Why a New US Fleet Payment “First” Is Routine in Europe & China

Support CleanTechnica’s work through a Substack subscription or on Stripe.


Or support our Kickstarter campaign!

The announcement that WEX, a major US fleet card provider, can finally combine gasoline and public EV charging into one card, one account, and one invoice lands as a small milestone that only looks novel if the frame of reference is strictly American. For US fleet operators, this closes a long standing operational gap. For fleets elsewhere, it describes a capability that has been routine for years. The significance is not that something new has been invented, but that the United States has at last recreated a pattern that has been dominant in other markets. Mixed energy fleets are normal, accounting systems want consolidation, and drivers want one workflow rather than three.

At a practical level, unified fleet payments solve boring problems, which is precisely why they matter. Fleets do not want drivers juggling fuel cards, charging apps, and reimbursement processes. Operations teams do not want parallel reporting systems that separate gallons from kWh. Finance teams want one invoice, one credit line, and one set of controls. As electric vehicles move from pilot projects to material shares of fleet miles, these frictions stop being tolerable. What looks like a payment innovation is actually a reduction in operational noise, and that kind of change usually arrives earlier in markets that treat electrification as infrastructure rather than as an experiment.

Europe reached this point years ago. By the late 2010s, many European fleets were already operating diesel vehicles, gasoline vehicles, and battery electric vehicles side by side, often across borders. Fuel cards that handled only liquid fuels were no longer adequate. Multi energy cards that covered diesel, gasoline, public AC charging, and DC fast charging on a single account became common. RFID based activation was standard, not because it was fashionable, but because it worked across thousands of charge points without requiring drivers to manage apps. Detailed transaction data including kWh delivered, charger location, and time of use flowed into fleet management systems because value added tax reclaim and cost allocation demanded it. In this context, unified payments were not positioned as innovation. They were a response to normal fleet complexity.

China arrived at a similar outcome through a different path. Instead of extending fuel cards, China largely bypassed them. Mobile payments became the default layer for almost all transactions, including fueling, charging, tolls, parking, and logistics services. QR code payments and integrated fleet platforms made the distinction between fuel and electricity less relevant at the payment level. For a logistics operator, both were energy inputs recorded digitally and reconciled centrally. By the early 2020s, mobile wallets accounted for the majority of in store payments in China, with hundreds of billions of transactions per year. In that environment, the idea that EV charging would require a separate payment system would have seemed odd. The integration problem had already been solved at the platform level.

The United States followed neither of these paths. Its payment systems evolved around open loop credit cards optimized for a world of ubiquitous gasoline stations and long haul trucking. Fuel cards became specialized tools for controlling where and how drivers bought fuel, but they remained tightly coupled to liquid fuels. Public EV charging emerged as a separate ecosystem, fragmented across networks, apps, and billing models. For years, most US EV charging sessions were paid for with consumer credit cards or proprietary apps rather than fleet accounts. This fragmentation reflected deeper structural choices. The US had little pressure to consolidate payments because gasoline dominated fleet energy use, and because accounting systems tolerated separation longer than they should have.

This pattern fits a broader story of US lag in digital payments. The United States was slow to adopt EMV chip cards, beginning its migration around 2015, roughly a decade after much of Europe. Even then, the dominant model became chip and signature rather than chip and PIN, leaving a weaker authentication standard in place. Contactless payments followed a similar arc. While contactless cards and mobile wallets became common in the UK, parts of continental Europe, and Asia in the early 2010s, US adoption remained limited until the pandemic forced upgrades. As of the early 2020s, contactless transactions accounted for a minority of US card payments, compared with shares above 50% in several European countries.

Real time bank to bank payment systems tell the same story. Europe built single euro payments area (SEPA) instant credit transfers over the past decade, enabling low cost, near real time payments across borders. India launched its unified payments interface (UPI) in 2016, and by 2023 it was processing over 100 billion transactions per year, representing a large share of all retail payments in the country. The US only began rolling out its equivalent real time system in the mid 2020s, decades after automated clearing house (ACH) was entrenched as a slow, batch based rail. In each case, the US eventually adopts similar capabilities, but later and with more friction.

Emerging economies highlight why this lag is not inevitable. Many skipped cards entirely and moved straight to phone based payments. Kenya’s M Pesa, launched in 2007, brought digital payments to a largely unbanked population using basic mobile phones. By the 2010s, it was handling a volume equivalent to a large share of national GDP. India’s UPI built on widespread smartphone adoption and low cost data, creating a public payment rail that private apps could ride on. These systems spread quickly because they did not have to coexist with entrenched card networks and legacy merchant hardware. They solved real problems at low cost and scaled.

The relevance to fleet electrification is direct. Payment systems are not the driver of electrification, but they can slow it quietly when they are misaligned with operational reality. Mixed fleets are not a transitional anomaly. They are the dominant state for a decade or more. When charging requires separate accounts, separate reporting, and separate controls, it adds friction to every EV added to a fleet. That friction shows up as higher administrative costs, confused drivers, and delayed rollouts. Europe and China reduced this friction earlier by treating charging as another line item in an energy account rather than as a special case.

The recent US move to unify fleet fuel and charging payments should be understood as a signal rather than a destination. It indicates that the market now recognizes mixed energy fleets as normal and worth serving properly. It does not close the gap with markets that already offer deep interoperability, standardized data, and seamless cross network roaming. It does, however, mark a break with the idea that EV charging can remain operationally separate from fueling. Once that mental model shifts, further integration tends to follow quickly.

The broader lesson is that digital infrastructure and energy infrastructure are increasingly intertwined. Payments, identity, data exchange, and interoperability shape how quickly physical systems can change. The United States has repeatedly shown that it can build advanced technology while lagging in the connective tissue that makes systems easy to use at scale. Fleet payments are a small example, but a revealing one. Catching up here matters less for bragging rights than for reducing unnecessary drag on transitions that are already underway.