A Formula 1 Manifesto: Beyond the 2026 Regulations

Introduction

The regulatory framework scheduled to come into force in 2026 represents one of the most ambitious attempts to redefine modern Formula One. The FIA and Formula One Management have articulated clear objectives: increased sustainability, enhanced safety, technical competitiveness, and improved marketability of the sporting product. However, a systematic analysis of the 2026 technical and sporting regulations reveals that these objectives have been pursued through an unprecedented level of complexity, which risks undermining both regulatory stability and the identity of the category itself.

The analytical and academic contributions on the comparison between the 2024, 2025, and 2026 regulations[1][2] demonstrate that many of the adopted solutions are still immature and subject to continuous interpretative adjustments. In this context, it is reasonable to assume that the lifecycle of the 2026 regulations may be shorter than originally planned. This article therefore presents itself as a manifesto: not a mere critique of existing regulations, but a structured and programmatic proposal of what Formula One should become beyond 2026, in order to remain the pinnacle of global motorsport.

Part I – Elements That Must Be Preserved

 

Sustainability as a Structural Objective

The introduction of 100% sustainable fuels from 2026 represents one of the most solid pillars of the current regulatory framework. This choice is consistent with the decarbonisation pathways of the global automotive industry and represents a signal of technological continuity and improvement.

Official data from Formula One Sustainability Reports clearly show that the cars themselves account for a marginal share of total championship emissions, contributing less than 1% of the overall footprint. By contrast, global logistics and intercontinental transportation of freight and personnel represent the dominant share, exceeding 60% of total emissions.

This quantitative evidence leads to an important conclusion: Formula One sustainability cannot be evaluated solely by the emissions made by the cars but must be addressed as a systemic issue. Without a structural reorganisation of the calendar and logistics, it is not possible to impact actively on the Formula 1’s footprint and is neither possible to meet environmental objectives.[3] Sustainability, to be credible, must become an organising principle of the championship as a whole.

 

Legal Design of the Regulations

The rewriting of the regulations according to legal design principles represents one of the most significant innovations of the 2026 cycle. The reduction in the number of articles, the thematic reorganisation of provisions, and the systematic use of definitions substantially improve readability and legal certainty within sporting law.

Nevertheless, early versions of the 2026 regulations revealed cross-referencing errors and coordination issues, confirming that the system is still in a consolidation phase. This does not undermine the underlying choice, but it requires a strengthening of the method: legal design must become an instrument of regulatory stabilisation, not merely a formal exercise.

 

Smaller Cars and Safety

The reduction in car dimensions and weight anticipated for 2026 responds to a long-standing criticism of modern Formula One: the excessive growth in size and mass. More compact cars are less sensitive to aerodynamic turbulence and more suited to close on-track competition.

At the same time, continuous safety improvements (reinforced impact structures, enhanced side protections, and advanced heat management systems) confirm that technical innovation does not come at the expense of driver protection. This balance between performance and safety must be preserved as a non-negotiable foundation of the sport.

 

Part II – A Manifesto for Formula One Beyond 2026

 

1. Returning to V10 Engines

Proposed principle:

Formula One should adopt naturally aspirated V10 power units powered by sustainable fuels, within a regulated and transparent cost framework that encourages competitiveness and the entry of new manufacturers.

Explanation:

Long considered impractical, the return to V10 engines has recently re-entered the public debate, including through official statements by Formula One CEO Stefano Domenicali. This renewed interest is not driven by nostalgia, but by growing awareness of the structural limitations of current hybrid power units.

Modern Formula One power units are among the most complex propulsion systems ever developed in motorsport, with estimated costs ranging between €12 and €18 million per unit per season. This level of complexity represents a significant barrier to entry for new manufacturers and constitutes one of the main cost drivers of the current Formula One ecosystem.

A modern naturally aspirated V10, powered by FIA-certified sustainable fuels, would significantly reduce technical complexity and costs, while remaining fully compatible with environmental objectives. Official sustainability reports show that emissions directly attributable to the cars are negligible compared to the overall championship footprint, reinforcing the feasibility of this solution.

