The Evolution of Automotive Safety Glass Regulation: A Comprehensive 50-State Analysis of Insurance Mandates, ADAS Integration, and Consumer Rights

The regulatory framework governing automotive safety glass has transitioned from a localized property-damage concern into a complex intersection of insurance law, high-tech safety standards, and consumer protection litigation. As of early 2026, the windshield is no longer merely a transparent barrier but a structural component of the vehicle that serves as the primary housing for Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS). These systems, including cameras, lidar, and radar sensors, are essential for the operation of automatic emergency braking, lane-keeping assistance, and adaptive cruise control.1 Consequently, the legal requirements for repairing or replacing these components have expanded to include mandatory recalibration procedures, often governed by state-specific statutes that dictate insurance reimbursement and consumer choice.5 The current national landscape is characterized by three distinct regulatory philosophies. A handful of "zero-deductible" states mandate that insurers provide glass replacement without out-of-pocket costs for the consumer, viewing clear visibility as a public safety imperative.1 A second group of states requires insurers to offer such coverage as an optional endorsement, placing the burden of choice on the policyholder.12 The remaining majority of states treat glass damage under standard comprehensive claims, where deductibles apply unless specifically waived by the insurer for minor repairs.11 Within this framework, a secondary battleground has emerged regarding "steering"—the practice of insurers directing customers toward preferred repair networks—and the right of consumers to insist on Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) parts rather than aftermarket alternatives.16

The Regulatory Architecture of Glass Insurance Deductibles

The most visible distinction in state insurance codes is the treatment of the comprehensive deductible as it applies to safety glass. While the standard comprehensive policy covers damage from falling objects, hail, and road debris, the deductible—often ranging from $250 to $1,000—can exceed the cost of a simple windshield replacement for older vehicles.1 To mitigate the safety risk of drivers operating vehicles with obstructed views, several states have intervened legislatively.

Mandatory Zero-Deductible States

Florida, Kentucky, and South Carolina represent the most consumer-friendly jurisdictions regarding glass claims. Florida Statute 627.7288 explicitly prohibits insurers from applying a deductible to windshield repairs or replacements, provided the vehicle is covered by a comprehensive policy.12 However, it is important to note that the Florida mandate is strictly limited to the windshield; side and rear glass remain subject to the standard policy deductible.1 This creates a notable divergence in documented insurer practice, as policyholders often assume "all glass" is free, leading to disputes when tempered side glass is damaged.13 Kentucky and South Carolina offer broader protections. Kentucky law requires that comprehensive policies provide full coverage for all safety glass without a deductible.1 In 2024, Kentucky bolstered this framework with Senate Bill 29, which prohibited "incentives" such as gift cards that glass shops previously used to attract customers, while maintaining the zero-deductible status as a core consumer right.7 South Carolina’s Code Section 38-77-280 similarly waives the deductible for all safety glass, and 2025 legislation (Bill 767\) has expanded this to explicitly include the cost of ADAS recalibration as an inseparable part of the glass repair.11

Mandated-Offer and Optional Jurisdictions

Arizona, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and New York operate under a "mandated offer" system. In these states, insurers are not required to provide zero-deductible coverage automatically, but they must offer it to the consumer as a separate option for an additional premium.1 Arizona’s Title 20 mandates that insurers offer a zero-deductible option for all glass, a provision heavily utilized due to the high frequency of road debris damage in the state.12 Massachusetts law (Chapter 175 § 113O) is unique in that it requires insurers to offer a $100 deductible option, though the market has evolved such that most regional carriers offer a $0 deductible to remain competitive.12 In states without specific mandates, such as California, Texas, and Illinois, glass damage is treated as a standard comprehensive claim.13 While many insurers in these regions voluntarily waive the deductible for chip repairs (typically under 6 inches) to prevent cracks from spreading, full replacements remain subject to the deductible.1 This often leads to consumer frustration when modern windshields—equipped with ADAS technology—push replacement costs toward $1,000 or more, making the deductible a significant barrier to repair.1

Anti-Steering Protections and the Right to Choose

A central tension in the auto glass industry is the relationship between insurance companies and their "preferred provider" networks, often managed by Third-Party Administrators (TPAs).16 Anti-steering laws are designed to prevent insurers from coercing or misleading consumers into using a specific shop that may prioritize the insurer’s cost-containment goals over factory-standard repair quality.16

