The government’s announcement of new window tint regulations, which now allows the minimum visible light transmission (VLT) levels of the rear side windows and rear windscreen to be lowered to full black, has drawn a mixed reaction from the public.
The previous regulations – which were put in place in 2016 – stipulated that permissible VLT levels were 30% for the rear windows and the rear windscreen. The new guidelines, announced by transport minister Anthony Loke yesterday, do not stipulate a minimum VLT percentage and simply list “any” percentage, meaning that motorists can theoretically go to 0% VLT and entirely blacken out – or panelise – the rear of the car.
While motorists wanting a cooler mobile environment will no doubt be happy with the new ruling, not everyone thinks this is a wise idea, and it’s not just the police, which has voiced its displeasure at not being consulted on the new ruling and cited concerns about how the new rules could affect police work as well as the security of personnel.
There is also the question of road safety. The Malaysian Automotive Accessories Traders’ Association believes that the previous 30% rear VLT level was sufficient. Its president Lim Bee Choo said that those levels were “dark enough,” and anything less will affect visibility on the road, The Star reports.
“We welcome the ministry’s move to allow fully dark rear passenger windows. But we are concerned about road safety if the rear windscreen is allowed to go all dark. If the rear windscreen is fully darkened, what the driver sees through the rear view mirror will also be darkened. It may be okay during the day, but it will be a safety concern at night when the driver has poor visibility,” she said.
While the new rules are bound to see an increase in the installation of darker rear window tint films, Lim cautioned consumers about expectations. Based on feedback from its more than 600 members nationwide, she said many users regretted installing overly dark tint film on their rear windscreens.
“They realised how difficult it was to see the road clearly, especially when driving at night or in the rain, and then decided to remove their tint,” she said.
She said that a darker tint film did not mean greater heat-reflecting capability, and with most imported cars now coming with laminated windows with 18% to 25% VLT on their rear windscreens, there was less necessity to increase heat-cutting capability without raising road safety concerns. “If drivers insist on going all dark, they should install a better sensor or camera to avoid posing a danger on the road,” she said.
Others welcomed the move. National Road Safety Council member Tan Sri Lee Lam Thye said the new ruling was “appropriate in line with the climate condition” here. “For security concerns, I believe the ministry has taken into account the views of the public to allow for this new ruling. It is a welcome move for many drivers,” he said.
The existing regulations of a 70% VLT for the front windscreen and 50% for the front side windows remains unchanged, but can be bypassed with a RM5,000 fee, renewable every two years, for those with valid safety or health reasons.
Do you think the new guidelines to lower the permissible VLT levels for the rear windows and windscreen is a good move? Share your thoughts with us in the comments section.
Looking to sell your car? Sell it with Carro.
With the rear now can be completely blocked from visibile light, its goodbye to those 3rd brake lights installed on the rear deck/windscreen and the option to see the vehicles beyond the one directly in front.
Agreed 100% about being unable to see the vehicle brake lights ahead of the car immediately ahead – ditto for idiots in luxury cars with roll down rear sunshades
you forgot those ladies that pile giant pillows or tons of dolls into the rear parcel shelf or plaster the driver & passenger windows with thick sunshade to shield sun light.
In Singapore there is no nonsense. Straight away car is compounded and towed away if you flout the law
Time for Malaysia to follow how Singapore does things
In Singapore, the ministers walk the talk. Here in New Malaysia, the ministers just talk.
Good one bro! Fully agreed!!
Past 61 year in Malaysia, the ministers just talk. And then forgot what they talk. haha
Third brake light is very important. Having this covered can be such a hazard and danger.
But don’t worry, no matter what ruling comes out, it will follow the old system. No enforcement. Last time also got laws that say cannot have dark tint. But nobody followed because no enforcement.
Polis and JPJ also allowed people to do it because it is a good way to make money during road blocks.
Until JPJ and PDRM clean their officers up, we can never have enforcement.
What enforcement? Now it is legalised with money, how for PDRM to enforce? This gomen only money talks, safety can take a hike.
