GM to Pay $220 Million After Selling Driver Data to Insurers

General Motors will pay $220 million to settle claims that it sold driving data collected through its now-discontinued Smart Driver feature to insurance companies without consumers' knowledge, according to Ars Technica, which reported the deal resolves a lawsuit brought jointly by the District of Columbia and 35 state attorneys general.

Smart Driver was marketed to GM owners as a tool for parents to monitor teen drivers or for any adult to track acceleration, braking, and other habits behind the wheel, Ars Technica reported. It emerged in 2024 that GM had instead been sharing that data with brokers, who resold it to insurers. Some drivers reported that their premiums rose afterward, and many said they never recalled agreeing to share driving behavior for that purpose, according to the outlet's reporting.

How did Smart Driver data end up with insurance companies?

According to Ars Technica, GM and its OnStar subsidiary routed data gathered through the Smart Driver app to third-party brokers. Those brokers then sold the information to insurance companies, which used it in ways that, in some cases, pushed up what customers paid for coverage. The outlet reported that affected drivers said they had not knowingly consented to that chain of data sales — a gap between what the app's marketing promised and how the data was actually used.

What did GM already agree to with federal regulators?

The state settlement follows an earlier case. Ars Technica reported that GM and OnStar settled with the Federal Trade Commission last year, an agreement finalized in January, that bars the two companies from sharing geolocation data or driver behavior data with third parties for five years. GM discontinued Smart Driver across its vehicle lineup around the same time, according to the report.

What does the new, larger settlement add?

The $220 million figure comes from the separate multistate case, in which the District of Columbia and 35 state attorneys general sued GM over the same underlying conduct, Ars Technica reported. Citing TechCrunch, the outlet noted that the settlement is notable because it requires an independent third party to assess GM's compliance with its new privacy program going forward — a verification step beyond simply ordering the company to stop a practice.

What does GM say about the settlement?

GM has not disputed the broad outline of the conduct described by state attorneys general, but the company frames its intentions around disclosure and choice rather than wrongdoing. In a statement quoted by Ars Technica, GM said:

"Safer, more helpful and personalized experiences are enabled by connected vehicle data, and GM is committed to being clear about what information is used, how it's protected, and the choices customers have about what they share."

The statement does not address why drivers said they were unaware their data was being sold to insurers, a discrepancy that sits at the center of both the FTC case and the states' lawsuit.

What is a data broker, and why does that matter here?

A data broker is a company that collects personal or behavioral information — in this case, driving data such as speed, braking, and location — and sells or licenses it to other businesses, including insurers, marketers, or risk-assessment firms. Drivers using Smart Driver interacted directly with GM and OnStar, not with the brokers or insurers downstream, which is part of why many said they had no visibility into where their data ultimately went, according to Ars Technica's reporting.

What happens next for GM customers?

The practical result for drivers is twofold, based on the reported settlements. Smart Driver itself is gone — GM pulled it from its vehicle range after the FTC action — and the five-year FTC restriction on sharing geolocation and driver-behavior data remains in place. The multistate settlement adds an external compliance check on GM's privacy program, intended to confirm the company is following through rather than relying on GM's own representations. Ars Technica's report does not specify how individual drivers who were affected, including those who saw premiums rise, will be compensated from the $220 million, and HTT News found no additional detail on distribution in the available reporting.

The episode leaves an open question the settlement does not resolve on its own: whether connected-car features marketed as safety or monitoring tools will come with clearer, verifiable consent before data moves from automaker to broker to insurer — or whether enforcement actions like this one will remain the primary check on that pipeline.

Artiglio is A coming-soon iPhone chief of staff for briefings and drafts. Not on the App Store yet.