Skip to content
ROAT — Regulation of Automated TransportROAT — Regulation of Automated Transport

Regulatory map › Germany

ROAT-JUR-DE · profil countries

Germany

Conditions for testing and operating automated vehicles, competent authorities and sources.

Download country profile (PDF, Slovak) ↓How to cite this profile ↓

Scenarios, comparisons and related material

Data coverage and review limits →

Explain legal roles in the glossary →

Practical scenario: test drive with a driver →

What changed? Country overview →

Selected sources checked: · Working research overview · targeted review of provisions

Scope: Autonomous vehicle in an approved area

Compared with the original snapshot, the alternative of European type approval in the current § 1e(1), point 2, is clarified. Permanent supervision during testing remains distinct from ordinary autonomous operation. The relationship between the current StVG and AFGBV procedural requirements must be resolved for an individual application; this comparison does not treat it as settled.

Roles in this country

The glossary explains each term’s tasks, legal status and sources.

Who authorises test drives?

The Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt (KBA) issues a testing permit on application by the vehicle keeper (Halter). The vehicle must be registered and used exclusively for testing; AFGBV § 16 specifies further conditions.

What enables driverless operation?

§ 1e requires an eligible technical approval, an approved operating area and vehicle registration. Type approval under (EU) 2022/1426 is a technical alternative; a German Betriebserlaubnis is therefore not always an additional cumulative permit.

The area is approved by the competent authority under federal or Land law; for relevant federal roads, the Act identifies a particular infrastructure management company.

Who bears operational duties?

The Halter ensures safety, maintenance and performance of technical supervision tasks. Manufacturers have separate duties concerning risks, cybersecurity, documentation and training.

What is the human role?

During ordinary autonomous operation, the technical supervisor evaluates and authorises specified alternative manoeuvres, deactivates the system and addresses the safe state. The Act does not require continuous monitoring of driving. Testing follows a different regime: permanent supervision by a driver or an on-site Technische Aufsicht.

What safety evidence is needed?

Safe performance of driving and risk management must be demonstrated; the area must have appropriate suitability, infrastructure and staffing. For testing, AFGBV requires a development concept, a description of changes, supervision and the ability to deactivate and intervene on site.

What is known about damage, insurance and offences?

The starting point for compensation arising from vehicle operation is Halter liability under § 7 StVG. The technical supervisor’s operational duties must not be confused with automatically assuming all liability for an accident.

Exceptions, other persons’ liability, insurance and recourse have not been fully examined.

What conditions and open issues remain?

An approved operating area remains a separate condition. An AFGBV testing permit generally lasts up to four years, with extension possible if conditions are met.

The practical application of older AFGBV §§ 8–9 references to Betriebserlaubnis alongside the new European alternative in § 1e StVG must be resolved, and authorisation for the specific transport service checked.

Compare with another country

The same seven questions, with answers side by side.

Sources and review scope

StVG § 1i — Erprobung

Consolidated text retrieved on 7 September 2026; KBA permit and supervision during testing.

Open official source ↗

AFGBV — approval, operation and testing

§§ 7–9, 14 and 16 checked in the consolidated text on 7 September 2026. The links in §§ 8–9 to a domestic Betriebserlaubnis must be read alongside the newer § 1e StVG.

Open official source ↗

StVG § 1e — Betrieb von Kraftfahrzeugen mit autonomer Fahrfunktion

Consolidated text retrieved on 7 September 2026. Paragraph 1, point 2 expressly includes type approval under (EU) 2022/1426 as an alternative.

Open official source ↗

StVG § 1f — duties of the keeper, technical supervisor and manufacturer

Full provision retrieved from the official portal on 7 September 2026.

Open official source ↗

StVG § 7 — Haftung des Halters

Consolidated § 7 retrieved on 7 September 2026; the basis of Halter liability, not a full audit of exceptions and recourse.

Open official source ↗

Related ROAT records: ROAT-2026-0329 · ROAT-2026-0330 · ROAT-2026-0170

How to cite this profile

ROAT. Germany — country profile. ROAT Observatory. Working research overview; targeted source review on 7 September 2026. https://roat.sk/en/jurisdictions/germany/.

