jeff Gonzalez, Mark González, Hadwick, Haney, Harabedian, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Johnson, Krell, Lackey, Lowenthal, Macedo, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Patel, Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Ramos, Ransom, Michelle Rodriguez, Rogers, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Schultz, Sharp-Collins, Solache, Soria, Ta, Tangipa, Valencia, Wallis, Wilson, Zbur, Rivas

ABS, ABST OR NV: Boerner, Calderon, Dixon, Gabriel, Gallagher, Garcia, Jackson, Kalra, Lee, Quirk-Silva, Celeste Rodriguez, Schiavo, Stefani, Ward, Wicks

SENATE FLOOR: 39-0-1

YES: Allen, Alvarado-Gil, Archuleta, Arreguín, Ashby, Becker, Blakespear, Cabaldon, Caballero, Cervantes, Choi, Cortese, Dahle, Durazo, Gonzalez, Grayson, Grove, Hurtado, Jones, Laird, Limón, McGuire, McNerney, Menjivar, Niello, Ochoa Bogh, Padilla, Pérez, Richardson, Rubio, Seyarto, Smallwood-Cuevas, Stern, Strickland, Umberg, Valladares, Wahab, Weber Pierson, Wiener

ABS, ABST OR NV: Reyes

UPDATED

VERSION: June 18, 2026

CONSULTANT: Kathleen O'Malley / INS. / (916) 319-2086 FN: 0004091

 THIRD READING  

Bill No: AB 2361

Author: Pacheco (D), et al.

Amended: 6/18/26 in Senate

Vote: 21

SENATE INSURANCE COMMITTEE: 6-0, 6/24/26

AYES: Padilla, Niello, Becker, Menjivar, Richardson, Rubio

NO VOTE RECORDED: Jones

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 65-0, 5/18/26 - See last page for vote

SUBJECT: Insurance: personal vehicle sharing

SOURCE: Turo

DIGEST:

This bill revises the liability of a Personal Vehicle Sharing Program (PVSP) from unlimited liability to liability for bodily injury or property damage to injured third parties resulting from personal vehicle sharing in the amounts stated in the PVSP agreement, and not less than $250,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $500,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $100,000 for property damage. Makes these provisions inapplicable if the vehicle owner acts in concert with a shared vehicle driver who fails to return the shared vehicle pursuant to the terms of the PVSP agreement.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires a PVSP to assume all liability of the owner and be considered the owner of the vehicle for all purposes.
2. Defines “personal vehicle sharing” as the use of private passenger motor vehicles by a person other than the vehicle’s owner, in connection with a PVSP.
3. Defines “personal vehicle sharing program” as a legal entity qualified to do business in the state of California engaged in the business of facilitating the sharing of private passenger vehicles for noncommercial use of individuals within the state.
4. Requires a “personal vehicle sharing program” to provide insurance coverages for the vehicle and operator at a minimum of forty-five thousand dollars ($45,000) for bodily injury or death for one person, ninety thousand dollars ($90,000) for bodily injury or death for all persons, and fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) for property damage.
5. Requires, on and after January 1, 2031, that the PVSP shall not provide liability coverage less than three times the minimum insurance requirements for private passenger vehicles.
6. Requires most drivers to purchase auto insurance with minimum limits of coverage, of $30,000 for liability resulting in bodily injury or death of one person, $60,000 for liability resulting in bodily injury or death to more than one person, and $15,000 for liability resulting from property damage.

This bill:

1. Reduces the liability of PVSPs from unlimited liability to liability for bodily injury or property damage to injured third parties resulting from personal vehicle sharing in the amounts stated in the PVSP agreement, and not less than $250,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $500,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $100,000 for property damage.
2. Renders the above provisions inapplicable if the vehicle owner acts in concert with a shared vehicle driver who fails to return the shared vehicle pursuant to the terms of the PVSP agreement.
3. Specifies that nothing in this bill’s provisions limits the liability of the PVSP for its acts or omissions that result in injury to anyone due to the use or operation of a PVSP.

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 2743 (Pacheco, Chapter 244, Statutes of 2024). Updated the insurance coverage limits for a PVSP when the vehicle is engaged in personal vehicle sharing.

AB 1095 (Low, 2023). Would have deleted the insurance coverage requirement for a PVSP and instead required a PVSP, when a vehicle is engaged in personal vehicle sharing to provide liability insurance coverage of the same minimum coverage that applies to an owner or operator of a motor vehicle. Died in Assembly Insurance Committee.

AB 3041 (Low, 2020). Would have made changes to PVSP insurance coverage requirements. Not heard in Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee.

AB 1871 (Jones, Chapter 454, Statutes of 2010). Authorized private passenger motor vehicle owners to make their vehicle available for use by a PVSP without impacting owners' private passenger automobile insurance policy.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: Yes Local: No

SUPPORT: (Verified 8/3/26)

Turo (source)

Bright Inspect

Brightline Defense

Civil Justice Association of California

Community Members for AB 2361

Florence Firestone Merchants Association

Nissan North America

Relay Rides D.b.a. Turo

Streets Are for Everyone

Streets for All

Tint Technologies, INC.

