How much insurance is available after a Wisconsin Uber or Lyft accident?

Liability changes at acceptance. Uninsured coverage does not. Underinsured coverage is optional.

Read the uninsured-motorist column straight down. There is no separate statutory amount for the drive to the pickup, and no second step-up when the passenger gets in the car. After the later exit, a driver who is still logged on and has not accepted another request is back in the first row. The uninsured-motorist figure still has not moved.

The required insurance is primary in both periods, for liability and for uninsured-motorist coverage. A participating driver, or the company on the driver’s behalf, must maintain primary automobile insurance that recognizes that the driver is a participating driver, or otherwise uses a motor vehicle to transport passengers for compensation, and that covers the driver while logged on and while engaged. § 440.48(1)(a). Each period’s requirements may be satisfied by automobile insurance maintained by the driver, by the company, or by any combination of the two. § 440.48(1)(b)3. and (c)3. Insurance required under subsection (1) is deemed to satisfy the financial-responsibility requirement for a motor vehicle under chapter 344. It may be placed with an insurer authorized to do business in this state or with a surplus-lines insurer. § 440.48(1)(f) and (g).

Logged off, and not using the digital network, section 440.48 does not apply. Operating a motor vehicle on a highway requires a motor vehicle liability policy satisfying § 344.33(2), or a listed substitute. Those limits are $25,000 because of bodily injury to or death of one person in any one accident, $50,000 because of bodily injury to or death of two or more persons in any one accident, and $10,000 because of injury to or destruction of property of others in any one accident. Wis. Stat. §§ 344.62 and 344.61(2); § 344.33(2). The Office of the Commissioner of Insurance states the same liability minimums in PI-233 (R 08/2026). Those are not the rideshare floors. On a policy subject to § 632.32, uninsured-motorist coverage of at least $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident is required unless a stated exception applies. That is not a rideshare add-on.

The later exit in the passenger’s party ends the $1 million period

“Passenger” means the individual who uses the digital network to connect to a driver and, unless the context requires otherwise, includes all other persons in that individual’s party who accompany that individual in the personal vehicle. Wis. Stat. § 440.40(4). The exit test is that requesting passenger, or the last person in that passenger’s party. It is not a rule written for unrelated successive riders on a pooled trip, and it is not an app-completion rule.

The higher liability amount is already in force on the drive to the pickup. Nothing in § 440.48 prints a lower number for that drive, and nothing prints a higher number that starts only when a door opens. The period keeps running after the car stops if the requesting passenger, or someone in that passenger’s party, is still in the vehicle. It ends at the later of those exits. Marking the trip complete in the app is not the statutory end. “Finished unloading” is not the statutory end unless that exit has happened.

A cash street hail is a different problem. A participating driver may not solicit or accept street hails, or otherwise provide rides for compensation that are not prearranged through the company’s digital network. A participating driver may not solicit or accept cash for transportation network services, and passenger payments must be made electronically using the digital network. Wis. Stat. § 440.445(4) and (5). A cash street hail is outside transportation network services as defined, so the $1,000,000 engaged-period amount is not the coverage this statute attaches to that trip.

“Transportation network services” means transportation provided to a passenger in the participating driver’s personal vehicle. It does not include transportation in a taxicab, limousine, shuttle, or other for-hire vehicle. § 440.40(7). 2015 Wisconsin Act 16 amended the common-motor-carrier definition so that transportation network services are not that kind of transportation. Requirements in chapters 340 to 349 that apply specifically to commercial motor vehicles or for-hire vehicles do not apply to these personal vehicles. Wis. Stat. § 440.465(2). The § 440.48 dollars are not replaced by a taxicab or motor-carrier schedule. The transportation-network paragraphs do not require medical payments or personal injury protection.

The dollar schedule in § 440.48(1) took effect July 1, 2015. 2015 Wisconsin Act 16 was enacted May 1, 2015, and published May 2, 2015. Section 7 of the act makes the treatment of § 440.48(1) effective on July 1, 2015, or the day after publication, whichever is later. The day after publication was May 3, 2015, so the insurance-dollar date is July 1, 2015. 2015 Wisconsin Act 16. The disclosures in § 440.48(2) and the insurer-exclusion rules in § 440.48(3) were not inside that delayed subsection. They took effect May 3, 2015, with the rest of the act, except the delayed licensure section. The Legislative Council Act Memo states the license requirement takes effect September 1, 2015, which matches the act’s “first day of the fourth month beginning after publication” formula. For an accident before July 1, 2015, today’s § 440.48(1) dollar schedule is not the rule that was in force. There was no earlier transportation-network insurance section.