From an identity standpoint, the V10 represents one of the most iconic elements of Formula One history. Its sound and power delivery shaped the sport’s global appeal for decades. Reintroducing such engines would therefore combine sustainability, cost control, competitive accessibility, and heritage preservation.

 

2. Reintroducing Refuelling

Proposed principle:

Formula One should reintroduce in-race refuelling under clear and uniform regulations, restoring fuel strategy as a central and comprehensible element of competition.

Explanation:

Refuelling, removed from the regulations after the 2009 season, represented a fundamental strategic tool capable of generating complex yet easily understandable races. Its abolition progressively reduced strategic variability, replacing it with increasingly artificial mechanisms.

The 2026 regulations introduce multiple power unit modes and dual active aerodynamic configurations, resulting in a system that is difficult for spectators to follow and demanding for drivers to manage. The introduction of active aerodynamics available simultaneously to all cars risks neutralising overtaking opportunities and raises additional safety concerns.

Reintroducing refuelling would restore strategic depth through a universally understandable mechanism: the trade-off between fuel load, weight, and performance. This approach would reduce reliance on artificial systems and enhance the sporting spectacle.

 

3. More Clearly Differentiated Tyre Compounds

Proposed principle:

Tyre compounds must be redefined to guarantee markedly different lifespans and performance levels, restoring tyres as a central strategic element of Formula One.

Explanation:

In contemporary Formula One, tyre changes often occur due to regulatory obligations rather than genuine performance degradation. Drivers frequently exceed the expected stint lengths, sometimes by a considerable margin, undermining the strategic relevance of tyres.

To restore tyres as a decisive strategic variable, compounds must be significantly softer and clearly differentiated. A plausible framework would limit soft tyres to approximately 10 laps, medium tyres to 20 laps, and hard tyres to 30 laps, with pronounced performance drop-offs.

Such differentiation would ensure meaningful performance gaps between compounds, giving each tyre a clear purpose and forcing teams to make genuine strategic trade-offs. Tyres would once again become a determining factor in race outcomes.

 

4. Avoiding Excessive Aerodynamic Complexity to Reduce Dirty Air

Proposed principle:

Technical regulations must impose strict limits on aerodynamic complexity and evolution, reducing turbulence generation and enabling sustained close racing.

Explanation:

The phenomenon of Dirty air (where a following car loses performance due to aerodynamic turbulence) remains one of the main obstacles to close racing. The initial implementation of the 2022 regulations demonstrated that simpler aerodynamic concepts allow cars to follow each other more closely.

However, unrestricted aerodynamic development quickly reintroduced turbulence-generating solutions. To prevent this, future regulations must structurally limit aerodynamic evolution, not through reactive technical directives, but through proactive regulatory design.

Such limits would improve racing quality, reduce development costs, and ensure long-term regulatory stability.

 

5. Reducing the Number of Races to 20

Proposed principle:

The Formula One calendar should be capped at 20 races to preserve exclusivity, quality, and workforce sustainability.

Explanation:

The current trend toward an ever-expanding calendar risk diminishing audience engagement and placing unsustainable pressure on the Formula One workforce. A calendar exceeding 20 races prioritises short-term revenue maximisation over long-term sustainability.

Reducing the number of races would restore a sense of exclusivity, improve event quality, and alleviate physical and mental stress on teams and personnel. This position has been also publicly supported by figures such as Toto Wolff and Max Verstappen.

 

6. Optimising the Race Calendar for Sustainability

Proposed principle:

The calendar must be geographically optimised to minimise logistical impact, with races grouped by continent wherever possible.

Explanation:

The current distribution of races across continents is logistically inefficient, requiring frequent intercontinental travel that significantly increases emissions and operational strain.

Grouping races by geographical region would enable genuine continental tours (European, American, Asian), drastically reducing logistical complexity and environmental impact. Exceptions could be made for season-opening and season-closing events, subject to higher sustainability requirements or monetary compensations.

 

7. Guaranteeing the Presence of Historic Circuits

Proposed principle:

Historic circuits must be protected and valorised within the calendar as symbols of Formula One’s sporting and cultural heritage.