Tunua Thrash-ntuk, Councilwoman, Eighth District, City of Long Beach

42 Turo Employees

1,132 Individuals

OPPOSITION: (Verified 8/3/26)

None received

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:

According to Turo, sponsor of the bill:

“Today, no other state applies uncapped vicarious liability to PVSPs. This bill maintains strong consumer protections by requiring that minimum insurance coverage always remains available – including access to additional coverage – while eliminating California’s unchecked vicarious liability exposure that only applies to car-sharing platforms.

Under current law, PVSPs are subject to a distinct and more expansive form of vicarious liability. Pursuant to Insurance Code Section 11580.24(d), a car-sharing platform must assume the vehicle owner’s legal responsibility for any claims that arise while a car is being shared. Unlike individual vehicle owners, whose liability is capped under Vehicle Code Section 17151, a platform’s liability is unlimited. As a result, a PVSP can face unlimited financial exposure even when it followed the law, acted in good faith, and had no ability to prevent an incident.

The bill, as amended, is a compromise that was reached to address the opposition’s concerns and does the following:

First, it clarifies the types of damages that PVSP must assume on behalf of the vehicle owner. Ins 11580.24(d) is a vicarious liability statute. It does not clearly specify that the PVSP must assume only those owner liabilities that arise out of sharing the vehicle. That leaves untenable ambiguity that could result in the platform being held responsible for damages wholly unrelated to car sharing. For that reason, the bill removes the word “all” and specifies that the platform is responsible for owner liabilities for bodily injury and property damage that result from car sharing.

Second, the bill limits the dollar amount that the PVSP must assume from an at-fault vehicle owner. Currently, the PVSP is required to assume all liability of the owner. E.g., existing law requires the PVSP to assume all liability for an owner’s negligent entrustment. This bill would limit that vicarious liability to the amounts $250K for bodily injury or death of one person, $500K for bodily injury or death of all persons, and $100K for property damage. There is no reduction in the amount of damages that can be recovered from the at-fault party.

The bill does not reduce the total recoverable damages, nor does it eliminate or reduce a PVSP's liability for its own tortious conduct, nor does it reduce the insurance requirements for PVSPs (which remain above those required of car rentals or personal vehicles). This bill ensures continued consumer protection by requiring that minimum insurance coverage always remains available while eliminating California’s unchecked vicarious liability exposure that applies only to PVSPs. We are pleased to have reached an agreement with stakeholders and appreciate the effort by many to get to this point.”

ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 65-0, 5/18/26

AYES: Addis, Aguiar-Curry, Ahrens, Alanis, Alvarez, Arambula, Ávila Farías, Bains, Bauer-Kahan, Bennett, Berman, Bonta, Bryan, Caloza, Carrillo, Castillo, Chen, Connolly, Davies, DeMaio, Elhawary, Ellis, Flora, Fong, Gipson, Jeff Gonzalez, Mark González, Hadwick, Haney, Harabedian, Hart, Hoover, Irwin, Johnson, Krell, Lackey, Lowenthal, Macedo, McKinnor, Muratsuchi, Nguyen, Ortega, Pacheco, Papan, Patel, Patterson, Pellerin, Petrie-Norris, Ramos, Ransom, Michelle Rodriguez, Rogers, Blanca Rubio, Sanchez, Schultz, Sharp-Collins, Solache, Soria, Ta, Tangipa, Valencia, Wallis, Wilson, Zbur, Rivas

NO VOTE RECORDED: Boerner, Calderon, Dixon, Gabriel, Gallagher, Garcia, Jackson, Kalra, Lee, Quirk-Silva, Celeste Rodriguez, Schiavo, Stefani, Ward, Wicks

Prepared by: Brandon Seto / INS. / (916) 651-4110

8/5/26 15:04:40

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON INSURANCE

Senator Stephen Padilla, Chair

2025 - 2026 Regular

Bill No: AB 2361 Hearing Date: June 24, 2026

SUBJECT: Insurance: personal vehicle sharing

DIGEST:

This bill, revises the liability of a Personal Vehicle Sharing Program (PVSP) from unlimited liability to liability for bodily injury or property damage to injured third parties resulting from personal vehicle sharing in the amounts stated in the PVSP agreement, and not less than $250,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $500,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $100,000 for property damage. Makes these provisions inapplicable if the vehicle owner acts in concert with a shared vehicle driver who fails to return the shared vehicle pursuant to the terms of the PVSP agreement.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Requires a PVSP to assume all liability of the owner and be considered the owner of the vehicle for all purposes.
2. Defines “personal vehicle sharing” as the use of private passenger motor vehicles by a person other than the vehicle’s owner, in connection with a PVSP.
3. Defines “personal vehicle sharing program” as a legal entity qualified to do business in the state of California engaged in the business of facilitating the sharing of private passenger vehicles for noncommercial use of individuals within the state.
4. Requires a “personal vehicle sharing program” to provide insurance coverages for the vehicle and operator at a minimum of forty-five thousand dollars ($45,000) for bodily injury or death for one person, ninety thousand dollars ($90,000) for bodily injury or death for all persons, and fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) for property damage.
5. Requires, on and after January 1, 2031, that the PVSP shall not provide liability coverage less than three times the minimum insurance requirements for private passenger vehicles.
6. Requires most drivers to purchase auto insurance with minimum limits of coverage, of $30,000 for liability resulting in bodily injury or death of one person, $60,000 for liability resulting in bodily injury or death to more than one person, and $15,000 for liability resulting from property damage.

