GM made millions selling your driving data. Where's your cut?

General Motors has agreed to pay $220 million to settle allegations that it collected and sold customers' driving information without their knowledge or consent. But the drivers whose information was allegedly sold — some of whom saw their insurance premiums increase — won't receive a dime.

The October 29 settlement resolves allegations brought by attorneys general from 36 states and jurisdictions. The money goes to those states, not directly to affected drivers. GM must also comply with new privacy requirements, including obtaining express consent before collecting or sharing driving data.

Beginning in December 2022, GM also provided Wejo with radio-listening data, including ignition timestamps, AM/FM frequencies, station call signs, time zones, and radio genres.

That leaves an important question: How much money did GM make selling information its customers generated simply by driving their cars?

The information came largely through GM's OnStar Smart Driver program, which operated from 2016 until 2024. It included trip times, speed, hard braking, acceleration, and other driving behavior. Data brokers sold this information to insurance companies, which could use it to help determine premiums.

Chevy Bolt owner Kenn Dahl told the New York Times he learned a data broker had a detailed record of his trips after his insurance costs jumped 21%.

The investigation also found that many customers were enrolled without their knowledge. In some cases, dealership employees allegedly accepted terms and conditions on their behalf. Worse, GM's OnStar app incorrectly told more than 370,000 drivers they weren't enrolled in Smart Driver even while their information was being collected and sold.

Getting paid twice

Just how lucrative was GM's data business? A separate lawsuit filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton in August 2024 offers a detailed look at the financial arrangements behind it. Texas did not participate in the $220 million settlement.

Under a 2015 agreement with Verisk Analytics, a company that supplies data and risk assessments to insurers, GM received an initial multimillion-dollar payment for its customers' driving information. Verisk then put that information into a database that insurance companies could pay to access.

Every time insurers purchased licenses to the database, Verisk paid GM royalties based on the revenue generated. GM thus had a continuing financial interest in information collected from cars it had already sold.

GM also required Verisk to approach other automakers, telecommunications companies, and third parties about contributing their information to the exchange. Verisk subsequently entered similar agreements with Honda in 2017 and Hyundai in 2018, according to the Texas lawsuit.

The information wasn't anonymous. According to the filing, GM supplied Verisk with names, home addresses, vehicle identification numbers, and other identifying information that could be connected to individual driving records.

Insurers could then look up a driver's score when deciding whether to issue coverage, renew a policy, or set premiums.

A $70 million year

GM's arrangement with Verisk wasn't its only source of revenue from driving information.

A 2018 deal with Wejo, a British connected-car company, put a dollar figure on a single year's worth of driving records. GM paid $25 million for a 35% ownership stake in Wejo and agreed to supply 2018 data from 2.6 million vehicles. The Texas filing values those records at $70 million.

Wejo could license the information to businesses beyond the insurance industry, subject to GM's approval.

The agreement described in the Texas lawsuit included a minimum monthly licensing revenue target of $3 million, with Wejo agreeing to pay GM 70% of that revenue. Wejo also agreed to reimburse GM if it failed to meet the target.

The relationship continued until Wejo declared bankruptcy in May 2023.

And GM wasn't limiting the information it supplied to driving behavior. Beginning in December 2022, GM also provided Wejo with radio-listening data, including ignition timestamps, AM/FM frequencies, station call signs, time zones, and radio genres.

Think about that. Your driving habits were one thing. But even the radio stations you listened to could become part of a commercial data business.

Beyond GM

Other automakers are facing scrutiny over similar practices.

In April 2026, Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen opened an investigation into Ford and Stellantis over reports that the companies collected and sold or licensed vehicle data to third parties, including data brokers and insurers.

The investigation is separate from the GM settlement, and the allegations against Ford and Stellantis have not been established as violations of the law. But the concern extends well beyond a single automaker or a discontinued OnStar program.

Modern vehicles can collect enormous amounts of information about their owners. That information can be packaged, analyzed, licensed, and sold to businesses the driver may never have heard of.

And if an insurance company uses that information to raise your rates, you could end up paying more because of data you never knowingly agreed to share.

RELATED: Washington blocked Polestar. So why are Chinese-built robotaxis on American streets?

Bloomberg/Getty Images

Where's the driver's cut?

The GM settlement imposes new safeguards. The company must obtain affirmative consent before collecting or sharing driving and location information, limit its data collection, and strengthen oversight of dealership enrollment practices.

But GM did not admit wrongdoing as part of the settlement, and Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel confirmed that the agreement provides no direct consumer restitution. A separate private class-action lawsuit seeking monetary relief remains pending.

So the states receive millions, GM agrees to new rules, and drivers whose information may have affected their insurance premiums get nothing.

That's a pretty convenient outcome for everyone except the consumer.

Automakers need to explain what information they're collecting, who is buying it, and how much money changes hands. Insurance companies should disclose when driving information influences rates, and consumers deserve the ability to challenge inaccurate records before those records affect their wallets.

If a company can make money from your driving habits, should you receive a share? And if your information was used to increase your insurance premium without your knowledge or consent, shouldn't you be entitled to a refund?

Show me the money!