Mechanisms of Steering and Legislative Responses

Insurers frequently use subtle pressure tactics during the First Notice of Loss (FNOL) process. These include claims that work performed by independent shops cannot be guaranteed, that using a non-network shop will cause significant delays, or that the consumer will be responsible for "balance billing" if the independent shop’s rates exceed the insurer’s "prevailing market rate".17 To counteract this, 47 states have enacted some form of anti-steering protection.18 For instance, Rhode Island Statute § 31-47-12.1 requires insurers to provide a bold-face notice stating that the consumer has the right to choose their repair facility and that the insurer may not interfere with that choice.28 Connecticut Statute § 38a-354 similarly prohibits appraisers and insurers from requiring repairs at a specified facility and mandates a disclosure of the consumer's right to choose.29 In North Carolina, General Statute 58-3-180 provides the legal basis for the Insurance Commissioner’s 2025 warnings against insurers who attempt to bypass these rights.19 The practical challenge remains the "fair competitive price" clause.17 While an insurer cannot force a consumer to use a network shop, they are generally only obligated to pay the rate they would have paid within their network.17 If a specialized independent shop charges a higher labor rate for ADAS-intensive work, the consumer may still face out-of-pocket costs, a reality that often functions as "de facto steering".17

OEM Glass Rights and the Quality Debate

The debate between Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) glass and Aftermarket (non-OEM) glass is fundamentally about fit, finish, and the reliability of ADAS recalibration.21 OEM parts are manufactured to the vehicle maker’s exact specifications, ensuring that the optical clarity in the area of the ADAS camera sensors is perfect.5 Aftermarket parts, while often meeting Department of Transportation (DOT) safety standards, may have slight variances in thickness or curvature that can trigger ADAS malfunctions.5

Codified Consent and Disclosure Requirements

Only a minority of states have codified specific rights regarding OEM parts. Indiana requires owner consent for the use of non-OEM parts for vehicles within five years of their model year, while Rhode Island requires such consent for 30 months.34 Other states, like Arkansas, Kansas, and West Virginia, only require disclosure—meaning the insurer or shop must inform the consumer that non-OEM parts are being used, but the consumer cannot necessarily veto that choice without paying the difference in cost.30 In California, the law requires that non-OEM parts be of "like kind and quality" to OEM parts in terms of safety, fit, and performance.30 Insurers who specify non-OEM parts must also pay for any modifications needed to make those parts fit correctly.30 Ohio’s 2026 legislative push (Bill 3937.51) aims to enhance this by requiring insurers to offer "OEM part repair coverage" as an optional endorsement, effectively creating a premium-based pathway for consumers to guarantee factory-original glass.20

ADAS Recalibration: The New Safety Standard

The integration of ADAS has redefined the "complete repair." Recalibration—the process of aligning the vehicle’s sensors and cameras with its electronic control unit—is now a mandatory safety step after most windshield replacements.3 There are two primary methods: static calibration, which involves specialized targets in a controlled shop environment, and dynamic calibration, which involves driving the vehicle at specific speeds under certain conditions.4

The Shift Toward Mandatory Recalibration Laws

Legislatures are increasingly treating ADAS recalibration as a non-negotiable safety requirement. Utah is considered a pioneer, requiring auto glass repair facilities to provide notice if calibration is required and ensuring that insurance policies cover 100% of these costs as part of the restoration to "pre-loss condition".4 Arizona Senate Bill 1410 similarly requires that all calibrations meet or exceed manufacturer specifications and prohibits shops from claiming insurance coverage until it is confirmed.8 New York’s 2026 law is perhaps the most stringent, requiring shops to itemize all calibration work and notify both the consumer and the insurer if a shop is incapable of performing the work to OEM standards.3 This law effectively bars shops from "cutting corners" on calibration to save time or insurer costs.3 At the federal level, the ADAS Functionality and Integrity Act (H.R. 6688\) and the REPAIR Act (H.R. 1566\) are currently under consideration to standardize these requirements nationally, ensuring that independent shops have the data access needed to perform these complex safety tasks.9