Thousands of cars are tinted way above what is permitted even now , where is the PDRM when you need them.
MAY CARS THIRD BRAKE LIGHT IS NOT FUNCTIONAL ANYWAY, POLICE DON’T EVEN SUMMON THEM … MOST OFTEN OFFENCE …NO 3RD BRAKE LIGHT !!!
You are tinting from the inside, the brake light will not be covered with tinting film.
For those cars with the 3rd brake light not stick to the rear glass, those tint guys WILL TINT THE WHOLE GLASS NEVERTHELESS.
I am a tint guy and always cut out the brake light stencil. #NotAllTintGuysAreIdiots
Maybe only you. I have tinted many of my cars by various tint installers over the years and NONE have ever take the effort to even ask me if I wanted to cut a hole around the 3rd brake light. Sorry but I find your claim a bit implausible.
Isn’t it our responsibility to ensure the light is not block since we are paying for the installation?
Saying “I don’t know, the installer did it.” is doubtful to spare us from being issue a summons.
What summons? JPJ has now regulated that non-see thru tints are legal. The police cannot issue a summon when no laws were broken, which was why they had voiced their concerns. You can read this in an earlier article. Did you even read the articles pertaining to this issue?
yup… clearly the government didn’t think enough or couldn’t be bothered to miss out such basic requirement. seems too eager to collect money that it forgot about the safety of road users.
They don’t tint the light, they cut it out, just like front rain censor
Isn’t it already an offence if the 3rd brake light doesn’t work? Or put in another way, if the 3rd brake light is not visible, wouldn’t it also be an offence?
As for not being able to see the vehicle beyond the one directly in front, don’t we already facing this when behind a panel van, truck, lorry or any vehicle taller/larger than ours?
Pls ban SUVs and 4wds, bcos when they are Infront of me I can’t see the front car brake, Tq
The real reason is that Ah Loke is eagerly awaiting his new ministerial Alphard. But this Alphard is Made In Japan & the imported CBU rear tint would fail the current tinting regulations. So in one fell swoop, he ensure the CBU Alphard meets the new regulations. Now, the tender for the Alphards can proceed without breaking the law.
Are u sure? How do u explain the one going to court daily with his Alphard tinted full black? How come his Alphard is approved?
Instead of complaining about tint, can the Malaysian Automotive Accessories Traders’ Association not just mandate VSC???????? or even ABS???????????
i do agree to have vsc & abs mandated for all new cars but visibility is basic/essential safety requirement.
Also like the lack of enforcement on HID (even irritating factory installed ones that blind your ——> looking at you BMW). Law is there but who cares.
VSC & ABS are not accessory items, dude.
FYI, VSC and ABS already mandatory for new model introduced from 1st Jun 2018
There’s a big misunderstanding here. The new rule ALLOWED you to tint full black at the rear not MUST.
It’s a shame that idiots don’t get it.
The rules also ALLOWED cars to travel up to 110kmph, it’s not a MUST. But how many luxury cars ACTUALLY follow the speed limits and go within the limits? So look back into your statement and think about it.
Hmm.. There are pros and cons here. Definitely advantageous against our weather here but a little hazardous when driving as u can’t see thru the car ahead of u to anticipate braking in time. If the car next to u is heavily tinted, it’ll pose a problem getting out of a parallel car park as u can’t see thru their windows. Cyclist may have an issue too when they can’t see thru heavily tinted cars. Absent minded parents may accidentally leave their child in the back seat and passerby’s will never notice. It should be made a law that heavily tinted cars wind down their windows immediately when approaching a road block by authorities. Crime can take place in a heavily tinted car and nobody will suspect anything. Darker tints doesn’t mean a cooler interior, it’s the quality of the tint that makes the difference.
Bro. All those mentioned isn’t little hazardous, it is A BIG HAZARD!
Darker tint doesn’t mean better heat rejection…
Yea it doesn’t help heat rejection, but it surely helps the eyes from glaring sun. Really a lot of difference, sometimes I sit in car with 0 tint it’s like too bright and so uncomfortable
Now with permissible FULL tint, those drivers can freely hold their handphones and chat away while driving or even without putting on their seat belts for that matter.
