Because no one has noticed yet, The taxi and VTC debate is more than just a sectoral conflict. It is a corporate thermometer for understanding technological change. Y en España, sadly, no se está introducing the height.
In recent years, various autonomous communities governed by both the PP and the PSOE (Catalonia, Baleares, Galicia, Andalucía, Murcia or the Community of Valencia) have adopted restrictive regulations that do not respond to the general interest and limit the activities of VTCs, imposing administrative and urgent obstacles that disproportionately protect the market capacity, up to the order of organized presence. before competence.
We do not have to guarantee legal certainty or quality of services. Let’s talk about it armor is the status quo of taxi drivers, classified against the recommendations and judgments of the European Union.
The result is asymmetric regulation that limits competence, reduces supply and harms users – sacrificing freedom of choice and generating risk and costly costs – which is the great promise of this debate.
From a legal point of view, the problem is even bigger. The regulatory framework – since the introduction of the infamous “Ábalos Decree” in 2018 – has been transformed into a fragmented patchwork of autonomous regulations that come into conflict with European legislation on freedom of establishment and jurisdiction.
Legal uncertainty discourages turnaround, undermines the workforce and prompts constant litigation
Legal uncertainty discourages turnaround, undermines the workforce and prompts constant litigation. It is not an effective way to order a market as strategic as urban movement.
Taxi drivers and politicians ask how to drive, limiting themselves to VTC, connecting autonomous vehicles and robots This is a defensive logic based on protecting the privileges of a monopoly that makes no economic sense.
The phenomenon is not new. Economic history is full of episodes in which an innovation was received with ease by those who subdued it. As recorded by Henry Hazlitt Economy in a nutshellNo, my reaction to the machine is understandable but ambiguous.
Hazlitt explains that one of the most persistent economic errors is the belief that machines create a permanent example. It should be noted that every time there is a crisis, technology is to blame because every technological advance eliminates jobs without generating new opportunities in other industries and increasing the available rents that it will be transformed into another economic activity for the benefit of the company.
But let me show that if the logic was correct, mankind was inspired by the first inventions that supported human endeavours.
The debate is not taxi vs VTC. It’s the past against the future
Technical progress does not destroy, it only transforms; and when politicians prevent this transformation, they do not preserve people until they freeze development.
Technology advances at a speed that the legislator does not anticipate. In cities in the United States and China, robotaxis operates in normal commercial operation. Europe does not support this trend, but Spain without an embargo continues to stubbornly regulate the conflict of the present without anticipating the future.
The real legal stamp is built on human driver reward and limited supply. How do you feel about a licensing system designed to narrow supply when the labor factor becomes central? Do we want to look at the most advanced economies or the emerging and emerging models?
This is where Spanish politicians demonstrate their short-sightedness. Replace regulation with progress. If there are rules designed to favor taxis in 2026 and contain VTC without considering that by 2030 the market may transform and maintaining monopolies will have high social costs.
If one protects the patrimonial value of one’s licenses to avoid conflicts on the street without realizing that technological disruption will irreversibly change the business model and that the fire must be able to occur during a rapid and adequate transition to adapt to this new paradigm, otherwise conflicts will be much more difficult to resolve. Yes, the politician of the “current moment” will not be there on this matter, and it will be someone else dealing with the problem. Myopic selfishness adds to myopia.
The corporate defense of taxis is strategically flawed. Technological competence will apply equally, and practicing games through regulatory withdrawal will not avoid the change, it will only make it more traumatic.
Legislators perspicaz and with real social sensitivity should not vote for ganadors and losers until the market is opened with clear, reasonable and technologically neutral regulations.
PUSH technological neutrality, a basic principle of European law requires that the standard does not favor any harmful specific technical solutions unless it guarantees safety and quality. Unfortunately, however, it is enacted to maintain political balance, not to anticipate a transformative market.
Spain needs a national mobility strategy that integrates taxis, VTC and autonomous mobility in a coherent and competitive framework. This requires courage and far-reaching vision. Also coordination between government and administration.
I demand to understand that innovation is not the enemy, yes a condition for improving services and increasing efficiency. The only option is to embrace the technology and the future of motion guided by a robotic axis.
In addition to removing regulatory walls, we need to discuss how to promote competences, adapt training, facilitate transformation and integrate new technologies with legal safeguards. The global change that attracts artificial intelligence and robotaxis will not happen by decree. If you try to slow down, Spain will pay a very high price.
The debate is not taxi vs VTC. It’s the past against the future. If the legislation that calms those worried about competence is followed, Spain will be the first to play in the world of autonomous vehicles.
The problem is not the machine. The problem is with the legislation because it never existed.
*** Emilio Domínguez del Valle is an abogado, specialist in movement and transport.
Leave a Reply