50-State Comprehensive Windshield Insurance Law Comparison (2025-2026)

The following table provides a high-density comparison of the statutory and practical landscape across the United States. It incorporates the most recent legislative updates and flags areas where law and insurer practice are known to diverge.

| State | Glass Deductible Type | Governing Statute Citation | Anti-Steering Protection | OEM Glass Rights | ADAS Recalibration Treatment | Unique Protections / Flags | | :---- | :---- | :---- | :---- | :---- | :---- | :---- | | Alabama | Optional | AL Code § 27-14-8 30 | Yes; Right to choose 30 | Disclosure only 30 | Covered under comprehensive 9 | Insurer must restore to pre-accident condition 30 | | Alaska | Optional | AK Stat. § 21.36.125 30 | Yes; No unreasonable travel 30 | LKQ standard 30 | No specific ADAS mandate 9 | Adjusters must guarantee repairs 30 | | Arizona | Mandated Offer | AZ Rev. Stat. § 20-264 9 | Yes; Mandatory disclosure 30 | Disclosure required 30 | SB 1410: Must meet OEM spec 8 | Divergence: Insurers often push dynamic vs static 8 | | Arkansas | Optional | AR Code § 23-66-206 13 | Yes; § 23-66-206 7 | Right to OEM under warranty 30 | No specific ADAS law 9 | Anti-steering bill died in 2025 7 | | California | Optional | CA SB 988 (2025) 42 | Robust; ARD sign req. 30 | LKQ fit/finish mandate 30 | SB 988: Calibration notification 8 | Flag: New OBD readiness monitor rules 2025 43 | | Colorado | Optional | CO Rev. Stat. § 10-4-617 30 | Yes; No intimidation 30 | Disclosure required 30 | No specific ADAS law 9 | Disclosure of insurer ownership interest 30 | | Connecticut | Mandated Offer | CT Gen. Stat. § 38a-339 7 | Yes; § 38a-354 29 | LKQ standard 30 | DOI bulletin issued 2024 9 | Flag: Failed 2026 bill sought claim numbers pre-work 7 | | Delaware | Optional | DE Code tit. 18 § 2304 14 | Yes; for glass repair 28 | Used/Rebuilt must be listed 30 | No specific ADAS law 9 | Prohibits substandard airbags 30 | | Florida | Mandatory (Windshield) | FL Stat. § 627.7288 11 | Yes; § 626.9743 17 | Equivalent kind/quality 26 | Integral to comprehensive 5 | Flag: Windshield only; AOB use now restricted 7 | | Georgia | Optional | GA Code § 33-34-1 14 | HB 1117 (2026) active 7 | HB 1117: OEM procedure mandate 7 | HB 1117: Reimbursement req. 7 | 2026 Shift: Move away from pure LKQ 7 | | Hawaii | Optional | HI Rev. Stat. § 431 7 | General consumer protection 7 | LKQ standard 14 | "Right to Repair" debate 2025 7 | Small market; limited TPA competition 7 | | Idaho | Optional | ID Code § 41 14 | Yes; general steering 14 | LKQ standard 14 | No specific ADAS law 9 | Standard comprehensive rules apply 14 | | Illinois | Optional | 215 ILCS 5/155.29 14 | HB 1141 (2026) active 7 | HB 2472: OEM tool mandate 7 | Calibration required if spec. 7 | Flag: Active AOB/assignment reform 2026 3 | | Indiana | Optional | IN Code § 27 14 | Yes; general steering 34 | Consent required (5 years) 34 | No specific ADAS law 9 | Stronger OEM protection than neighbors 34 | | Iowa | Optional | IA Code § 507B.4 14 | AOB