This bill:

1. Reduces the liability of PVSPs from unlimited liability to liability for bodily injury or property damage to injured third parties resulting from personal vehicle sharing in the amounts stated in the PVSP agreement, and not less than $250,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $500,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons, and $100,000 for property damage.
2. Renders the above provisions inapplicable if the vehicle owner acts in concert with a shared vehicle driver who fails to return the shared vehicle pursuant to the terms of the PVSP agreement.
3. Specifies that nothing in this bill’s provisions limits the liability of the PVSP for its acts or omissions that result in injury to anyone due to the use or operation of a PVSP.

Background

According to the author:

“AB 2361 modernizes California’s treatment of vicarious liability for peer-to-peer vehicle sharing platforms (PVSPs) by aligning liability with fault while preserving strong protections for consumers and injured parties.

California is currently the only state that subjects personal vehicle sharing platforms to uncapped vicarious liability. Under existing law, a PVSP must assume a vehicle owner’s legal responsibility for claims arising during a vehicle-sharing transaction, with no limit on liability exposure, even when the platform complied with all legal requirements, acted in good faith, and had no ability to prevent the incident.

AB 2361 preserves consumer protections while addressing this unique and inequitable liability structure. The bill maintains existing insurance requirements and ensures that minimum insurance coverage remains available, including access to additional coverage where applicable. At the same time, it establishes reasonable limits on a platform’s vicarious liability exposure and clarifies that a PVSP is responsible only for owner liabilities arising from the sharing of the vehicle.

As amended, the bill reflects a compromise reached with stakeholders. Specifically, the bill:

Clarifies that a PVSP must assume owner liability only for bodily injury and property damage resulting from the vehicle-sharing transaction, eliminating ambiguity that could otherwise expose platforms to liability unrelated to car sharing.

Establishes reasonable limits on the vicarious liability a PVSP must assume on behalf of an at-fault vehicle owner: $250,000 for bodily injury or death of one person, $500,000 for bodily injury or death of all persons, and $100,000 for property damage.

Importantly, AB 2361 does not reduce the total damages recoverable from an at-fault party, does not limit a PVSP’s liability for its own negligent or wrongful conduct, and does not reduce existing insurance requirements, which remain higher than those applicable to traditional rental vehicles or personal automobiles.

California is home to innovative transportation businesses that provide consumers with affordable mobility options while creating jobs and economic opportunity. AB 2361 preserves these benefits while ensuring that liability remains tied to fault and that strong consumer protections remain in place.”

Related/Prior Legislation

AB 2743 (Pacheco, Chapter 244, Statutes of 2024). Updated the insurance coverage limits for a PVSP when the vehicle is engaged in personal vehicle sharing.

AB 1095 (Low, 2023). Would have deleted the insurance coverage requirement for a PVSP and instead required a PVSP, when a vehicle is engaged in personal vehicle sharing to provide liability insurance coverage of the same minimum coverage that applies to an owner or operator of a motor vehicle. Died in Assembly Insurance Committee.

AB 3041 (Low, 2020). Would have made changes to PVSP insurance coverage requirements. Not heard in Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee.

AB 1871 (Jones, Chapter 454, Statutes of 2010). Authorized private passenger motor vehicle owners to make their vehicle available for use by a PVSP without impacting owners' private passenger automobile insurance policy.

ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT:

According to Turo, sponsor of the bill:

“Today, no other state applies uncapped vicarious liability to PVSPs. This bill maintains strong consumer protections by requiring that minimum insurance coverage always remains available – including access to additional coverage – while eliminating California’s unchecked vicarious liability exposure that only applies to car-sharing platforms.

Under current law, PVSPs are subject to a distinct and more expansive form of vicarious liability. Pursuant to Insurance Code Section 11580.24(d), a car-sharing platform must assume the vehicle owner’s legal responsibility for any claims that arise while a car is being shared. Unlike individual vehicle owners, whose liability is capped under Vehicle Code Section 17151, a platform’s liability is unlimited. As a result, a PVSP can face unlimited financial exposure even when it followed the law, acted in good faith, and had no ability to prevent an incident.

The bill, as amended, is a compromise that was reached to address the opposition’s concerns and does the following:

First, it clarifies the types of damages that PVSP must assume on behalf of the vehicle owner. Ins 11580.24(d) is a vicarious liability statute. It does not clearly specify that the PVSP must assume only those owner liabilities that arise out of sharing the vehicle. That leaves untenable ambiguity that could result in the platform being held responsible for damages wholly unrelated to car sharing. For that reason, the bill removes the word “all” and specifies that the platform is responsible for owner liabilities for bodily injury and property damage that result from car sharing.

Second, the bill limits the dollar amount that the PVSP must assume from an at-fault vehicle owner. Currently, the PVSP is required to assume all liability of the owner. E.g., existing law requires the PVSP to assume all liability for an owner’s negligent entrustment. This bill would limit that vicarious liability to the amounts $250K for bodily injury or death of one person, $500K for bodily injury or death of all persons, and $100K for property damage. There is no reduction in the amount of damages that can be recovered from the at-fault party.

