A Comparative Study of the Regulatory Models for Autonomous Vehicles in the United States and the European Union

Amid intensifying global competition in the autonomous vehicle industry, the United States and the European Union have developed sharply different regulatory paths grounded in distinct legal philosophies. This study adopts a comparative analysis to examine the existing regulatory frameworks of the two jurisdictions with the obligations borne by regulated subjects. On this basis, this study uses the timing of market access, the regulated subjects, and the allocation of liability as its comparison dimensions. The study moves the comparison towards a legal analysis of how administrative compliance and civil liability are connected, and it discusses the institutional strengths and limits of the two regulatory paths. The analysis shows that the United States adopts a decentralised, market-driven approach. It preserves the self-certification tradition of the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act. More specifically, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration does not approve vehicles before they enter the market. Instead, it exercises post-market oversight through accident reporting and recalls. The United States places original equipment manufacturers, automated driving system developers, and fleet operators side by side as independent reporting parties. After an accident, liability is distributed through state product liability litigation and insurance pools. The European Union, in contrast, has built a stringent, centralised type-approval system. It treats the General Safety Regulation 2019/2144 as the parent regulation. It designates the manufacturer as the sole type-approval applicant. Therefore, this study clarifies the institutional features and respective merits of the two major regulatory models and offers useful references for global coordination on improving autonomous vehicle regulatory frameworks.