

Both options are potentially bad for low-income earners. If you force them to pay for a speed limiter they lost the money for that, which they might not able to afford. If you take away their license they will have difficulty getting around and might lose their job.
So from that perspective the speed limiter might be the less dangerous choice.






Or you could go for a tiered scheme where the device is free if the owner’s income is below a certain level. There’s always options; whether or not they’re taken is another question.