'Defeat Devices' and a $25 Billion Bill: The Volkswagen Dieselgate Settlement

Volkswagen AG agreed to a combined settlement worth roughly $14.7 billion in the United States, announced June 28, 2016, resolving civil claims brought by the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission, California regulators, and private vehicle owners over the company's use of illegal "defeat device" software installed in nearly 500,000 diesel vehicles specifically designed to cheat emissions testing.DOCUMENTED

Volkswagen separately pleaded guilty to criminal charges in March 2017 and agreed to pay an additional $4.3 billion in criminal and civil penalties to resolve Department of Justice and EPA claims, bringing the company's total U.S. financial exposure from the scandal to well over $20 billion once additional settlements covering 3.0-liter engine vehicles and state-level claims are included.DOCUMENTED

How the defeat device worked

The scandal, which became public in September 2015 after the EPA issued a notice of violation, centered on software Volkswagen engineers built into the engine control units of nearly 500,000 diesel vehicles sold in the United States between 2009 and 2015. The software was capable of detecting the specific conditions present during official laboratory emissions testing — including steering wheel position, vehicle speed patterns, and other test-specific signals — and would activate full emissions controls only under those detected test conditions.DOCUMENTED

During ordinary on-road driving, when the software determined the vehicle was not being tested, the emissions controls were scaled back, allowing the vehicles to emit nitrogen oxide pollutants at levels the EPA found could reach up to 40 times the legally permitted limit under the Clean Air Act, while still delivering the fuel economy and performance characteristics Volkswagen had marketed the vehicles around.DOCUMENTED

The scale of the deception

What began as an investigation into roughly 482,000 vehicles with 2.0-liter engines expanded considerably once Volkswagen subsequently admitted to installing similar defeat device software in an additional approximately 85,000 vehicles equipped with larger 3.0-liter diesel engines, sold under both the Volkswagen and Audi brands, ultimately implicating close to 600,000 vehicles in the United States and roughly 11 million vehicles worldwide.DOCUMENTED

The 2016 civil settlement

The initial civil settlement, reached with the EPA, the Department of Justice, the FTC, the California Air Resources Board, and private plaintiffs' counsel representing affected vehicle owners, required Volkswagen to offer affected owners either a buyback of their vehicle at its pre-scandal value or an approved emissions modification, along with cash compensation, at a total settlement value of approximately $14.7 billion. A portion of the settlement, roughly $2.7 billion, was directed toward an environmental mitigation trust intended to fund projects reducing nitrogen oxide pollution in the areas where the excess emissions had occurred, with an additional $2 billion allocated to promote zero-emission vehicle infrastructure and adoption in the United States.DOCUMENTED

Criminal charges and a guilty plea

Beyond the civil settlement, Volkswagen faced separate criminal exposure. The company pleaded guilty in March 2017 to three felony counts, including conspiracy to defraud the United States, obstruction of justice, and violating the Clean Air Act's prohibition on importing vehicles through false statements, agreeing to pay a $2.8 billion criminal fine as part of that plea, on top of a separate $1.5 billion civil penalty resolving related claims with the EPA and Customs and Border Protection.DOCUMENTED

The Justice Department separately indicted six Volkswagen executives and employees on criminal charges related to the scheme, including former CEO Martin Winterkorn, who was charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States and other offenses. Winterkorn has remained in Germany throughout the proceedings; because Germany's constitution generally prohibits extraditing its own citizens to face criminal charges abroad, he has not faced trial in the United States, though a separate criminal case against him proceeded in Germany.DOCUMENTED

A watershed moment for automotive regulation

The Volkswagen case remains among the largest corporate fraud settlements in history and reshaped how regulators worldwide approach vehicle emissions testing, prompting several countries to adopt more rigorous real-world driving emissions tests specifically designed to catch defeat-device-style software that could otherwise evade traditional laboratory testing protocols. Then-EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy described the scandal at the time as reflecting a level of corporate deception that went beyond an ordinary regulatory violation, given that the defeat device software's entire purpose was to defeat the very testing process meant to verify legal compliance.REVIEWED

The scandal's ripple effects extended well beyond Volkswagen's own balance sheet, prompting a broader industry reckoning over diesel emissions testing that touched other manufacturers as regulators worldwide began scrutinizing whether similar defeat-device software might be present in other companies' vehicles. Several other automakers faced their own, smaller-scale emissions-related investigations and settlements in the years following Dieselgate's exposure, though none approached the scale of Volkswagen's roughly $25 billion global reckoning once European penalties, buybacks, and remediation costs are added to the U.S. settlement figures.REVIEWED

The scandal also permanently altered consumer and investor perception of "clean diesel" technology as a viable, environmentally responsible alternative to gasoline or hybrid vehicles, contributing to a broader industry-wide pivot away from diesel passenger vehicles in the U.S. market and toward electric vehicle development in the years that followed Dieselgate's exposure.REVIEWED

Owners who accepted the buyback option under the settlement received compensation based on their vehicle's pre-scandal trade-in value plus an additional cash payment, a remedy structure that, unlike a simple recall and repair, directly acknowledged that the affected vehicles' underlying value had been misrepresented to consumers from the moment of purchase rather than merely requiring a technical fix after the fact.REVIEWED

Have documents relevant to this story? Reach us through our tips channel.