Chapter SPS 210, Wis. Adm. Code, is the licensing rule. It requires an attestation that the applicant satisfies § 440.48. It does not set a different insurance limit. The permanent rule is Register March 2016 No. 723, effective April 1, 2016. A licensed company also may not allow an individual who is not at least 19 years of age to be a participating driver. § 440.445(2)(a)7. That age rule is a licensing fact, not a coverage tier. Chapter SPS 210.

$25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident is bodily-injury coverage

Liability coverage responds to the rideshare driver’s legal responsibility for harm. Uninsured-motorist coverage is different. It covers persons insured under that coverage who are legally entitled to recover damages for bodily injury, death, sickness, or disease from owners or operators of uninsured motor vehicles. Wis. Stat. § 632.32(2)(f). It is a bodily-injury coverage.

On a policy subject to § 632.32 that insures a motor vehicle registered or principally garaged in this state against liability for bodily injury or death, uninsured-motorist coverage is mandatory in limits of at least $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident, except as § 632.32(4)(d) provides, and except a town-mutual policy organized under chapter 612. § 632.32(4)(a)1. Both rideshare paragraphs cross-reference that subdivision only. They do not incorporate medical-payments coverage under § 632.32(4)(a)2., and they do not incorporate underinsured-motorist coverage under § 632.32(4m).

OCI’s automobile FAQ, PI-233 (R 08/2026), states the same $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident bodily-injury minimum and states that uninsured-motorist coverage does not cover property damage to the vehicle and does not protect the other driver. There is no statutory uninsured-motorist property-damage requirement in § 632.32. $1,000,000 of engaged-period liability is not $1,000,000 of uninsured-motorist coverage.

An uninsured motor vehicle, other than one owned by a governmental unit, includes a vehicle as to which a bodily-injury liability policy is not in effect and the owner or operator has not furnished proof of financial responsibility for the future and is not a self-insurer. The definition also includes an insured or self-insured vehicle whose insurer or self-insurer is later declared insolvent, a phantom motor vehicle if the statutory conditions are met, and an unidentified motor vehicle involved in a hit-and-run accident with the person. § 632.32(2)(g). A governmental unit’s vehicle is outside the definition.

A phantom motor vehicle makes no physical contact with the insured or a vehicle the insured is occupying, and its operator and owner cannot be identified. § 632.32(2)(bh). For that phantom vehicle to count as uninsured, all of the following must apply: corroboration by competent evidence from someone other than the insured or any other person who makes an uninsured-motorist claim from that accident; a report within 72 hours to a police, peace, or judicial officer, or to the Department of Transportation, or the equivalent if the accident is outside Wisconsin; and, within 30 days, a statement under oath filed with the insurer. Those conditions sit in the phantom subdivision. The separate hit-and-run subdivision, § 632.32(2)(g)3., does not repeat them. “No contact” and “hit-and-run” are not one test.

A policy may limit stacking, and a policy may reduce the limit. Neither clause is automatic.

Stacking is not required, and it is not universally barred. A policy may provide that the limits for any coverage under the policy may not be added to the limits for similar coverage on other motor vehicles to determine the limit available for bodily injury or death in any one accident. § 632.32(5)(f). A policy may also cap uninsured-motorist, underinsured-motorist, or medical-payments coverage, for a person who was not using a motor vehicle, at the highest single applicable limit. § 632.32(5)(g). Wisconsin does not prohibit stacking as a flat rule. The statute permits a policy clause.

A reducing clause is also permission, not a statute that shrinks every payment. A policy may provide that the uninsured-motorist or underinsured-motorist limit for bodily injury or death from one accident shall be reduced by amounts paid by or on behalf of a person or organization that may be legally responsible, amounts paid or payable under a worker’s compensation law, and amounts paid or payable under a disability benefits law. § 632.32(5)(i). The statute does not impose that reduction on every policy.

