appConfigEntityId

bodyType

customContents

entityId

entityUuid

isVideo

articlePageQuery

article

articleSchemaContent

content

hooksArticlePageAdvertisementConfigArticle

hooksArticlePageFloatingButtonConfigArticle

appConfig

filter

json

liveArticle

Mike Rowse

Hong Kong should not limit the number of vehicles licensed to provide ride-hailing services. In particular, every owner of an electric vehicle that complies with the regulations should, in principle, be able to obtain one on demand by paying the required fee.
Normal market forces, together with fees and other licensing requirements, will be sufficient to strike the right balance.
I have used ride-hailing services a lot recently. Knee replacement surgery has restricted my mobility, and I have a greater need for reliable point-to-point transport. I think that makes me as qualified as anyone else to comment on the government’s latest set of proposals for regulating ride-hailing services.
My experience has been instructive. The booked vehicle invariably arrives on time. It’s usually modern, clean and odourless. The driver has generally been younger and very polite with a good command of English.
I still use normal taxis where suitable. The drivers have generally been older; most vehicles have seen better days. In fairness, there are now some modern taxis and some younger drivers – welcome changes, for sure. When it comes to courtesy, the ability to use modern technology for navigation and English skills, it’s case by case. Some urban taxi drivers are still reluctant to cross Victoria Harbour but, overall, it could be said that the taxi service has improved in recent years.
The Transport Bureau circulated a discussion paper last week for consideration at a special meeting of the Legislative Council’s transport panel. It outlines the government’s views on regulating ride-hailing services following the enabling legislation last October.

The document said taxis have a 78 per cent share of the personalised point-to-point market, and ride-hailing vehicles have the balance of 22 per cent. There are an estimated 114,000 ride-hailing trips per day.
These figures are remarkable, bearing in mind that the various platforms offering these services have been operating in a legal grey area due to administrative caution. Public demand for a better service and a determination to secure it have given rise to an alternative.
The key findings in respect of ride-hailing drivers were that between 60 and 70 per cent worked less than 20 hours per week. Some 20 per cent worked between 20 and 40 hours a week, and only 10 to 15 per cent on a full-time basis.
Most of the ideas set out in the Legco paper seem sensible. Ride-hailing platforms must register and meet various requirements. They will be given renewable licences valid for five years. There is no reason to think the four existing operators – Uber, Tada, Amap and Didi Chuxing – would not qualify.

The only caveat is the requirement to give extraordinary amounts of detailed operating information to the Transport Department on a continuous basis, in addition to basic data on drivers and vehicles. This includes the number of bookings received, completed or cancelled, as well as fares charged and a record of complaints.
Ride-hailing vehicles will require a separate permit. The vehicle must be less than 12 years old when registered and will need an annual inspection. There seems to be no requirement for them to be electric vehicles; an unfortunate omission. Drivers will have to pass a special test to be licensed.
The whole emphasis of the conditions is to bring them into line with those applicable to licensed taxis. On the surface, this seems fair and is no doubt designed to deflect complaints from the taxi trade. There is also a suggestion to ensure new licences are used and not left idle, which seems a rather odd concern.
The paper stresses that the taxi service and ride-hailing are complementary and should coexist. The objective should be to provide a people-oriented safe regime.
The most controversial issue in the paper is whether there should be control of the total size of the ride-hailing fleet, to prevent vicious competition and minimise congestion. The paper says there should be a limit, but did not set one. As might be expected, different industry figures have suggested widely varying figures.


Uber has said its existing workforce includes 30,000 active drivers, and a quota less than that could result in higher fares and a reduced service. One lawmaker has suggested that, mathematically, 15,000 licences would be required just to maintain the existing level of service. A former lawmaker proposed a higher cap of 20,500. Taxi interests have said that even 10,000 is too many.
I fear the administration will buckle in the face of opposition from the taxi trade and set a number too low to preserve existing service standards. The excuse will be that by setting a low figure at first, officials can monitor the situation and adjust it later if necessary. But why set a limit at all? Getting the necessary licences for the vehicles and drivers takes time and costs money. Taking into account the pattern of hours worked, only those satisfied that they can cover the costs will seek to qualify. We should let them.
To protect taxi drivers’ incomes, it would be better to encourage the whole fleet (some 18,000) to register with the technology platforms.


14 key takeaways from John Lee’s policy address, Hong Kong’s first 5-year plan

Hong Kong’s first five-year plan seeks to boost innovation

Top Chinese official leads 87-member committee for Tung Chee-hwa state funeral

Hong Kong’s first 5-year plan to set goals, not alter economic system: John Lee

Hong Kong politics

Why set a limit for Hong Kong’s ride-hailing services?

Taxis and other vehicles are seen on Harcourt Road in Central on September 5, 2025. Photo: Jelly Tse

Online ride-hailing service apps are seen on a mobile phone as a local taxi drives past in Tsim Sha Tsui on August 29, 2025. Photo: Jelly Tse

A driver in a car offering ride-hailing services on September 5, 2025. Photo: Elson Li

Ride-hailing regulation must keep customers and operators in mind

An Uber taxi in Wong Tai Sin in 2025. Photo: Edmond So

Hong Kong authorities to set cap on ride-hailing vehicles ahead of Legco break

Hong Kong authorities should issue about 20,500 licences in the first phase of regulating ride-hailing platforms, lawmakers and experts have said. Photo: Dickson Lee

The Transport and Logistics Bureau is expected to roll out a legal framework to govern operators such as Tada and Uber. Photo: May Tse

What Hong Kong’s planned ride-hailing regime could mean for your next Uber trip

Hong Kong authorities have begun laying out details on how they plan to regulate ride-hailing platforms such as Uber, Tada and Didi Chuxing. Photo: Elson Li

Platforms will need to keep records covering driver and vehicle information, booking numbers, cancellations, passenger waiting times, fares and complaints. Photo: Karma Lo

Uber Hong Kong warns proposed permit cap risks triggering 70% rise in fares

Uber also warned that the cap could result in 40 per cent of peak-hour bookings being unsuccessful. Photo: Karma Lo

The Transport and Logistics Bureau earlier revealed a regulatory framework to govern ride-hailing platforms such as Uber, Didi Chuxing, and Amap. Photo: Jelly Tse

Opinion

Hong Kong Opinion

News

World

Hong Kong

Politics

Hong Kong Economy

Transport

The administration’s views on how to best regulate ride-hailing are mostly sound, with one glaring exception


The administration’s views on how to best regulate ride-hailing are mostly sound, with one glaring exception.


Hong Kong transport

Uber

Didi Chuxing

Hong Kong taxis

Regulation

Transport and logistics

Hong Kong economy

Expresses the views, ideas and conclusions of the author. (Eg. Enough of Crazy Rich Asians, think of crazy poor Hongkongers.)


Why set a limit for Hong Kong’s ride-hailing services?

.css-1c6uqr6{color:inherit;font-weight:inherit;font-size:inherit;font-family:inherit;line-height:inherit;overflow-wrap:break-word;}The administration’s views on how to best regulate ride-hailing are mostly sound, with one glaring exception

The administration’s views on how to best regulate ride-hailing are mostly sound, with one glaring exception