The bill does not reduce the total recoverable damages, nor does it eliminate or reduce a PVSP's liability for its own tortious conduct, nor does it reduce the insurance requirements for PVSPs (which remain above those required of car rentals or personal vehicles). This bill ensures continued consumer protection by requiring that minimum insurance coverage always remains available while eliminating California’s unchecked vicarious liability exposure that applies only to PVSPs. We are pleased to have reached an agreement with stakeholders and appreciate the effort by many to get to this point.”

ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION:

None received.

SUPPORT:

Turo (Sponsor)

Bright Inspect

Brightline Defense

Brightline Defense Project

Civil Justice Association of California

Community Members for AB 2361

Florence Firestone Merchants Association

Nissan North America

Relay Rides D.b.a. Turo

Streets Are for Everyone

Streets for All

Tint Technologies, INC.

Tunua Thrash-ntuk, Councilwoman, Eighth District, City of Long Beach

42 Turo Employees

1,132 Individuals

OPPOSITION:

None.

-- END --

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 2361

Author:(Pacheco)

As Amended Ver:April 27, 2026

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Reduces a Personal Vehicle Sharing Program (PVSP) from unlimited liability to liability for bodily injury or property damage to injured third parties resulting from personal vehicle sharing in the amounts stated in the PVSP agreement, but no less than limits set forth in existing law: $45,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $90,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons and $15,000 for property damage (45/90/15), with each value tripling on January 31, 2031.

Major Provisions

>

COMMENTS

In 2010, AB 1871 (Jones) created PVSPs, also known as peer-to-peer car sharing. The bill specified that a PVSP is an entity that facilitates personal vehicle sharing, provides liability insurance for private vehicles, and provides disclosures to the vehicle owner about the law and the terms and conditions of the transaction. California was the first state to establish PVSPs. PVSPs allow car owners to make their vehicles available to others to rent for periods of time. Car owners list their vehicles on a platform, then prospective renters can search the platform and select a vehicle to rent.

Every driver in California must show "financial responsibility," i.e. insurance. Financial responsibility (FR) shows that a driver is financially able to provide monetary protection to those injured or vehicles damaged due to an accident, regardless of fault. Current FR limits for private passenger vehicles stand at $30,000 for injury/death to one person/$60,000 for injury/death to more than one person /$15,000 for damage to property. The FRLs increase in 2035 to $50,000/$100,000/$25,000. PVSPs must provide a minimum of $45,000/$90,000/$15,000. Starting in 2031, PVSPs will have to provide three times the limit.

Host Vehicle Requirements: Before determining liability limits, it is important to understand the precautions and requirements before a vehicle is allowed onto a platform. TURO, for example, requires their "hosts" (owner of the vehicle) to get an annual vehicle safety inspection from a qualified mechanic, and the inspection must be submitted to TURO no more than 14 days after the inspection is complete. If a host misses this inspection, TURO will remove the vehicle from the platform. TURO, also, requires vehicle standards which include: vehicles must be equipped with working air conditioning and heating systems; battery should be five years old or newer; batteries more than five years old must be able to pass a 12.1 v test using a multimeter; brake pads must be at least three mm thick; no dashboard lights that indicate the vehicle requires immediate attention should be lit; including but not limited to, lights indicating low tire pressure, check engine, or low oil; the vehicle's horn must be in working condition; interior components, such as seat adjusters, window levers, glove compartment, and other control mechanisms and features must be in working order; all adjustable mirrors must be in working order and free of cracks, chips, and scratches; all seatbelts must be in working order; tires must have a tread depth of at least 4/32" or 3.175mm; tires must show no signs of dry rot; tires must be free of air bubbles, gashes, and other defects; tires must be less than six years old; headlights, tail lights, brake lights and turn indicator lights must be operable and clean; front and back windshield should be free of cracks, chips, or other damage; if otherwise, cracks, chips, or other damage must be smaller than 1" or 25.4mm; windshield wipers must be in working order. Further, only certain vehicles are eligible to be listed on the platform. Vehicles cannot be more than 12 years old with exceptions made for classic or specialty vehicles and vehicles must have less than 130,000 miles. Once listed, vehicles that reach or exceed 130,000 miles may remain listed if they are in excellent condition and continue to meet all legal, safety and mechanical standards. Vehicles must also have a clean title and can never have been declared a total loss. 

Lastly, under existing law, PVSPs are prohibited from facilitating the use of a vehicle with an open manufacturer recall within 48 hours of notification. Hosts cannot list or share recalled vehicles until the vehicle has been repaired, and the federal National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) database shows the repair is complete.

NCOIL (National Council of Insurance Legislators): In 2019, NCOIL adopted a PVSP Model Act. This act, so far, has been adopted in 30 other states. This Model Act provided, as it relates to AB 2361:

"Insurance Coverage During Car Sharing Period Sec. 1. (a) A peer-to-peer car sharing program shall assume liability, except as provided in subsection (b) of this chapter, of a shared vehicle owner for bodily injury or property damage to third parties or uninsured and underinsured motorist or personal injury protection losses during the car sharing period in an amount stated in the peer-to-peer car sharing program agreement which amount may not be less than those set forth in (State's financial responsibility law). (b) Notwithstanding the definition of "car sharing termination time" as set forth in Chapter 3 or 4 of this Act, the assumption of liability under subsection (a) of this subsection does not apply to any shared vehicle owner when: (1) A shared vehicle owner makes an intentional or fraudulent material misrepresentation or omission to the peer-to-peer car sharing program before the car sharing period in which the loss occurred, or (2) Acting in concert with a shared vehicle driver who fails to return the shared vehicle pursuant to the terms of car sharing program agreement."