Section 632.32(4)(d) says subsection (4) does not apply to a commercial liability policy whose auto coverage is limited to motor vehicles that are not owned motor vehicles, or to an umbrella or excess liability policy. Whether a particular surplus-lines form can claim that exception is not settled. The rideshare statute still tells the insurance that satisfies § 440.48(1) to provide primary uninsured-motorist coverage in accordance with § 632.32(4)(a)1 during both periods. Uber’s certificate, below, states the $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident amount anyway.

Insurers paying under the coverages in § 632.32(4) are subrogated to the insured’s rights to the extent of the payment, unless the insurer waives subrogation. § 632.32(4)(c).

Underinsured-motorist coverage is optional. The statutory definition of an underinsured motor vehicle was repealed.

Underinsured-motorist coverage is not what § 440.48 requires. For a policy that goes into effect after November 1, 2011, and that does not include underinsured-motorist coverage, the insurer must give one named insured written notice of the availability of that coverage, including a brief description, one time, with delivery of the policy. § 632.32(4m)(a). Acceptance or rejection need not be in writing. The absence of a premium payment for underinsured-motorist coverage is conclusive proof that the person has rejected it. The rejection applies to all insureds and to renewal. § 632.32(4m)(b) and (c).

The definition of “underinsured motor vehicle” was repealed by 2011 Wisconsin Act 14. The Office of the Commissioner of Insurance’s July 15, 2011 bulletin states that repeal expressly. The current § 632.32(2), as read, defines underinsured-motorist coverage and does not define an underinsured motor vehicle. A “limits compared with limits” test, and a “limits compared with damages” test, are not current statutory definitions. OCI bulletin, July 15, 2011.

OCI’s August 2026 consumer FAQ, PI-233 (R 08/2026), describes underinsured-motorist coverage as increasing bodily-injury protection up to the amount purchased if the at-fault party’s bodily-injury liability limits are lower than the underinsured-motorist limits, with the maximum payable equal to the difference between the two limits. PI-233 (R 08/2026). That is an agency description of the product. It is not a restored statutory definition, and it does not control a policy that uses different wording. Whether a particular company policy would even be an underinsured-motorist policy is a policy question. Uber’s current certificate says the coverage is not included in any amount. Lyft’s current certificate does not mention it. Those are not the same sentence.

For policies newly issued or renewed on or after November 1, 2011, Act 14 is the statute that set the current uninsured-motorist floor, made underinsured-motorist coverage optional, lowered the medical-payments minimum to $1,000, and permitted anti-stacking and reducing clauses. For an accident governed by a policy issued or renewed before that date, read the statute and the policy then in force.

Recovery is barred only when the plaintiff’s negligence is greater than the defendant’s

Contributory negligence does not bar recovery in an action for negligence resulting in death or in injury to person or property if that negligence was not greater than the negligence of the person against whom recovery is sought. Any damages allowed are then diminished in proportion to the amount of negligence attributed to the person recovering. The plaintiff’s negligence is measured separately against each causally negligent person. Wis. Stat. § 895.045(1).

A defendant whose causal negligence is less than 51 percent is liable only for that percentage. A defendant whose causal negligence is 51 percent or more is jointly and severally liable for the damages allowed. A plaintiff who is 50 percent negligent as against a defendant is not barred against that defendant. A plaintiff who is 51 percent negligent as against that defendant is barred against that defendant.

This is not pure comparative fault, and it is not a rule that any contributory negligence bars the claim. OCI’s PI-233 shortens the same bar: recovery only if the person’s negligence is not greater than the other party’s, reduced by the person’s percentage, and no recovery if the person’s negligence is greater. The 51 percent joint-and-several sentence is in the statute, not in that FAQ paragraph. Product-liability comparison is a separate subsection, § 895.045(3), and is not the ordinary auto-negligence rule.

A liability policy makes the insurer liable, up to the amounts stated in the bond or policy, to the persons entitled to recover against the insured for death or for injury to persons or property, whether or not that liability is already established by a final judgment against the insured. Wis. Stat. § 632.24. An injured person may sue the liability insurer directly, up to the policy amounts. That changes who can be named. It does not raise the § 440.48 limit, and it does not turn uninsured-motorist coverage into liability coverage. The statute is aimed at liability insurance for negligence. No rideshare-specific appellate opinion is the source for that statute.

What the form prints, below the statutory answer

A certificate is evidence of insurance, not the policy. The file below is the PDF linked from the “Wisconsin” entry on Uber’s U.S. certificates list. The state identification is that index. The certificate face does not print “Wisconsin” or “State of Wisconsin.” Uber certificate PDF.

