Insurance requirements are framed as common sense, but for e-bike riders they function as a financial gatekeeper. Unlike car owners, many riders chose e-bikes precisely because they could not afford recurring costs. Adding mandatory insurance shifts e-bikes from a low-barrier solution into a monthly liability. The policy doesn’t reduce risk; it redistributes access. Those with cash stay mobile, while everyone else is forced back into longer commutes or unemployment pressure.

RISK IS BEING MISLABELED

E-bikes operate at lower speeds and cause less damage than cars, yet are increasingly regulated as if they’re motor vehicles. This mismatch inflates premiums and justifies requirements that don’t reflect actual harm. The result is a pricing model built on fear, not data. When risk is exaggerated, compliance becomes impossible for the people who rely on e-bikes most. Policy then mistakes noncompliance for irresponsibility.

FIXED COSTS CRUSH FLEXIBLE WORK

Gig and hourly workers survive on variable income. Fixed monthly costs — insurance, registration, inspections — punish that variability. Miss one payment and access disappears. What’s sold as “responsibility” is really a stability tax imposed on unstable earners. The system rewards predictability while depending on flexible labor.

ENFORCEMENT FILLS THE GAP

When riders can’t afford compliance, enforcement steps in. Citations replace solutions, and fees replace safety investment. Cities quietly convert mobility into a revenue stream. Over time, this normalizes punishment instead of infrastructure. The street becomes a paywall.

THE HARD TRUTH

If the goal were safety, insurance would be optional, affordable, and scaled to real-world risk. Mandatory coverage without subsidies is exclusion by design. It doesn’t protect the poor — it removes them.