FRLs vary state to state; Maine with the highest limits stands at 50/100/25. California just recently increased the FRLs to 30/60/15 on January 1, 2025, and will increase to 50/100/25. PVSPs FRLs are currently at 45/90/15 and will increase to three times that amount on January 1, 2031.

According to the Author

California is an outlier; no other state applies uncapped vicarious liability for peer-to-peer vehicle sharing platforms. Assembly Bill 2361 ensures continued consumer protection by requiring that minimum insurance coverage always remains available while eliminating California's unchecked vicarious liability exposure that applies only to PVSPs. By aligning liability with fault while preserving strong insurance protections for injured parties. While keeping car sharing affordable and viable for hosts.

Arguments in Support

According to the sponsor of the measure, TURO, "Today, no other state applies uncapped vicarious liability to PVSPs. This bill maintains strong consumer protections by requiring that minimum insurance coverage always remains available – including access to additional coverage – while eliminating California's unchecked vicarious liability exposure that only applies to car-sharing platforms. Under current law, PVSPs are subject to a distinct and more expansive form of vicarious liability. Pursuant to Insurance Code Section 11580.24(d), a car-sharing platform must assume the vehicle owner's legal responsibility for any claims that arise while a car is being shared. Unlike individual vehicle owners, whose liability is capped under Vehicle Code Section 17151, a platform's liability is unlimited. As a result, a PVSP can face unlimited financial exposure even when it followed the law, acted in good faith, and had no ability to prevent an incident. AB 2361 addresses this imbalance by applying the same state liability limits to PVSPs that already apply to individual vehicle owners, helping to keep operating costs predictable without weakening consumer protections."

Arguments in Opposition

The Consumer Attorneys of California who oppose state, "Peer-to-peer car-sharing platforms such as Turo operate a commercial marketplace that allows privately owned vehicles to be rented to the public for profit. These companies facilitate, market, and profit from each transaction, while structuring their business model to shift responsibility for vehicle safety and financial accountability to individual vehicle owners—many of whom are undercapitalized and unable to provide any aid to an injured individual in the event of catastrophic injury. Under current law, Turo appropriately steps into the shoes of the vehicle owner when serious injuries arise from negligent entrustment or unsafe vehicle maintenance. These claims are uncommon and difficult to prove, but when they do arise, they typically involve death or catastrophic injury where damages far exceed minimum financial responsibility limits – like the $45,000 limit AB 2361 as amended."

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, potential costs to the California Department of Insurance (CDI) or an unknown amount, but likely less than $150,000 (Insurance Fund).

VOTES

ASM INSURANCE: 16-0-1

YES: Calderon, Wallis, Addis, Alvarez, Ávila Farías, Berman, Ellis, Gipson, Hadwick, Harabedian, Krell, Nguyen, Ortega, Petrie-Norris, Michelle Rodriguez, Valencia

ABS, ABST OR NV: Chen

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 15-0-0

YES: Wicks, Hoover, Bauer-Kahan, Calderon, Caloza, Ellis, Fong, Mark González, Krell, Pacheco, Pellerin, Sharp-Collins, Solache, Ta, Tangipa

UPDATED

VERSION: April 27, 2026

CONSULTANT: Kathleen O'Malley / INS. / (916) 319-2086 FN: 0002548

Date of Hearing: May 13, 2026

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Buffy Wicks, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2361

Author:(Pacheco) – As Amended Ver:April 27, 2026

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill limits the liability of a personal vehicle sharing program (PVSP) in the event of a loss or injury that occurs during any time when the vehicle participating in the program is under the operation and control of a person other than the vehicle owner.

Specifically, this bill reduces the PVSP’s liability in such a situation, from unlimited liability to liability for bodily injury or property damage to injured third parties resulting from personal vehicle sharing in the amounts stated in the PVSP agreement, but no less than limits set forth in existing law: $45,000 for bodily injury or death for one person, $90,000 for bodily injury or death for all persons and $15,000 for property damage (45/90/15), with each value tripling on January 31, 2031.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Potential costs to the California Department of Insurance (CDI) or an unknown amount, but likely less than $150,000 (Insurance Fund).

COMMENTS:

Existing law a requires a PVSP to assume all liability of the owner and be considered the owner of the vehicle for all purposes. In effect, this means there is no limit to liability a PVSP might face from an incident involving a personal vehicle used in the PVSP program. PVSP company Turo objects, noting “a PVSP can face unlimited financial exposure even when it followed the law, acted in good faith, and had no ability to prevent an incident.” According to Turo, “AB 2361 addresses this imbalance by applying the same state liability limits to PVSPs that already apply to individual vehicle owners.”