Insurer A is Liberty Surplus Insurance Corporation, NAIC 10725. The producer is Aon Risk Insurance Services West, Inc., San Francisco. The insureds are Rasier LLC, Rasier-CA LLC, Rasier-DC LLC, and Rasier-PA LLC. The certificate date on each ACORD 25 page is February 25, 2026. The automobile policy period printed on the forms is March 1, 2026 to March 1, 2027. The claims URL printed on the forms is http://t.uber.com/claims. Section 440.48(1)(f) allows a surplus-lines insurer. Liberty Surplus’s surplus-lines eligibility is not separately verified. The certificate names the company and the NAIC number.

• Available and waiting, policy ASE-665-067247-556, certificate number 570118117697. Covered autos are passenger autos used by a driver logged into the digital network, available to receive requests, who has not accepted any request. Liability limits printed: $50,000 bodily injury per person, $100,000 bodily injury per accident, and $25,000 property damage. The description says uninsured-motorist coverage is included in the amount of $25,000 for death and bodily injury per person and $50,000 for death and bodily injury per accident, and that underinsured-motorist coverage is not included in any amount. The form’s bodily-injury aggregate word on the liability line is “per accident.” The statute’s word in § 440.48(1)(b)1. is “per incident.”
• After acceptance, policy ASE-665-067247-566, certificate number 570118117698. Covered autos are those for which the driver has logged and recorded acceptance and is en route to the pickup or traveling from the pickup to the final destination. The liability limit printed is a $1,000,000 combined single limit. That “combined single limit” wording is the certificate’s, not § 440.48(1)(c)1. The description says “Uninsured Bodily Injury included as further described in the policy,” and then states uninsured-motorist coverage of $25,000 for death and bodily injury per person and $50,000 for death and bodily injury per accident. The sentence finishes on the ACORD 101 additional-remarks schedule that names certificate 570118117698, and that schedule says underinsured-motorist coverage is not included in any amount. Uninsured-motorist coverage on the accepted-trip form is $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident, not $1,000,000. The “as further described in the policy” clause means this certificate is not the policy wording.
• Physical damage is on the same policy number, certificate number 570118117699, for the same accepted-trip use. Comprehensive deductible $2,500. Collision deductible $2,500. The description does not say this physical-damage coverage is contingent on the driver carrying personal comprehensive and collision. It does not cover the available-and-waiting use on the first form. Comprehensive and collision are company coverage the statute does not require.

The certificate does not list a personal-injury-protection limit, a medical-payments limit, an airport liability limit, or an airport uninsured-motorist trigger. No higher-than-statutory liability figure appears. Waiting-period liability matches the statutory $50,000 per person, $100,000 per incident, and $25,000 property damage, with the wording difference noted above. Accepted-trip liability is the $1,000,000 combined single limit the company chose to print against the statute’s “at least $1,000,000” sentence.

Period 1 and Period 2 print liability. Period 3 does not print a liability dollar.

Lyft’s current certificate is Mobilitas General Insurance Company, NAIC 10675. That is not Mobilitas Insurance Company. The form says “Evidence of Insurance Only for the State of WI.” Certificate date August 14, 2026. Certificate number SEA-004219095-05. Reference line CN109337515-WI-GAWUX-26-27. Producer: Marsh Risk & Insurance Services, San Francisco. Producer license number 0437153. Insured: Lyft, Inc. Policies October 1, 2026 to October 1, 2027. Lyft certificate PDF.

• Period 1, policy WIBA1T6624548271, Symbol 10: bodily injury $50,000 per person and $100,000 per accident, property damage $25,000. Those printed figures match the pre-acceptance statutory split in dollars. The certificate does not define Period 1. The form says “per accident” on that bodily-injury pair. The statute says “per incident” for the $100,000 aggregate.
• Period 2, policy WIBA2T6624548271: combined single limit $1,000,000. Period 2 is the only row with a printed $1,000,000 liability limit. The certificate does not define Period 2, so that row is not relabeled as a statutory period.
• Period 3, policy WIBA3T6624548271: the limits cell prints “APD Deductible: 2,500” and does not print a liability dollar. A liability figure printed on a certificate for an earlier policy year is not a basis for filling in a number this form omits.