I have no issues with partial or full black because regardless of the decision there will be full black tints since there is no enforcement so who cares?
Gd move,polis Jst do their proper job, tinted hv not made their job inefficient but in a way can cut dwn a lot of rasuah
Countries like japan have dark rear windscreen & rear windows. No major issue. They’ve been practising it for years. It’s also optional, so anyone who feels strongly about it can opt not to do it
Japan have more people with more common sense and consideration to their fellow road users. They wouldn’t do it unless they have a good reason, usually medical. Here? People do it just because they are selfish and inconsiderate to others. Don’t compare us with civilised countries.
Most imported alphard,vellfire and japanese car already tinted black out for rear passenger. If Japan allow it, why not Malaysia? Just follow lah…since anyhow, anyway malaysian still will tint in dark.
It’s a personal choice, even the rules allowed you to go fullly darkened it doesn’t mean that you need to do it right ? If you find it difficult to drive at night with the rear windscreen being too dark, just stick with higher visibility tinted that’s all … The rear windscreen should maintain a reasonable visibility IMHO
Is it my personal choice when some ahole can’t see me because of his super dark tints and proceeds to ram into my car? Because here in PJ, there are plenty of these aholes.
Plain and simple…. Reduced visibility means increased possibility for accident and or making it more unsafe to the ownself or others.
You got that perfectly right, my friend
Plain and simple…. Reduced visibility means increased possibility for accident and or making it more unsafe to the ownself or others.
Typical, no reflection on safety for road user, wait for disaster to strike like a row of kids get mowed down while a car is reversing with full dark tint and the driver says DID not see the kids lar, it get’s on the news and then the tint rule will be changed again….Its Malaysia baru, but mentality is still the same most of the time, got problem, change quickly and try to make a fast buck out of it and then when disaster strike, review whole thing, setup RCI, change law makers and then change intermittent rules, see if works and if not change again.
No proper study done and no independent review is taken into account, News websites reported that even PDRM was not even aware of the change of tint rules nor were they consulted. It may be good for a handful of new vehicle that have 360 camera view and low ground clearances sensors but what about the rest of Malaysia vehicles whom just has a read view mirror and perhaps that beep ..beep sensor. Third brake light which are not attached to the rear window will also be not visible should a fully dark tint be applied to the rear window, so how is it safe anymore for road users when they cannot see the 3rd brake light of a car !
Please stop the new rule and maintain with the current one which I think its good enough, for those with medical conditions and proper security reasons, permit them but regulate properly if theirs vehicles are equip with proper all round safety monitoring systems. Lets avoid disaster from striking !!
Polis no chance cari makan…. that’s why not happy…
For crime prevention, can always ask the driver to wind down the window if suspect anything amiss….
Just based on my wife experience with a police officer during roadblock who claims that the tint is too dark. Just trying to bully a lady, so that can get duit kopi. End up summon open under ‘pengubahsuain kereta’ not under tinted!
Don’t lie here. When police suspects the tint is too dark, they will issue a summon for you to get car inspected by Puspakom. If the results are pass, they will cancel the summon, otherwise just pay up since you know the dark is (was) illegal.
Money over safety. Welcome to New Malaysia!
Wait a minute, why is it suddenly a problem?
For as long as I knew, nobody give a damn about tinting rules. Before this, cars are already beyond 50%, and the real difference is that you are not deemed illegal now. Most of the cars with illegal tint will just wind down all of their windows before every roadblock and police will let them through.
Will it be much different now? I don’t think so.
If you think it will increase crime rate, but it also made it harder for those rempit to spot cars with unattended bags in traffic queue/jam.
It really boils down to personal preference. Will everyone went to tint their windows darker, most probably not. I personally won’t because a darker car will just be more to absorb more heat when baked under the sun.
I think what jpj had done is letting everyone choose for themselves what they really want for things that are not relevant with driving safety, since a big majority of us are doing it anyway.