The Consumer Attorneys of California sees things very differently, asserting “AB 2361 would severely limit Turo’s responsibility for injuries or even death arising from unsafe vehicle maintenance or negligent entrustment” and recommends a $1 million liability requirement as a reasonable minimum to ensure individuals seriously harmed by unsafe vehicles are not left without recourse.”

Analysis Prepared by: Jay Dickenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 22, 2026

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON INSURANCE

Lisa Calderon, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2361 (

Author:Pacheco) – As Introduced Ver:February 19, 2026

SUBJECT: Insurance: personal vehicle sharing

SUMMARY: Caps vicarious liability in the personal vehicle sharing program (PVSP) agreement, in amounts not less than $15,000 for the death of, or injury to one person in any one accident, $30,000 for the death of, or injury to more than one person in any one accident, and $5,000 for damage to property of others in any one accident.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Requires a PVSP to assume all liability of the owner and be considered the owner of the vehicle for all purposes. (Insurance (Ins.) Code, Section 11580.24)
2. Defines “personal vehicle sharing” as the use of private passenger motor vehicles by a person other than the vehicle’s owner, in connection with a PVSP. (Ins. Code, Section 11580.24)
3. Defines “personal vehicle sharing program” as a legal entity qualified to do business in the state of California engaged in the business of facilitating the sharing of private passenger vehicles for noncommercial use of individuals within the state. (Ins. Code, Section 11580.24)
4. Requires a “personal vehicle sharing program” to provide insurance coverages for the vehicle and operator at a minimum of forty-five thousand dollars ($45,000) for bodily injury or death for one person, ninety thousand dollars ($90,000) for bodily injury or death for all persons, and fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) for property damage.
   1. Requires, on and after January 1, 2031, that the PVSP shall not provide liability coverage less than three times the minimum insurance requirements for private passenger vehicles. (Ins. Code, Section 11580.241)
5. Requires most drivers to purchase auto insurance with minimum limits of coverage, of $30,000 for liability resulting in bodily injury or death of one person, $60,000 for liability resulting in bodily injury or death to more than one person, and $15,000 for liability resulting from property damage (known as $30,000/$60,000/$15,000). (Vehicle Code, Section 16500)
6. Increases, effective January 1, 2035, the requirements of the Financial Responsibility Limits (FRL) to $50,000 for bodily injury or death to one person, $100,000 for bodily injury or death to more than one person, and $25,000 for liability resulting from property damage. (Vehicle Code, Section 16500)
7. Provides that an owner of a vehicle in liability is limited to the amount of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000) for the death of or injury to one person in any one accident and, subject to the limit as to one person, is limited to the amount of thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) for the death of or injury to more than one person in any one accident and is limited to the amount of five thousand dollars ($5,000) for damage to property of others in any one accident. (Vehicle Code, Section 17151)

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose: According to the Author, “California is an outlier; no other state applies uncapped vicarious liability for peer-to-peer vehicle sharing platforms. Assembly Bill 2361 ensures continued consumer protection by requiring that minimum insurance coverage always remains available while eliminating California’s unchecked vicarious liability exposure that applies only to PVSPs. By aligning liability with fault while preserving strong insurance protections for injured parties. While keeping car sharing affordable and viable for hosts.”
2. Background: In 2010, AB 1871 (Jones) created PVSPs, also known as peer-to-peer car sharing. The bill specified that a PVSP is an entity that facilitates personal vehicle sharing, provides liability insurance for private vehicles, and provides disclosures to the vehicle owner about the law and the terms and conditions of the transaction. California was the first state to establish PVSPs. PVSPs allow car owners to make their vehicles available to others to rent for periods of time. Car owners list their vehicles on a platform, then prospective renters can search the platform and select a vehicle to rent.

Every driver in California must show “financial responsibility,” i.e. insurance. Financial responsibility (FR) shows that a driver is financially able to provide monetary protection to those injured or vehicles damaged due to an accident, regardless of fault. Current FR limits for private passenger vehicles stand at $30,000 for injury/death to one person/$60,000 for injury/death to more than one person /$15,000 for damage to property. The FRLs increase in 2035 to $50,000/$100,000/$25,000. PVSPs must provide a minimum of $45,000/$90,000/$15,000. Starting in 2031, PVSPs will have to provide three times the limit.

1. Lack of Data: It is still unclear the frequency/severity of harms and losses (accidents) associated with PVSPs. Currently, the California Department of Insurance (CDI) does not collect this information. When this program was created in 2010, there was also no data to accurately determine limits.
2. Host Vehicle Requirements: Before determining liability limits, it is important to understand the precautions and requirements before a vehicle is allowed onto a platform. TURO, for example, requires their “hosts” (owner of the vehicle) to get an annual vehicle safety inspection from a qualified mechanic, and the inspection must be submitted to TURO no more than 14 days after the inspection is complete. If a host misses this inspection, TURO will remove the vehicle from the platform. TURO, also, requires vehicle standards which include: vehicles must be equipped with working air conditioning and heating systems; battery should be five years old or newer; batteries more than five years old must be able to pass a 12.1 v test using a multimeter; brake pads must be at least 3 mm thick; no dashboard lights that indicate the vehicle requires immediate attention should be lit; including but not limited to, lights indicating low tire pressure, check engine, or low oil; the vehicle's horn must be in working condition; interior components, such as seat adjusters, window levers, glove compartment, and other control mechanisms and features must be in working order; all adjustable mirrors must be in working order and free of cracks, chips, and scratches; all seatbelts must be in working order; tires must have a tread depth of at least 4/32” or 3.175mm; tires must show no signs of dry rot; tires must be free of air bubbles, gashes, and other defects; tires must be less than six years old; headlights, tail lights, brake lights and turn indicator lights must be operable and clean; front and back windshield should be free of cracks, chips, or other damage; if otherwise, cracks, chips, or other damage must be smaller than 1” or 25.4mm; windshield wipers must be in working order.