Calibration Law 2025 7 | LKQ standard 14 | Mandated AOB Calibration 7 | Recently shifted toward calibration mandate 7 | | Kansas | Optional | KS Stat. § 40-2404 14 | Yes; § 40-2404(9) 14 | Disclosure on estimate req. 34 | No specific ADAS law 9 | 2022 service contract bill failed 7 | | Kentucky | Mandatory (All Glass) | KY Rev. Stat. § 304.20-060 7 | SB 29 (2024) 7 | SB 29: Reasonable charge cap 7 | SB 29: Notification mandate 7 | Flag: Incentive ban 2024; No gift cards 7 | | Louisiana | Optional | LA Rev. Stat. § 22:1892 7 | Yes; § 22:1892(D) 30 | 2026 Motor Vehicle Glass Law 7 | No specific ADAS law 9 | New 2026 bill introduced for transparency 7 | | Maine | Optional | ME Rev. Stat. tit. 24-A 14 | Yes; tit. 29-A § 1810 7 | R2R: Telematics access req. 7 | Implementation stalled by court 7 | Flag: 2025 LD 1661 towing/storage laws 9 | | Maryland | Optional | MD Code Ins. § 10-503 9 | Yes; HB 920 9 | Disclosure of non-OEM 30 | SB 789 (2026): Licensing 7 | Trend: Moving toward static lab standards 9 | | Massachusetts | Mandated Offer | MA Gen. Laws ch. 175 § 113O 12 | Yes; unless DRP selected 30 | Identification of supplier 30 | R2R 2020: Data access mandate 9 | Flag: $100 deductible option is statutory 12 | | Michigan | Optional | MI Comp. Laws § 500.2101 14 | General steering 7 | LKQ standard 14 | No specific ADAS law 9 | 2025 bill on auxiliary facility license 7 | | Minnesota | Mandated Offer | MN Stat. § 65B.134 12 | Yes; § 72A.201 30 | Right to refuse (not glass) 30 | Zero-deductible offer mandate 12 | Commissioner rulemaking authority strong 47 | | Mississippi | Optional | MS Code § 83-11-501 14 | General 14 | LKQ standard 14 | No specific ADAS law 9 | Minimal glass-specific regulation 14 | | Missouri | Optional | MO Rev. Stat. § 375 14 | General 14 | LKQ standard 14 | No specific ADAS law 9 | Standard comprehensive rules 14 | | Montana | Optional | MT Code § 33-18-224 14 | Yes; insurers cannot mandate 14 | LKQ standard 14 | No specific ADAS law 9 | High rate of "voluntary" zero-deductible 48 | | Nebraska | Optional | NE Rev. Stat. § 44 14 | General 14 | LKQ standard 14 | No specific ADAS law 9 | Regional news: Cycle time focus 49 | | Nevada | Optional | NV Rev. Stat. § 691A 13 | General 14 | High-end cert requirements 50 | Documentation practice growing 50 | Sierra Mobile Glass case study 50 | | New Hampshire | Optional | NH Rev. Stat. § 417:12-b 30 | Yes; Intimidation prohibited 30 | Equal to OEM fit/quality 30 | Glass shop bill amended 2025 7 | Strict definitions of "equal" parts 30 | | New Jersey | Optional | NJ Stat. § 17 14 | Yes; general 7 | LKQ standard 14 | 2025 Glass Safety Bill pending 7 | 2025 legislative wave participant 7 | | New Mexico | Optional | NM Stat. § 59A 14 | General 14 | LKQ standard 14 | No specific ADAS law 9 | Low density of ADAS specialized shops 14 | | New York | Mandated Offer | NY Ins. Law § 3411 8 | Yes; but glass exemption 51 | 2025 Bill: OEM procedures 7 | 2026 Law: Mandatory disclosure 3 | Flag: Among strictest laws nationally 3 | | North Carolina | Optional | NC Gen. Stat. § 58-3-180 13 | Yes; Commissioner active 19 | LKQ standard 14 | Training/Apprenticeship focus 27 | Flag: Active steering enforcement 2025 19 | | North Dakota | Optional | ND Cent. Code § 26.1 14 | General 14 | LKQ standard 14 | Coverage bill defeated 2025 7 | Low regulatory activity for ADAS 9 | | Ohio | Optional | OH Rev. Code § 3937 14 | Yes; pressure is illegal 18 | 2026 Bill: OEM coverage opt 20 | Forced options bill 2026 7 | Divergence: Insurers falsely claim DRP req 18 | | Oklahoma | Optional | OK Stat. tit. 36 § 1250.8 14 | Yes; § 1250.8(D) 14 | LKQ standard 14 | No specific ADAS law 9 | Standard comprehensive rules 14 | | Oregon | Optional | OR Rev. Stat. § 746.280 13 | Yes; sign posting req. 30 | Warranty equivalent to OEM 30 | Documentation practice standard 9 | Flag: 2026 Q1/Q2 rate increase pressure 48 | | Pennsylvania | Optional | 31 PA Code § 62.3 7 | Yes; Appraiser disclosure 30 | Warranty match required 30 | Service contract inclusion 2025 7 | Disclosure of right to choose is vital 30 | | Rhode Island | Optional | RI Gen. Laws § 31-47-12.1 14 | Yes; Boldface notice 28 | Consent required (30 months) 34 | No specific ADAS law 9 | High level of consumer protection 28 | | South Carolina | Mandatory (All Glass) | SC Code § 38-77-280 11 | 2025 Bill 767 strengthens 16 | § 38-57-75 16 | Bill 767: Explicitly included 16 | Flag: 2025 bill bans TPA intimidation 16 | | South Dakota | Optional | SD Codified Laws § 58 14 | General 14 | LKQ standard 14 | No specific ADAS law 9 | Standard comprehensive rules 14 | | Tennessee | Optional | TN Code § 56-7-11 14 | General 14 | LKQ standard 14 | Rep. Harshbarger federal lead 9 | Focus on federal ADAS legislation 9 | | Texas | Optional | TX Ins. Code § 1952.1 13 | Yes; § 1952.301 30 | LKQ standard 14 | Inspection repeal 2025 impact 9 | Divergence: ADAS safety gap post-2025 9 | | Utah | Optional | UT Code § 31A-22-316 4 | Yes; Templeted ADAS law 8 | HB 119: Disclosure required 20 | Policies cover 100% cost 4 | Flag: 2026 HB 119 rule-making authority 20 | | Vermont | Optional | VT Stat. tit. 8 § 4203 14 | 2023 study active 53 | Aftermarket study pending 53 | Bill to eliminate glass ded. 3 | Review of insurer fairness active 53 | | Virginia | Optional | VA Code § 38.2-517 13 | Yes; Unconditional right 54 | Equivalent Fit/Finish 14 | No specific ADAS law 3 | Consumer choose refund vs repair 54 | | Washington | Optional | WA Rev. Code § 48.30.340 13 | Yes; SB 5054/HB 1141 7 | SB 5054: OEM spec notice 7 | SB 5054: Mandatory calibration 7 | 2026 Shift: Fair market price focus 7 | | West Virginia | Optional | WV Code § 33-6-33 14 | Yes; General 14 | Disclosure required 34 | No specific ADAS law 9 | Standard comprehensive rules 14 | | Wisconsin | Optional | WI Stat. § 632.32 14 | 2025 R2R bill introduced 27 | Airbag focus (counterfeit) 43 | No specific ADAS law 9 | 50th state to intro R2R bill 27 | | Wyoming | Optional | WY Stat. § 26 14 | Yes; § 26-13-124 14 | LKQ standard 14 | Service contract reform 2022 7 | Low volume; high transport costs 14 |

