Goodbye to the mandatory V-16 beacon before January 1, 2026

Maybe you have wondered why the famous V-16 beacon, which has already started to impose fines, seems to be questioned even before its obligation becomes total. Well, you are not alone. Traffic policy gets complicated when measures that seemed clear become flexible, and now Vox has entered the game to stir things up.

But, beware: it is not just a change in regulation, but a debate on whether the beacon should be mandatory or just another alternative to the traditional triangles, which will neither disappear nor cease to be valid. And that’s without even mentioning the connectivity that the DGT wanted to impose.

Vox’s proposal to make the V-16 beacon optional

What does the amendment say exactly?

Vox has submitted an amendment to the PSOE law that advocates making the use of the V-16 beacon optional. Its key point is that it could be an "alternative" to the warning triangles, keeping the latter valid after January 1, 2026. And, attention, the beacon will not have to comply with connectivity with the DGT's detection systems nor geolocation.

Why do they propose this flexibility?

According to Vox, this measure aims to improve road safety with tools that have already proven effective, avoiding imposing unnecessary burdens on families and businesses. Furthermore, they highlight that the V-16 beacon is mandatory only in Spain, while other European countries do not require it, and that its effectiveness has even been questioned by the Unified Association of Civil Guards.

The position of the European Commission and the DGT

The European Commission sees no conflicts with community regulations

The European Commission has made it clear that the regulation of road safety devices is not harmonized at the European level. Thus, it has defended that Spain can establish its own regulation based on the Vienna Convention on Road Traffic, and that the obligation of the V-16 beacon does not violate community law.

The DGT and current sanctions

Currently, not carrying the approved and connected V-16 beacon is a minor infraction with an 80 euro fine (40 if paid quickly). However, the lack of correct signaling in the event of a breakdown can raise the fine up to 200 euros. Even so, the amendment foresees that connectivity will not be required, an aspect that will change the way the regulation is applied.

Arguments for and against the mandatory V-16 beacon

Doubts about its real effectiveness

The V-16 beacon has been received with some distrust by some experts and entities such as the AUGC, who have expressed that its imposition does not always equal more safety. Moreover, the fact that it is a unique obligation in Spain increases the feeling that it is more a local rule than a universal solution.

The advantages of keeping the triangles

The traditional reflective triangles will remain valid without time limitations, something many drivers will appreciate for their simplicity and cost. Thus, the measure could remain a personal choice: beacon or triangles, without strict impositions that generate controversy.

The reality is that this debate about the V-16 beacon reflects more political and imposition issues than a clear consensus on the best way to increase safety on our roads.

If you always carry triangles, now you have an excuse to try not to switch to the beacon if the amendment is finally approved. Or you can leave it to your instinct: safety, after all, is not always a matter of mandatory technology.

With this new turn, 2026 will be a year to see how drivers and authorities adapt to the flexibility imposed by politics and regulations. And, who knows, maybe we’ll end up returning to that classic image of beacons and triangles coexisting without drama.