Further, only certain vehicles are eligible to be listed on the platform. Vehicles cannot be more than 12 years old with exceptions made for classic or specialty vehicles and vehicles must have less than 130,000 miles. Once listed, vehicles that reach or exceed 130,000 miles may remain listed if they are in excellent condition and continue to meet all legal, safety and mechanical standards. Vehicles must also have a clean title and can never have been declared a total loss. 

Lastly, under existing law, PVSPs are prohibited from facilitating the use of a vehicle with an open manufacturer recall within 48 hours of notification. Hosts cannot list or share recalled vehicles until the vehicle has been repaired, and the federal NHTSA database shows the repair is complete.

1. Different forms of liability: This measure only touches upon vicarious liability and does not touch on or change any other liability requirements of PVSPs. Vicarious liability is holding one party responsible for another person’s actions.

According to TURO, since 2020, TURO has paid over $4 million to settle claims related to owner liability. Existing California law, as established in 2010, provides for uncapped vicarious liability which leaves this exposure unpredictable and challenging to account for.

When california created the first PVSPs law this industry was relatively new and unknown. Since then, each state has adopted more likely than not, the National Council of Insurance Legislators (NCOIL Model Act) which did not apply uncapped liability.

Negligent entrustment occurs when a vehicle owner permits an unfit or incompetent driver to use their car, resulting in an accident. The owner is liable if they knew or should have known the driver was reckless, unlicensed, intoxicated, or unfit.

Additionally, California follows the pure comparative negligence rule which means a person can recover damages in cases where someone is partially at fault- the jury assigns a percentage of fault to each party.

This measure has no impact on these liabilities.

1. NCOIL: In 2019, NCOIL adopted a PVSP Model Act. This act, so far, has been adopted in 30 other states. This Model Act provided, as it relates to AB 2361:

“Insurance Coverage During Car Sharing Period Sec. 1. (a) A peer-to-peer car sharing program shall assume liability, except as provided in subsection (b) of this chapter, of a shared vehicle owner for bodily injury or property damage to third parties or uninsured and underinsured motorist or personal injury protection losses during the car sharing period in an amount stated in the peer-to-peer car sharing program agreement which amount may not be less than those set forth in (State’s financial responsibility law). (b) Notwithstanding the definition of “car sharing termination time” as set forth in Chapter 3 or 4 of this Act, the assumption of liability under subsection (a) of this subsection does not apply to any shared vehicle owner when: (1) A shared vehicle owner makes an intentional or fraudulent material misrepresentation or omission to the peer-to-peer car sharing program before the car sharing period in which the loss occurred, or (2) Acting in concert with a shared vehicle driver who fails to return the shared vehicle pursuant to the terms of car sharing program agreement.”

FRLs vary state to state; Maine with the highest limits stands at 50/100/25. California just recently increased the FRLs to 30/60/15 on January 1, 2025, and will increase to 50/100/25. PVSPs FRLs are currently at 45/90/15 and will increase to three times that amount on January 1, 2031.

1. Graves Amendment: The Graves Amendment (49 U.S. Code § 30106) established by the federal government in 2005, was introduced to limit the liability of rental car companies for damages caused by drivers who rent vehicles.

“An owner of a motor vehicle that rents or leases the vehicle to a person (or an affiliate of the owner) shall not be liable under the law of any State or political subdivision thereof, by reason of being the owner of the vehicle (or an affiliate of the owner), for harm to persons or property that results or arises out of the use, operation, or possession of the vehicle during the period of the rental or lease, if—(1) the owner (or an affiliate of the owner) is engaged in the trade or business of renting or leasing motor vehicles; and (2) there is no negligence or criminal wrongdoing on the part of the owner (or an affiliate of the owner).”

Before the Graves Amendment, rental car companies could be held vicariously liable for the actions of their renters, meaning they could be sued simply because they owned the vehicle involved in an accident. The law specifically states that rental car companies cannot be held liable for harm caused by their renters if the company has no direct negligence.

The Graves Amendment does not apply to PVSPs, but it is worth noting the differences between a rental car and a PSVP.

1. Previous Legislation: AB 2743 (Pacheco) (Chapter 244, Statutes of 2024) This bill updated the insurance coverage limits for a PVSP when the vehicle is engaged in personal vehicle sharing.

AB 1095 (Low) 2023 Legislative Session, would have deleted the insurance coverage requirement for a personal vehicle-sharing program and instead requires a personal vehicle-sharing program, when a vehicle is engaged in personal vehicle sharing to provide liability insurance coverage of the same minimum coverage that applies to an owner or operator of a motor vehicle. Died in the Assembly Insurance Committee.