Regional Synthesis and Economic Implications

The 50-state data set reveals a significant geographic polarization in glass repair economics. The Southeast, led by Florida and South Carolina, has effectively decommodified the windshield, treating it as a standard safety utility like a highway guardrail.12 This has led to a high-volume, low-margin environment where independent shops must rely on efficient TPA processing or aggressive litigation over recalibration fees.16 In the Northeast, particularly in states like New York and Massachusetts, the regulatory focus has shifted from "free glass" to "documented safety".3 The 2026 laws in New York require such extensive disclosure that they effectively mandate a higher tier of professional certification for glass technicians, which is likely to consolidate the market into larger, more technologically capable facilities.3 The Western states, most notably Utah and Washington, are pioneering the "fair market rate" movement.4 By legislating that insurers pay for repairs that meet OEM specifications, regardless of whether the shop is in-network, these states are attempting to preserve the viability of independent shops in an era where the specialized equipment for ADAS calibration can cost upwards of $50,000.4

The Impact of Federal Intervention: REPAIR and ADAS Acts

While state laws remain primary, the 2025-2026 legislative sessions have been heavily influenced by federal activity. The REPAIR Act (H.R. 1566\) aims to provide a national framework for access to vehicle-generated data, which is essential for ADAS calibration.9 If enacted, it would override many state-level barriers to independent recalibration, potentially lowering costs across the board by increasing competition.9 Conversely, the ADAS Functionality and Integrity Act focuses on standardized calibration guidelines.8 This would move the industry away from "manufacturer-controlled" data toward a publicly available database of tolerances and sensor sensitivity.8 For insurers, this federal standardization would simplify the claims process by providing a clear benchmark for what constitutes a "necessary" calibration expense, potentially reducing the frequency of bad-faith litigation.9

Economic Outlook and Divergence Flags

A recurring theme in 2026 is the divergence between "paper law" and "street practice." In states like Texas and Florida, where the law ostensibly protects consumers, the reality of insurer-driven pricing often limits the availability of high-quality OEM glass and certified recalibration.9

Flag: Texas ADAS Safety Gap: Following the 2025 repeal of safety inspections, shops report that insurers are increasingly denying recalibration claims, arguing they are not "safety-required" because the state no longer inspects them.9

Flag: Florida AOB Litigation: While Florida is a zero-deductible state, the 2023-2024 restrictions on Assignment of Benefits (AOB) have made it significantly harder for small shops to challenge insurer underpayments for ADAS work.7

Flag: Washington Market Rate Conflict: Despite 2026 bills pushing for fair market rates, TPAs are still applying nationwide labor averages that fail to account for the high cost of living and technical training in the Seattle metro area.7

The total cost of a windshield replacement in 2026 reflects these pressures. For a modern vehicle, the average claim is now $1,000+, with $300-$500 representing the glass and $500-$700 representing ADAS recalibration and specialized labor.1 For consumers in states without zero-deductible mandates, the decision to file a claim is no longer automatic, as the $500 deductible often eats up half the value of the repair, leading to a rise in "out-of-pocket" cash deals that may skip the critical recalibration step.1

Conclusion: A Shift Toward Technical Governance

The analysis of 50-state safety glass laws demonstrates that the industry has moved beyond simple property damage. The legal framework is now a form of technical governance, where statutes like New York’s A6943B and Utah’s template law dictate not just who pays, but how the work must be performed to ensure public safety.3 As vehicles become more complex and sensors become more deeply embedded in the glass, the role of the state insurance commissioner will increasingly overlap with the role of the automotive engineer, ensuring that insurance policies evolve to cover the true cost of modern safety.

Works cited

Should I Use Insurance to Replace My Windshield? (2026) \- ConsumerShield, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.consumershield.com/insurance/car-insurance/replace-windshield

2025 Auto Glass Standards: What Every Driver Should Know — Long Horn Autoglass, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.longhornautoglassmobileservice.com/blogs-1/2025-auto-glass-standards-what-every-driver-should-know

New Auto Glass Laws Are Changing How Windshield Replacements Work, accessed March 21, 2026, https://aceglassva.com/new-auto-glass-laws-are-changing-how-windshield-replacements-work/

Why Does My Insurance Require ADAS Calibration After Windshield Replacement in Utah?, accessed March 21, 2026, https://primeautoglassutah.com/why-does-my-insurance-require-adas-calibration-after-windshield-replacement-in-utah/

Does Auto Insurance Cover ADAS Calibration After Windshield Replacement?, accessed March 21, 2026, https://blog.glass.net/glass-quotes/adas-calibration-insurance-coverage/

When is ADAS Calibration Necessary? \- Windshield Surgeons Auto Glass, accessed March 21, 2026, https://windshieldsurgeons.com/when-is-adas-calibration-necessary/

Legislative Items \- AGSC, accessed March 21, 2026, https://agsc.org/member-legislative-items/

Calibrating for ADAS: NY law addresses post-repair recalibrations, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.collisionrepairmag.com/technology/adas/article/15775090/calibrating-for-adas-ny-state-law-requires-postrepair-recalibrations

ADAS Calibration Regulations: What Shops Should Know in 2026 ..., accessed March 21, 2026, https://adasdepot.com/blog/adas-calibration-regulations-what-shops-should-know-in-2026/

REPAIR Act and State Laws: What automotive OEMs must prepare for \- Grape Up, accessed March 21, 2026, https://grapeup.com/blog/repair-act-and-state-laws-what-automotive-oems-must-prepare-for/