The remarks say: “The Auto Physical Damage limits are provided under Period 2 and Period 3 policies and will be ACV or the Cost of Repair, whichever is less, less the $2,500 deductible. Policies include UM $25,000/$50,000.” Spell the uninsured notation: $25,000 per person and $50,000 per accident. That sentence does not say “each period.” It does not allocate the coverage to Period 1 only, Period 2 only, or Period 3 only.

The certificate does not mention underinsured-motorist coverage. Silence is not the same as Uber’s sentence that underinsured-motorist coverage “is not included in any amount.” The certificate also does not list personal injury protection, medical payments, an airport liability increase, or a statement that physical damage is contingent on the driver’s own comprehensive and collision.

Lyft’s state-and-local disclosures page places Wisconsin inside a multi-state block. That block tells the driver that a personal policy may not provide listed coverages while logged in or on a prearranged ride, depending on its terms, and it uses the phrase “personal injury protection.” The phrase is in a template that covers more than one jurisdiction. It is not a statement that Wisconsin requires personal injury protection, and it is not a limit on this certificate. The certificate does not list personal injury protection. Lyft state and local disclosures.

If the driver’s insurance lapses or does not provide the required coverage, the company covers that requirement from the first dollar and must defend

A Wisconsin insurer that writes automobile insurance in this state may, notwithstanding any coverage requirements under § 632.32, exclude any and all coverage for a loss or injury that occurs while a participating driver is logged on or is engaged. The right to exclude may apply to any coverage in a motor vehicle policy, including liability for bodily injury and property damage, uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage, medical payments, comprehensive, and collision. § 440.48(3)(a). Those exclusions apply notwithstanding chapter 344. Nothing in subsection (3) implies or requires that a personal automobile policy provide coverage while the driver is logged on, while the driver is engaged, or while the driver otherwise uses a vehicle to transport passengers for compensation. An insurer may still cover that use by contract or endorsement if it chooses. § 440.48(3)(b).

An insurer that excludes coverage as permitted has no duty to defend or indemnify any claim expressly excluded. The section does not invalidate an exclusion, including one in a policy in use or approved for use before May 3, 2015, that excludes coverage for vehicles used to carry persons or property for a charge or available for hire by the public. § 440.48(3)(c)1. If an automobile insurer defends or indemnifies a participating driver on a claim its policy was permitted to exclude, it has a right of contribution against other insurers that provide automobile insurance to the same driver in satisfaction of § 440.48(1) at the time of loss. § 440.48(3)(c)2.

The exclusion sentence is tied to being logged on or engaged. The statute does not say that the fact a driver sometimes drives for a transportation network company voids coverage for a later personal trip. It also does not contain an express sentence that forbids a denial of an exclusively personal claim.

Before the company allows someone to be a participating driver, it must obtain a copy of that person’s automobile liability insurance policy for each personal vehicle the person will use, and it may not allow a person who does not possess proof of automobile liability insurance for each such vehicle to be a participating driver. § 440.445(1)(a)5. and (2)(a)6. That is a gatekeeping requirement that the driver have a personal policy. It is not a holding that the personal policy covers the logged-on or engaged period. The disclosure required before the driver may accept a request says the opposite risk: the company must disclose, in writing, the types of coverage and the limits it provides, and that the driver’s own policy might not provide any coverage while logged on and available or while engaged, depending on its terms. § 440.48(2).

If insurance the driver maintains under the waiting-period paragraph or the engaged-period paragraph has lapsed or does not provide the required coverage, the company’s insurance shall provide the coverage required under subsection (1) beginning with the first dollar of a claim and have the duty to defend the claim. § 440.48(1)(d). “The coverage required under this subsection” is the coverage § 440.48(1) requires, including the primary uninsured-motorist cross-reference. It is not a promise to duplicate every extra limit a certificate happens to show above that floor. It is not collision coverage, and it is not underinsured-motorist coverage. Subsection (1) does not require those.

Company coverage shall not be dependent on a personal automobile insurer first denying a claim, and a personal automobile policy shall not be required to deny a claim first. § 440.48(1)(e).

