Today we do not have detailed figures on the heavy-vehicle fleet by federal entity. The figures that exist for federally plated units are not enough to make decisions state by state. This is the gap, and it is not a small one. Without it, any renewal, scrappage or road safety policy is designed around national averages that may not reflect what happens in each state.
When we speak of the fleet’s average age, we cite figures for federally plated units, which hover around 19 years. For state-plated units we only have estimates. Estimating is not the same as measuring, and in a public discussion about investment, that difference matters.
Why does it matter?
Three decisions depend directly on this figure. The first is renewal: without age and class by state, we do not know where to concentrate incentives or how many eligible units there are on each corridor. The second is scrappage: sizing withdrawals, targets and center capacity requires knowing how many units leave each state. Any scrappage program, including one under discussion for state-plated units, needs a baseline. The third is road safety and air quality: measuring exposure to risk and emissions requires crossing age and technology with the states where the units operate.
The Assumption We Cannot Yet Verify
There is a hypothesis that the state-plated fleet is older than the federal one. It is a reasonable one, but we have no figure that supports it. State-plated units could be recent and used on local routes, while the aging fleet is concentrated in long-distance federal operations. Both scenarios lead to different policies, and today we cannot tell which one reflects reality.
How can we obtain the information?
I identify two avenues; they are not the only ones. The first is the states. Each federal entity controls its registered units through its mobility and finance secretariats and its vehicle control offices. What is missing is an agreement to share those records in aggregate form.
The second is the Public Vehicle Registry (REPUVE, Registro Público Vehicular), a system created by the Federal Government that registers motor vehicles with Mexican plates circulating in the country. Its coverage by class and plate type must be verified with the authority before it can be considered a reliable source.
The Data That Matters Most: The Unit’s Status
Counting units is not enough. A registered unit may be operating, decommissioned, circulating with a temporary permit, without plates, in custody, or out of the country. A registry that does not distinguish these statuses overstates the active fleet and, with it, the useful age we actually have. In October 2025, SICT authorized federal trucks and buses without plates to circulate under a 180-day temporary permit. Those units may be circulating, and they probably do not appear clearly in the figures we use today. Status is therefore an essential part of the database, not a technical detail.
What data do we need, at a minimum?
Before requesting any figure, we should set a minimum base for each federal entity. The following list is a starting point, not a ceiling; at least these fields should be available:
- Vehicle class, separating cargo trucks over 3.8 tonnes gross vehicle weight, tractor units, and buses.
- Model year, to calculate age.
- Plate type: federal, state, or no plates.
- Use: cargo or passenger, and public or private service.
- Operating status: active with federal plates, active with state plates, with temporary permit, without plates, decommissioned with scrappage evidence, decommissioned without evidence, and exported.
- Engine technology, when the registry contains it.
- Fuel or energy source.
- Registration and deregistration dates, to measure fleet turnover.
Objections We Must Answer
A registry is not the same as a unit in operation, which is why status must accompany every figure. Personal data must also stay out. A nominal list of owners should neither be requested nor published; aggregate figures by state, class, year and status allow analysis without exposing anyone.
It is important to define the use of this information from the start: public policy design, explicit rules, and publication of aggregates only. Answering with open data is the best defense of our credibility.
Conclusion
Today we do not have detailed figures for the heavy segment by class, age and status in each state, and that limits what we can propose with credibility. The way forward is not to wait for a national registry, but to request the data from each state, use the administrative records of each entity and of REPUVE under the applicable confidentiality rules, and measure the status of each unit. With a first preliminary estimate, we will stop saying “it is estimated” and start saying how much.
Source: mexicobusiness.news