Explanation:

Historic circuits such as Imola, Spa-Francorchamps, and Monza are fundamental to Formula One’s identity. Their value lies not only in sporting challenge, but in their role as living archives of the sport’s history.

Without legends such as Ayrton Senna, Alain Prost, Michael Schumacher, Sebastian Vettel, Lewis Hamilton, and many others, Formula One would not possess its current value. While drivers eventually retire, circuits endure and transmit this heritage to future generations.

 

8. Optimising the Budget Cap

Proposed principle:

The budget cap should be rebalanced to protect smaller teams while enabling talent growth, focusing restrictions on tools rather than personnel.

Explanation:

The budget cap must ensure the survival and competitiveness of smaller teams, while still allowing leading teams to invest and innovate. Current restrictions on personnel risk limiting talent development and reducing the sport’s industrial ecosystem.

Rather than limiting human capital, regulations should focus on restricting performance-critical tools such as wind tunnels and outsourcing. This approach would promote fairness while allowing the sport to attract and retain top talents.

 

9. Reducing Discretion in Race Control

Proposed principle:

Sporting regulations must reduce discretionary power by introducing clearer, more detailed guidelines and predefined penalty frameworks.

Explanation:

The increased discretion granted to race control and stewards has resulted in inconsistent decision-making and legal uncertainty. The 2026 regulations further expand this discretion.

To address this, driver conduct guidelines must be rewritten with greater specificity, including explicit mitigating and aggravating factors, and predefined penalties for specific infractions.

 

10. Guaranteeing a Formula One Seat for the Formula 2 Champion

Proposed principle:

Formula One must guarantee a clear sporting pathway by ensuring that the Formula 2 champion receives an opportunity to compete in Formula One the following season.

Explanation:

Currently, winning the Formula 2 championship does not guarantee access to Formula One, undermining the credibility of the feeder series. Numerous champions, an example among many Davide Valsecchi, have failed to secure an F1 seat.

A structured mechanism, similar to a draft system, could require the last-placed F1 team to offer a seat to the F2 champion for one season, funded jointly by the FIA and Formula One. This mechanism would not apply if the driver already held an F1 contract.

A similar system could be introduced for F1 Academy, guaranteeing progression to Formula 3 and reinforcing commitments to gender equality.

 

Conclusion

 

Formula One stands at a structural crossroads. The 2026 regulations, while ambitious in intent, risk demonstrating that complexity alone cannot serve as a sustainable foundation for the future of the sport. If regulatory stability, sporting credibility, and global relevance are to be preserved, Formula One must move through a coherent, long-term vision.

This manifesto does not propose a return to the past, nor does it reject technological progress. Instead, it promotes a vision of the sport grounded in clarity, accessibility, sustainability considered as a systemic objective, and respect for the sport’s historical identity. The principles outlined here are interconnected: technical simplicity supports better racing; cost control enables competitiveness; calendar optimisation reinforces environmental credibility; and clear sporting governance restores trust and legitimacy.

Ultimately, the future of Formula One depends not only on how advanced its regulations appear on paper, but on whether they serve the fundamental purpose of the sport: to provide a fair, comprehensible, and compelling competition that can endure over time. Beyond 2026, Formula One must be governed not by short-term optimisation, but by principles capable of sustaining the sport across generations.

---

[1] D. Beatrice, M. Ferrer, A. Aly Mandal, A comprehensive comparison between f1 2024,2025 and 2026 Sporting Regulations, ISDE Law and Business School, Barcelona, 2025, available here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QWrqxe9SHR-thkltv7WjByNI5dyRUFzP/view

[2] D. Beatrice, A Complete Analysis of the 2026 Formula One Regulations: Ambition, Complexity, and Unresolved Risks,2026, available here: https://dbmotorsportf1.blogspot.com/2026/01/a-complete-analysis-of-2026-formula-one.html

[3] To get a deeper understanding of this topic: D. Beatrice, La compliance ESG e L’irriducibile dualismo della F1, available here: https://dbmotorsportf1.blogspot.com/2022/04/la-compliance-esg-e-lirriducibile.html