There is no sentence in § 440.48 that makes company coverage merely excess when the driver has some coverage below the statutory limits. A personal policy that excludes transportation-network use does not provide the coverage subsection (1) requires, so the company’s first-dollar duty and duty to defend apply. A personal policy that exists, does not exclude the use, and simply sits below the $50,000 per person, $100,000 per incident, and $25,000 property-damage floor, or below $1,000,000, is also insurance that does not provide the required coverage, unless a permitted combination brings the total up to the requirement. The statute does not say the short policy stays primary with the company policy excess for the remainder.

Only the coverage required by subsection (1) is filled by that sentence. A personal-policy exclusion of comprehensive and collision can leave physical damage unpaid unless a company policy independently provides it. Uber’s certificate provides comprehensive and collision, at a $2,500 deductible, only for the accepted-trip use. Lyft’s certificate describes physical damage under Period 2 and Period 3, at a $2,500 deductible, and does not define those periods. Neither description states a waiting-period physical-damage limit.

If the company’s insurer pays a comprehensive or collision claim, it must issue payment, as the company directs, either jointly to the owner and the primary lienholder, or directly to the repairer as payment in full. § 440.48(3)(e). That is a payment-direction rule. It is not evidence of which period applied.

A licensed company is not considered to control, direct, or manage a participating driver or that driver’s personal vehicle except as the subchapter or a written agreement provides. Wis. Stat. § 440.41(2). That sentence is not a workers’ compensation determination, and no workers’ compensation statute for these drivers was found in subchapter IV of chapter 440.

Medical payments of $1,000 are a rejectable personal-policy coverage

They are not a rideshare requirement, and they are not personal injury protection. Wisconsin is not a no-fault state. Section 632.32 does not create a personal-injury-protection benefit and does not create a tort threshold. Fault still matters. The comparative-negligence rule is in § 895.045, above.

The first-party medical coverage in the auto statute is medical-payments coverage: coverage to indemnify for medical payments or chiropractic payments, or both, for the protection of all persons using the insured motor vehicle. “Using” includes driving, operating, manipulating, riding in, and any other use. § 632.32(2)(am) and (2)(h).

Every policy subject to the requirement must contain medical-payments coverage of at least $1,000 per person, except as provided in § 632.32(4)(d). Coverage written under that subdivision may be excess over any other source of reimbursement to which the insured person has a legal right. § 632.32(4)(a)2. The named insured may reject medical-payments coverage. If one named insured rejects it, a later renewal by the same insurer need not provide it unless a named insured requests it in writing. § 632.32(4)(bc). The rejection sentence does not say the rejection itself must be in writing.

OCI’s PI-233 (R 08/2026) states the consumer version: insurers must offer the coverage, the insured can decline it, and if the insured elects it the minimum is $1,000. OCI also says medical-payments coverage usually covers only those expenses not covered by health insurance. “Usually” is the agency’s description of how policies are written. The statute’s own permission is that the coverage may be excess. It is not a rule that every medical-payments policy is excess over health insurance.

The transportation-network statute does not require medical payments. It lists medical payments only as one of the coverages a personal auto insurer may exclude while the driver is logged on or engaged. § 440.48(3)(a)3. Neither the current Uber certificate nor the current Lyft certificate lists a medical-payments amount or a personal-injury-protection amount. These certificates are not a statement that either company provides medical payments of $1,000 or personal injury protection.

Medical payments, when a policy actually provides them, are first-party. They are not a substitute for liability coverage against the at-fault driver. The statutory definition is aimed at persons using the insured motor vehicle. Pedestrians and people in the other vehicle are not automatically medical-payments insureds of the company policy. These certificates do not supply the insured definition.

Cities are preempted. An airport fee and a single company permit do not set an insurance dollar.

No city, village, town, or county may enact or enforce an ordinance, or adopt or enforce a resolution, that regulates a transportation network company or its participating drivers and their personal vehicles in connection with transportation network services. Wis. Stat. § 440.465(1).

The exceptions are narrow. A local government may, to the extent necessary to comply with assurances under 49 U.S.C. § 47107, impose airport fees or charges on the company, not exceeding the fees charged to taxicabs, limousines, shuttles, or other for-hire vehicles. It may also require the company to comply with a single airport permit, issued to the company, on the manner of operation on airport property by its participating drivers. § 440.465(1m). Neither exception sets a liability limit.

No primary source reviewed gives a city or an airport a liability dollar different from § 440.48. Uber’s certificate linked from the Wisconsin index has no airport liability sentence and no airport uninsured-motorist sentence. Lyft’s current certificate does not print an airport liability increase.