Should an offence be made legal since it becomes so rampant? So if murder becomes rampant, should it be allowed? Think lah. Malaysia Baharu will becomes Koboi Malaysia like this!
I don’t see the validity of comparing murder as an offence with the subject of tinting in this discussion.
If the argument against allowing tinting the rear windshield and passenger row is because of safety concern, a valid support to the argument is to show some facts/figures of higher accident rate with vehicles already tinted in such way (regardless whether the tinting was done legally or illegally) compared to vehicles that are not tinted.
The commenter Andrekua already stated a big majority have dark tints installed, so we can conclude when accidents happens a big majority of them have dark tints. So conclusively dark tints contributed to majority of accidents on the road. Simple.
I didn’t said majority of accidents were caused by the tint. Accidents happened for whatever reason, recklessness, mishaps etc. If one has bad habit like tail gating for example, accidents are just around the corner for you.
I think it’s time for you to grow up if you haven’t done so. LoL…
Read your own statements Andre. You are implying that. Grow some b@lls to admit what you said.
I think you’ll need to reflect on yourself to be comparing tinting to murder.
Despite the earlier ruling, almost everyone tint their windows and windshield. If you’re tinting your windshield then you are most likely already breaking the law since windshield came with 20% blockage by default. I would say more than 75% vehicle on the road are breaking the law due to front windshield tint alone. Why is tinting still allowed then?
You should just post a valid opinion of yours instead of pathetic comparison to rape, murder, thieves etc.
An offence is an offence, simple as that. Just becoz every other fool does it, it doesn’t make it legal. It is up to the authorities to catch and punish them. So if the authorities are reluctant to catch them, we should just relax the law and make it legal? Murder crimes are also on the increase so why not make it legal too since it’s becoming more common. Sorry but you don’t convince me with such BS logic.
siok la new malaysia
Under loke’s leadership, rulings can change over night and as frequently as possible to be seen working. Along the way, without study and rulings based on gut feelings, he offended many parties and overlooked things. Now that’s inefficiency.
Changing rules like changing underwear, then when he finds the laces are not pretty enough, he changes them again.
I do not agree with this new rulings.
Even now, without this darker ruling, many dark tinted cars already roaming the road dangerously (eg modified car & drive like hooligans with road bully mindset).
Just my opinion
I respect your opinion.
What you have pointed out, that even without this rulings, there are already “many” tinted cars roaming around dangerously, is kind of giving the impression that drivers who tint their cars are irresponsible road users.
I think it is a personal choice. It is not mandatory to tint our car. Drivers who want to tint their cars are not doing it so that they can drive dangerously on the road. A road menace would still be a menace whether he/she is driving a tinted or non-tinted car.
Just my 2 cents.
I really wonder why many are concerned with third brake light visibility. I think there’s way more smoked/semi-covered rear lights than heavy tinting. And then there are those who wouldn’t even care to replace a blown bulb. I don’t see anyone suggesting punishment for these despite passing the same risk. Double triple standards?
Definitely an unwise decision. Fully darkened rear windows will block entirely the vision of other drivers, so imagine every cars on the road now have fully darkened windows?! It will definitely deteriorate the safety on the road… i thought transport ministry is suppose to enhance safety on road! Very disappointed with this decision, shame on u for not consulting the police! I also fear now to get grab /taxi having fully tinted car windows :(
New rules just a rules. No enforcement to all vehicles owner. No worry being summons during roadblock. Safety is everyone roles and responsibilities. Think twice before installing dark tint. Still people use additional sunshade. Also caused visibility reduce.
Safety and security for ALL, not the safety and comfort of the car owners, is paramount. How the authorities cld come to this decision is to be questioned
Panel vans are on the road for a long time now, and there’s no windows on the back. It’s road legal everywhere in the World, and nobody wants to remove them from the roads…
Very dark rear windows is not an issue either, in the European Union, China and Russia it’s in the law to have any tint % on the rear windows of any vehicle.
It does not pose any trouble to anybody on the road.