Copyright AgriMech

Farmers who buy a tractor should be able to decide for themselves who they want to have their tractor repaired by or whether they might want to do it themselves. This free choice promotes competition, the European Union believes, and farmers are reaping the benefits. Changing a headlight unit, a filter or changing engine oil is not a problem - anyone can do that, even without information from the manufacturer. But with a tractor software malfunction, it's a different story.

A little help on the way

CNH Benelux supplies diagnostic software to anyone who wants it. But the buyer does not have to count on much further support.

Diagnostic software

Importers reluctantly make diagnostic software available to brand-independent dealers.

To prevent a farmer from having to go to a (pricey) brand dealer for such maintenance jobs, the European Repair and Maintenance Information (RMI) legislation has applied to the European agricultural machinery world for a few years now. In short, it requires machine manufacturers to ensure that brand-independent dealers have easy, unlimited and standardized access to information on the repair and maintenance of these machines. The legislation does not allow discrimination against brand-independent dealers over brand dealers.

This legislation seems to be the answer to the lingering litigation that continues to this day in the United States (see box). But what are the consequences of the RMI legislation in the Netherlands? Have manufacturers and importers opened the doors wide, and do brand-independent dealers have easy access to diagnostic software, for example, as the legislation intends?

First, let's take a closer look at the legislation itself. It only applies to tractors introduced after June 2021, says Ivo Hostens, technical director of Cema, the interest group of the European mechanization sector. Moreover, tractor manufacturers are free to close off parts of the software to third parties. This has attempted to prevent tampering with tractors. After all, access to the tractor computer would make it easy to disable exhaust aftertreatment, for example, or to increase a tractor's top speed. This is not desirable from an environmental and road safety perspective.

Reluctance

A round of calls by LandbouwMechanisatie revealed that manufacturers and importers of major brands do not help 'third parties' or only do so reluctantly. For example, diagnostic software at most manufacturers and importers is only accessible to brand dealers. And you can't just become a brand dealer. All companies say they classify the dealer network as they see fit.

Trade association Cema is not happy with the legislation

CNH Benelux does report that the company sells diagnostic software to brand-independent dealers. "It is required by law," says Ivo Dupon, service and product support manager at CNH Benelux. But these customers don't have to count on much support. In addition, Dupon reports that CNH only provides software to third parties of tractor series that appeared on the European market after 2018.

A search on the Internet pages of major companies such as CNH, John Deere and Agco also yields disappointingly few results. If you find anything at all, the information is buried deep and therefore difficult to find. John Deere requests that you create an account - a process that quickly takes 20 minutes. Then the manufacturer deadpansely refers you to your local John Deere dealer.

John Deere and the right to repair

Farm machinery maker John Deere has been regularly in controversy in the United States in recent years over the right to repair the farm machinery the company builds. Farmers want to be able to repair, replace and modify tractors and machines - and thus electronics - themselves. However, they cannot do that without the right parts, software and manuals. The manufacturer wanted to make those available only to John Deere dealers and not to farmers. For that reason, a group of farmers from the state of Nebraska wrote a bill in 2020 seeking to enforce the right to tinker with their own machines. But that law did not come, and so the fight continued unabated.In 2022, John Deere was taken to court three times by different groups of farmers. They felt the equipment maker was promoting unfair competition by making diagnostic software and parts accessible only to branded dealers. John Deere disagrees. In the manufacturer's view, brand dealers can have the necessary diagnostic software and thus compete with each other. The company received support from advocacy group AEM (Association of Equipment Manufacturers). The AEM believes that opening up the electronics in particular to third parties could lead to safety and environmental damage.In January of this year, there was movement on the issue. John Deere signed an agreement with the American Farm Bureau Federation (AFBF), a trade association for farmers in the US. It states that anyone should be able to buy parts, manuals and diagnostic software from John Deere at a reasonable price. Yet the agreement does not go far enough for everyone. The manufacturer could void the agreement if it suits John Deere, says Walter Schweitzer, president of the Montana Farmers Union. Because AFBF promises in the agreement not to file lawsuits to enforce right-to-repair, he thinks John Deere is trying to avert legislation with the deal. "If John Deere really wants to give farmers and independent repair shops the right to repair machines, why are they so afraid of a law to regulate that?"