Which states offer free windshield replacements? \- Progressive, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.progressive.com/answers/free-windshield-replacement-states/

Not So Simple: The Real Rules Behind “Zero-Deductible” States ..., accessed March 21, 2026, https://glassbytes.com/2026/03/not-so-simple-the-real-rules-behind-zero-deductible-states/

Zero-Deductible Glass Coverage: Which States Offer It and How to Qualify, accessed March 21, 2026, https://blog.glass.net/glass-quotes/zero-deductible-glass-coverage-which-states-offer-it-and-how-to-qualify/

Does Car Insurance Cover Windshield Replacement? State-by-State Breakdown, accessed March 21, 2026, https://blog.glass.net/glass-quotes/does-car-insurance-cover-windshield-replacement/

Which States Have Zero Deductible for Auto Glass? \- Policygenius, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.policygenius.com/auto-insurance/which-states-have-zero-deductible-for-auto-glass/

This Bill \- South Carolina Legislature, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.scstatehouse.gov/sess126\_2025-2026/bills/767.docx

Your Right to Choose: Florida Law and Car Glass (and other) Repairs, accessed March 21, 2026, https://ameriproautoglass.com/florida-insurance-law-your-right-to-choose/

Can An Insurance Company Force You to Use Its Body Shop? \- Gervelis Law Firm, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.gervelislaw.com/blog/insurance-company-body-shop-requirement/

Know your repair rights: NC Insurance Commissioner warns against insurer steering, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.wral.com/consumer/5onyourside/nc-insurance-commissioner-warns-against-insurer-steering-june-2025/

Utah House considers auto insurance bill expanding coverage and part use rules, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.insurancebusinessmag.com/us/news/risk-compliance-legal/utah-house-considers-auto-insurance-bill-expanding-coverage-and-part-use-rules-560950.aspx

Collision Repair: How to Choose a Body Shop After an Accident | WheelPrice, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.wheelprice.com/resources/service-guides/collision-repair-guide

Can You Choose the Repair Shop for a Car Insurance Claim? \- Experian, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.experian.com/blogs/ask-experian/can-you-choose-repair-shop-for-insurance-claim/

The 2025 Florida Statutes \- Online Sunshine, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App\_mode=Display\_Statute\&URL=0600-0699/0627/Sections/0627.7288.html

Navigating Windshield Replacement Costs and Laws in Florida \- Audi Orange Park, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.audiorangepark.com/navigating-windshield-replacement-costs-and-laws-in-florida.htm

Cheap Collision Shops Near Me: Smart 2025 Repair Guide \- Recharged, accessed March 21, 2026, https://recharged.com/articles/cheap-collision-shops-near-me

Florida Windshield Replacement Law | Ged Lawyers, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.gedlawyers.com/faqs/florida-windshield-replacement-law/

Auto Care Association State Government Affairs Update: Feb. 27, 2025, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.autocare.org/detail-pages/blog/aina/2025/03/03/auto-care-association-state-government-affairs-update-feb.-27-2025

General Laws of Rhode Island Section 31-47-12.1. (2025) \- Right to choose auto body repair facility., accessed March 21, 2026, https://law.justia.com/codes/rhode-island/title-31/chapter-31-47/section-31-47-12-1/

Connecticut General Statutes Title 38A. Insurance § 38a-354 \- FindLaw, accessed March 21, 2026, https://codes.findlaw.com/ct/title-38a-insurance/ct-gen-st-sect-38a-354/

State Collision Repair Laws and Regulations, accessed March 21, 2026, https://scrs.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/statecollisionrepairlaws-crash-parts-steering.pdf

Insurance won't pay for certified repair work \- Reddit, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.reddit.com/r/Insurance/comments/1nvlhpx/insurance\_wont\_pay\_for\_certified\_repair\_work/

Where Do I Take My Car After an Accident? \- Bressman Law, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.bressmanlaw.com/car-accidents/where-do-i-take-my-car-after-an-accident/

What States Have No Deductible for Windshield Replacement? \- Broadway Auto Glass San Diego, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.broadway-autoglass.com/post/states-have-no-deductible-for-windshield-replacement

