Spain’s Ministry of the Interior, through the Official State Gazette (BOE), published a new ministerial order in July 2025 amending the General Vehicle Regulations. The main objectives of this reform are to modernize the sector, decarbonize road freight transport, and improve the efficiency of the logistics chain, fulfilling a government mandate established in 2022.
One of the most significant measures is the increase in the maximum authorized mass for trucks with five or more axles, which rises from 40 to 44 tonnes. This limit can be extended to 46 tonnes for intermodal transport operations. Additionally, specific increases are established for the transport of round timber over short distances and for vehicles carrying indivisible longitudinal elements.
The regulations also greatly simplify the circulation of so-called “megatrucks” or European Modular Transports (EMTs). The requirement for prior authorization for their circulation is eliminated, their legal limits are expanded to 72 tonnes and 32 meters in length, and they will be able to circulate freely on a network of routes previously approved by road authorities based on technical reports.
Another important novelty is the increase in the maximum allowed height to 4.5 meters for the specialized transport of straw, live animals, and for supplying industries within a 50 km radius. This measure aligns the limits for these sectors with those already existing for car carriers and trucks transporting certified containers.
The order came into effect the day after its publication, although the provisions regarding maximum axle weights and authorized masses will take effect after three months. For tanker vehicles, this period is extended to six months. Overall, these measures aim to achieve greater operational efficiency, reduce the number of trips and vehicles on the road, and promote the decarbonization of the sector.
The recent approval of the regulations extending weight and size limits for freight transport in Spain has generated a predictable and necessary debate within the logistics sector. Initial reactions from key players, such as the CETM and AELOG, paint a picture of widespread theoretical acceptance but with deep practical reservations about its implementation. This contrast between principled support and substantive criticism reveals the complexity of modernizing a sector so interconnected and critical to the economy without addressing all links in the chain.
On one hand, carriers’ associations, represented by the CETM, welcome the measure as a crucial advance for competitiveness, aligning with European standards and allowing for greater efficiency per trip. However, their optimism is tempered by a very concrete concern: the additional financial burden it will place on owner-operators and companies. The increased wear and tear on tires, fuel consumption, and potential adjustments to tolls are costs that they fear will fall entirely on them. Therefore, their support conditional on a fiscal review is a defensive and understandable stance, seeking to prevent improved productivity from translating into lower profit margins.
On the other hand, the view of logistics providers and shippers, articulated by AELOG, is even more skeptical. Their criticism focuses on a structural problem: the lack of preparedness of Spanish terminal infrastructure. They warn that the measure could create an efficiency gap, where international corridors benefit while the last mile—the final leg to the industrial estate or warehouse—becomes a new bottleneck. The question of how to maneuver a 32-meter vehicle in facilities not designed for it points to a fundamental problem that the regulations alone cannot solve.
Collectively, these positions reveal that the success of the reform depends not only on the legal change but also on complementary measures that address its indirect consequences. The government faces the challenge of managing a transition that includes fiscal incentives for carriers and an investment plan in local logistics infrastructure to prevent a disconnect between major highways and final delivery points. Without this comprehensive approach, there is a real risk that the regulation, despite its good initial design, will end up generating inefficiencies where it intended to eliminate them.
In short, the extension of limits is a brave and necessary step towards modernization and decarbonization, but voices from the sector remind us that a logistics chain is only as strong as its weakest link. The measure will ultimately be judged not by its intention, but by its ability to drive a real and balanced improvement that benefits all involved actors, from the driver to the shipper, without overburdening any one of them.