Add the access date. Web profiles may change; save the PDF as well to preserve the material used. When making a claim about the law, cite the legislation and provision identified in the answer.

The practical answers use the same evidence as the country comparison. Earlier research material with its own dates is retained below.

Earlier research material and ROAT records

Jurisdictions › Germany

ROAT-JUR-DE

Germany

Last verified 2026-09-05 (JA)Authorities Kraftfahrt-Bundesamt (KBA) · Competent Land road authorities

Germany most clearly converts a technical operational design domain into a public-law deployment object: lawful autonomous operation is bounded by an authority-approved defined operating area, with the keeper, the manufacturer and the technical supervision as separately allocated actors, and explicit lifecycle control over post-permit changes.

StVG §§ 1d–1g and AFGBV in force.

In Module 02 · snapshot 2026-09-07 review snapshot

Post-type-approval deployment models

RegimeDeployment gateRemote human roleDominant deployment modelLegal statusConfidence
Germany – current lawVehicle operating permit + authority approval of defined operating area + registration before autonomous road useTechnische Aufsicht – may deactivate and release specified manoeuvres; not ordinary continuous remote drivingOperating-area + technical-supervision modelIn forceHigh

Germany – current law

Regulatory object
Autonomous vehicle + approved defined operating area + keeper + technical supervision
Technical approval baseline
EU/UNECE technical baseline plus German autonomous-vehicle operating permit under StVG/AFGBV
Additional deployment / road-use gate
Vehicle operating permit + authority approval of defined operating area + registration before autonomous road use
ODD / operating-area legalisation
ODD is translated into a geographically defined and authority-approved 'festgelegter Betriebsbereich'
Competent authority / decision maker
KBA / competent road authority depending on decision layer
Primary accountable organisational actor
Halter (vehicle keeper), with manufacturer duties and Technische Aufsicht functions separately allocated
Remote human role
Technische Aufsicht – may deactivate and release specified manoeuvres; not ordinary continuous remote driving
DDT / fallback allocation
ADS performs DDT; system must comply with road rules and achieve minimum-risk condition where necessary
Traffic-offence allocation
Dedicated AV behavioural architecture; legal duties are distributed among ADS framework, keeper and supervisor rather than simply retained by an onboard driver
Civil liability / insurance
General StVG keeper-liability / insurance architecture remains central; not wholly replaced by AV-specific civil liability
Data / logging
Statutory event/data duties; AFGBV data-storage requirements
Post-market / in-use oversight
KBA/authority market surveillance and permit supervision
Material change / software update
AFGBV § 4(5) expressly requires KBA approval before post-permit changes to an autonomous vehicle are used; § 6 allows withdrawal/suspension of the vehicle operating permit where approval conditions cease to be met.
Retesting / revalidation
Explicit lifecycle control: KBA approval for vehicle changes; suspension/withdrawal pending clarification under § 6; operating-area approval can be suspended/withdrawn under § 10 when safety assumptions or infrastructure conditions cease to hold.
Commercial service pathway
Possible within approved operating area and applicable transport/service law
Dominant deployment model
Operating-area + technical-supervision model
Legal status
In force
Primary-source anchor
StVG §§ 1d–1g; AFGBV §§ 4, 7–11, 13–14
Primary current-law rationale
Germany most clearly converts a technical ODD into a public-law deployment object: lawful autonomous operation is geographically bounded by an approved operating area.
Confidence
High

Sources

Public Library records for Germany

German Road Traffic Act (StVG) § 1a – Motor vehicles with an automated driving function (Straßenverkehrsgesetz § 1a)
German Road Traffic Act (StVG) §§ 1d–1g – Motor vehicles with autonomous driving function in defined operating areas (Straßenverkehrsgesetz §§ 1d–1g)
Ordinance on the approval and operation of motor vehicles with autonomous driving function in defined operating areas, AFGBV (Verordnung zur Genehmigung und zum Betrieb von Kraftfahrzeugen mit autonomer Fahrfunktion in festgelegten Betriebsbereichen)
Technical Report of the Working Group “Research Needs in Teleoperation” (BASt F 166b)
Germany — Straßenverkehr-Fernlenk-Verordnung (StVFernLV)