OEM vs. Aftermarket Parts: What Your Car Insurance Really Covers, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.insure.com/car-insurance/oem-parts-rights.html

OH HB636 \- BillTrack50, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.billtrack50.com/billdetail/1919496

HB2472 | Illinois 2025-2026 | INS-COLLISION REPAIR PROCEDURE \- PolicyEngage, accessed March 21, 2026, https://trackbill.com/bill/illinois-house-bill-2472-ins-collision-repair-procedure/2643181/

New National Poll Shows Overwhelming Bipartisan Support for Vehicle Right to Repair, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.autobpa.com/2026/03/16/new-national-poll-shows-overwhelming-bipartisan-support-for-vehicle-right-to-repair/

Right to Repair in 2026: Where Laws, Courts, and Automakers Stand \- Autobody News, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.autobodynews.com/news/right-to-repair-in-2026-where-laws-courts-and-automakers-stand

February 19, 2026 The Honorable Gus Bilirakis Chairman Subcommittee on Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade U.S. House of Represe, accessed March 21, 2026, https://docs.house.gov/meetings/IF/IF17/20260113/118816/HHRG-119-IF17-Wstate-HanveyB-20260113.pdf

(PDF) A NEW PARADIGM FOR AUTOMOTIVE OEMS IN THE RIGHT TO REPAIR ERA: TRANSFORMING REGULATORY COMPLIANCE INTO COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE WITH AI AND STRATEGIC COMPLEMENTARITY \- ResearchGate, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/397013028\_A\_NEW\_PARADIGM\_FOR\_AUTOMOTIVE\_OEMS\_IN\_THE\_RIGHT\_TO\_REPAIR\_ERA\_TRANSFORMING\_REGULATORY\_COMPLIANCE\_INTO\_COMPETITIVE\_ADVANTAGE\_WITH\_AI\_AND\_STRATEGIC\_COMPLEMENTARITY

Claims Disclosures | Safeco Insurance, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.safeco.com/claims/faq-claims/state-disclosures

California-2025-SB988-Introduced \- LegiScan, accessed March 21, 2026, https://legiscan.com/CA/text/SB988/id/3350904/California-2025-SB988-Introduced.html

New California laws on tap that impact auto repair \- Aftermarket ..., accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.aftermarketmatters.com/regions/northern-california/new-california-laws-on-tap-that-impact-auto-repair/

ARSC News \- Fall 2025 Legislation and regulations update, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.bar.ca.gov/arsc/newsletters/newsletter/fall-2025/legislation-and-regulations-update

Write It Right: Documentation and authorization requirements for automotive repair dealers, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.bar.ca.gov/wir

REPORT OF THE AUTO BODY LABOR RATE ADVISORY BOARD \- Massachusetts Legislature, accessed March 21, 2026, https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/SD3547.pdf

Sec. 72A.201 MN Statutes, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/72a.201

March 2026 West Edition \- Calaméo, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.calameo.com/books/00789728720add2e6bfda

March 2026 Midwest Edition \- Calaméo, accessed March 21, 2026, https://www.calameo.com/books/0078972874f16d3a3c3d5

Sierra Mobile Glass | California Office of the Small Business Advocate (CalOSBA) \- CA.gov, accessed March 21, 2026, https://calosba.ca.gov/sierra-mobile-glass/

New York Anti-Steering Legislation Would Exempt Auto Glass Companies \- AGSC, accessed March 21, 2026, https://agsc.org/new-york-anti-steering-legislation-would-exempt-auto-glass-companies/

RTF \- Utah Legislature, accessed March 21, 2026, https://le.utah.gov/xcode/Title31A/Chapter22/C31A-22\_1800010118000101.rtf

Act No. 32 (2023) STUDY; AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE; LABOR RATES; USE OF AFTERMARKET PARTS; BUSINESS PRACTICES December 31, 2025 \- Vermont General Assembly, accessed March 21, 2026, https://legislature.vermont.gov/assets/Legislative-Reports/DFR-Act-32-of-2023-Section-12a-Report.pdf

§ 59.1-207.13. Nonconformity of motor vehicles \- Virginia Law, accessed March 21, 2026, https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title59.1/chapter17.3/section59.1-207.13/