The Reality of the Right to Repair: Facts and Misconceptions Based on the Latest NIM Study

The European Union’s new Directive 2024/1799 on the “Right to Repair” aims to accelerate the transition to a sustainable circular economy. Member States must transpose the regulation into their national legal systems by July 31, 2026. The legislative framework aims to strengthen consumer rights, drastically reduce accumulating electronic waste (e-waste), and conserve valuable resources. But how do we stand in practice with repair culture? A comprehensive study published in the spring of 2026 by the Nuremberg Institute for Market Decisions (NIM) sheds light on reality: although the intention is there, legislation alone is not enough to change entrenched consumer habits.

Background of the EU Regulation and Research Methodology

The NIM research institute sought to find out whether the new EU law, and the associated political and social debates, have changed people’s attitudes towards repairing defective electronic devices in the recent period. The study was based on a previous representative survey from 2025, which researchers repeated in Germany in May 2026 (specifically between April 27 and May 13), supplemented with new questions. During the survey, a total of 3,500 people representing the 18 to 74 age group were interviewed via the NIQ eBUS® system. The goal was to establish a clear objective picture: how often do people have items repaired, what are the main obstacles, and how could a sustainable repair culture be meaningfully strengthened?

How Often Do We Actually Repair Broken Devices in Reality?

Statistics clearly point out that there is huge untapped potential when it comes to repair rates. According to the survey, at least one smartphone breaks down every year in about a quarter of German households, but on average, only a third of these devices are repaired by their owners. For small household appliances—such as coffee makers or vacuum cleaners—the balance is even worse: last year, an average of 0.5 such devices broke down per household, and barely less than a quarter of them were taken to a service center.

Regarding specific repair costs, consumers paid an average of 111 euros to repair a smartphone, while for a coffee maker or vacuum cleaner, the average repair cost was around 64 euros over the past 12 months.

Consumer Expectations Regarding Lifespan and Willingness to Pay

The NIM study also elaborates on how long users want to use certain technical items:

• For smartphones, the expected lifespan is roughly 5 years.

• For computers and televisions, this period is estimated at 8–9 years.

• For smaller household appliances (e.g., coffee makers, vacuum cleaners), nearly 8 years is the basic expectation.

• Large household appliances (e.g., washing machines, refrigerators) are expected to have the longest lifespan, reaching up to 11 years.

Willingness to pay for repairs has remained relatively stable compared to the previous year. The relative majority of respondents are still willing to pay a maximum of 20 percent of the new device’s purchase price for a repair. Thirty percent of those asked (showing a slight increase compared to 26 percent in 2025) would spend up to 10 percent of the new price on repairs, while barely a tenth would be willing to sacrifice 40 percent or more of the original price to save an old device.

The Real Drivers of Repair: Why Do We Choose Service?

Although 59 percent of respondents cited lower costs compared to buying a new device as the main argument for repairing, and 53 percent cited confidence in the device’s future reliable operation, data analysis revealed a surprising correlation. According to statistics, in practice, these two reasons do not actually have a strong positive correlation with the actual number of repairs. In reality, consumers are most likely to opt for repair if they can easily do it themselves, or if the incurred costs are covered by valid insurance or warranties.

Repairability Index: An Unknown Factor in Purchasing Decisions?

According to the results, the aspect of repairability does not currently play a significant role in concrete, individual purchasing decisions. While 85 percent of consumers consider battery life critical when choosing a new smartphone, repairability is a key issue for only 35 percent (which is a decline compared to the 42 percent measured in 2025).

The general awareness of the repairability index is extremely low: only one in six people had heard of it prior to the research. Examining the demographic data, the index is slightly more known among men and older age groups. An even more thought-provoking fact is that in everyday life, only 4 percent of buyers have noticed this rating on a specific product so far.

However, a controlled experiment conducted within the framework of the survey clearly proved the power of visual information: when the values were transparently displayed during a simulation with a 600-euro budget, 65 percent of participants chose the smartphone with the better repairability indicator, compared to the cheaper but less repairable alternative, which received only 35 percent of the votes.

Misconceptions and Expectations Regarding the “Right to Repair”

The study highlighted the fact that there are serious information gaps and misconceptions among consumers regarding the concept of the right to repair. Although 80 percent of respondents are aware of the sellers’ obligation to provide correct information, 63 percent mistakenly believe that the retailer is legally obliged to perform the actual repair. Even more surprisingly, 18 percent believe that thanks to the new European legislation, repairing electronic devices will become completely free of charge.

Despite all this, social support is clear: a large majority of the population would like devices to be easier to repair. Fifty-five percent of respondents support easier repairability, provided that this does not lead to an increase in purchase prices (in 2025, this ratio was 53 percent). Moreover, 29 percent of consumers would support this direction even if it involved a slight increase in the price of new products (compared to 25 percent in 2025). In parallel, the proportion of those who specifically oppose easier repairability has halved from the previous 10 percent to just 5 percent.

Expert Conclusion: Information and Guarantees Are the Key

PD Dr. Katharina Gangl, NIM’s study director, highlighted regarding the results that the repair rate can be significantly improved, as currently only a third of defective devices are given a second chance. In her view, the new laws can improve industry framework conditions, but they alone are not capable of revolutionizing repair culture. The main reason for this is that the laws only partially, or not at all, address the actual drivers of repair, namely the possibility of independent home repair and the issue of warranty and insurance coverage. If these do not exist, most people are only willing to have repairs done up to a maximum of 20 percent of the purchase price.

The expert emphasized that transparent, visible information is essential. It is useless for the repairability of certain smartphones and tablets to be mandatory since 2025 if the indicator remains invisible to consumers in everyday life. Expanding the repairability label, placing it more prominently in stores, and establishing clearer legal frameworks for warranties can collectively bring about the breakthrough that will ultimately create real added value for consumers, manufacturers, retailers, and—last but not least—our environment.

Official source used:

The full material and data of the study are available at the original link on the research institute’s website: Das „Recht auf Reparatur“ im Realitätscheck (NIM)