Both Agco and CNH ask for a VAT number before you can create an account. In short: it is not made easy for the searcher.

European interest group Cema is not happy with the RMI legislation, reports Jelte Wiersma, secretary general of Cema. This dissatisfaction, he says, is partly a result of the fact that the legislation was copied from the auto industry. After all, a car buyer cannot be compared to a farmer who has to earn a living with his tractor. Furthermore, Cema fears that the legislation will lead to higher prices for tractors and their maintenance.

The legislation also weakens the position of brand dealers, Cema believes. The advocacy group fears that they will only be called in for technically complex repairs. This will reduce their margins and force them to raise repair prices. That extra price will then end up on the farmer's plate, Wiersma warns.

His Cema colleague Hostens also points out that developing and maintaining diagnostic software and Web applications is expensive for manufacturers.

Vemo Tractors of Hoogeveen (Dr.) is a brand-independent trading company specializing in the trade and repair of used John Deere machines. "For reading and erasing fault codes, although aftermarket diagnostic software is available," explains Henry Veld of Vemo Tractors. "But those programs don't allow you to make changes to the tractor's software." And you have to if Vemo Tractors wants to mount a front PTO on a used tractor, for example, or connect a set of additional work lights. "The software has to accept that the tractor has a new function that you can control via the control terminal or via switches in the cab."

Because Vemo Tractors is a competitor of the Dutch John Deere brand dealers, asking for help is somewhat touchy, Veld points out. "Fortunately, I have a good relationship with the German brand dealers, so I work with them. Without the cooperation with those German colleagues, tinkering with tractors would become difficult."

Competition Law

In the United States, similar legislation has so far failed to regulate the right to repair. Still, American farmers also want to be able to tinker with their tractors themselves. Therefore, they are trying it through the Competition Act. Machinery manufacturer John Deere would put brand-independent mechanization companies at a disadvantage, according to farmers, by appointing its own brand dealers to repair tractors.

Horizontal relationships

Cyriel Ruels of Maverick Advocaten in Amsterdam (NH.) is a specialist in the field of European Competition Law. According to him, that law distinguishes two types of relationships: horizontal and vertical. Horizontal relationships are those between two companies that provide the same services, such as two mechanization companies or two machine manufacturers. According to the Competition Act, companies with horizontal relationships may not agree among themselves on price, area of operation or service provision. Ruels: "That would be cartelization."

Vertical relationships are relationships within a chain, such as those between a manufacturer (or importer) and its branded dealer. In this type of relationship, agreements are allowed as long as the machine brand's market share is at least lower than 30 percent, Ruels explains. In the Dutch agricultural mechanization world, no brand reaches that minimum percentage. As a result, manufacturers (or importers) are allowed to select dealers on both qualitative requirements (have mechanics followed the proper education and training) and qualitative requirements (the number of tractors a dealer must sell on an annual basis).

Truck maintenance costs are down

It is not only agricultural mechanization that is affected by the RMI legislation; truck manufacturers must also be open. For this industry, the legislation has been in place for 20 years. What impact has this legislation had? Jan-Willem van der Linden, data and digitalization specialist at the trade association for garage companies Bovag, acknowledges that truck manufacturers would also have preferred not to have seen the legislation and regulations. "But we can establish that trucks have not become proportionally more expensive after the introduction of the RMI legislation." In fact, the opposite is true. Vehicle maintenance has become cheaper because brand-independent dealers have since become more competitive with brand dealers. However, brand-independent companies often do not have all the knowledge in-house to solve complex problems, Van der Linden says. What is common is that these types of companies have started to cooperate with brand dealers in solving technically complex problems.

In the used car market, the European Commission assumes that each brand has a 100 percent market share. It follows that an importer may only impose qualitative requirements on a mechanization company. In other words, if mechanics have completed all required training and courses, then a manufacturer or importer must offer that mechanization company the same support as a brand dealer.

Cyriel Ruels

'The Competition Act distinguishes two types of relationships: horizontal and vertical.'

© The Content Exchange, source News