SB 1107 (Dodd) (Chapter 717, Statutes of 2022) This bill (1) increased, effective January 1, 2025, the requirements of the FRL, which requires most drivers purchase auto insurance with certain minimum limits of coverage, to $30,000 for liability resulting in bodily injury or death of one person, $60,000 for liability resulting in bodily injury or death to more than one person, and $15,000 for liability resulting from property damage (known as $30,000/$60,000/$15,000), up from the previous requirements of $15,000, $30,000, and $5,000 respectively; (2) adjusts further, on January 1, 2035, the FRL requirements upward by $20,000, $40,000, and $10,000, respectively, so that on January 1, 2035, the minimum limits will become $50,000 for bodily injury or death to one person, $100,000 for bodily injury or death to more than one person, and $25,000 for liability resulting from property damage; (3) requires the Insurance Commissioner to solicit rate applications in advance of each change to the FRL that would go into effect with the change in the FRL; and, (4) adjusts the bonding and deposit requirements for drivers that do not purchase auto insurance to match the FRL requirements as they change.

AB 3041 (Low) 2020 Legislative Session, would have made changes to PVSPs insurance coverage requirement. Never Heard in Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee.

AB 1871 (Jones) (Chapter 454, Statutes of 2010) This bill authorizes private passenger motor vehicle owners to make their vehicle available for use by a personal vehicle sharing program without impacting the owners' private passenger automobile insurance policy.

1. Arguments in Support: According to the sponsor of the measure, TURO, “Today, no other state applies uncapped vicarious liability to PVSPs. This bill maintains strong consumer protections by requiring that minimum insurance coverage always remains available – including access to additional coverage – while eliminating California’s unchecked vicarious liability exposure that only applies to car-sharing platforms. Under current law, PVSPs are subject to a distinct and more expansive form of vicarious liability. Pursuant to Insurance Code Section 11580.24(d), a car-sharing platform must assume the vehicle owner’s legal responsibility for any claims that arise while a car is being shared. Unlike individual vehicle owners, whose liability is capped under Vehicle Code Section 17151, a platform’s liability is unlimited. As a result, a PVSP can face unlimited financial exposure even when it followed the law, acted in good faith, and had no ability to prevent an incident. AB 2361 addresses this imbalance by applying the same state liability limits to PVSPs that already apply to individual vehicle owners, helping to keep operating costs predictable without weakening consumer protections.”
2. Arguments in Opposition: The Consumer Attorneys of California who oppose unless amended state, “Peer-to-peer car-sharing platforms such as Turo operate a commercial marketplace that allows privately owned vehicles to be rented to the public for profit. These companies facilitate, market, and profit from each transaction, while structuring their business model to shift responsibility for vehicle safety and financial accountability to individual vehicle owners—many of whom are undercapitalized and unable to provide any aid to an injured individual in the event of catastrophic injury. Under current law, Turo appropriately steps into the shoes of the vehicle owner when serious injuries arise from negligent entrustment or unsafe vehicle maintenance. These claims are uncommon and difficult to prove, but when they do arise, they typically involve death or catastrophic injury where damages far exceed minimum financial responsibility limits – like the $15,000 limit proposed in AB 2361.”
   
3. Recommended Amendments:

The committee recommends removing the reference to the Vehicle Code in AB 2361, which carries limits of 15/30/5, and instead referencing PVSPs own FRLs. Therefore, the amendments would increase the 15/30/5 to 45/90/15 and would then increase the limit again on January 31, 2031, to three times that amount. Due to the lack of data and after reviewing the NCOIL Model Law combined with other state action, this would be the best approach should this bill move forward.

(d) (1) Notwithstanding any other law or any provision in a private passenger motor vehicle owner’s automobile insurance policy, in the event of a loss or injury that occurs during any time period when the vehicle is under the operation and control of a person, other than the vehicle owner, pursuant to a personal vehicle sharing program, or otherwise under the control of a personal vehicle sharing program, the personal vehicle sharing program shall assume all liability of the owner and shall be considered the owner of the vehicle for all purposes. liability of the owner for bodily injury or property damage to injured third parties resulting from personal vehicle sharing in the amounts stated in the personal vehicle sharing program agreement, which amounts shall not be less than those limits set forth in Section 11580.241 17151 of the Vehicle Code. Nothing in this section limits the liability of the personal vehicle sharing program for its acts or omissions that result in injury to any persons as a result of the use or operation of a personal vehicle sharing program.

(2) The provisions of subsection 1 do not apply if a vehicle owner:

(A) Makes an intentional or fraudulent material misrepresentation or omission to the personal vehicle sharing program before the car sharing period in which the loss occurred; or

(B) Acts in concert with a shared vehicle driver who fails to return the shared vehicle pursuant to the terms of the personal vehicle sharing program agreement.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Bright Inspect
Civil Justice Association of California (CJAC)
Florence Firestone Merchants Association (FFMA)
Nissan North America
Streets for All
Tint Technologies, INC.
Tunua Thrash-ntuk, Councilwoman, Eighth District, City of Long Beach
Turo
Turo Employees [42 - Based in California]

1,132 Individual Californians in Support of AB 2361

Oppose Unless Amended

Consumer Attorneys of California

Analysis Prepared by: Kathleen O'Malley / INS. / (916) 319-2086