Electric vehicle (EV) inductive charging is a technology that allows an EV to charge its energy storage system without physical connections. It is an ideal solution for EV charging due to the associated advantages in terms of automation, safety in harsh environments, reliability during environmental disasters, and flexibility. However, several challenges are experienced with inductive charging, such as complexity in design, sensitivity to misalignments, safety concerns due to electromagnetic fields, and high initial cost. Most of these challenges are associated with the design of transmitter and receiver coils, which are the main components of the power transfer and system’s performance. The literature is full of studies that proposed and demonstrated different designs and structures for these coils, considering different magnetic materials, wires, and shielding. There is a special need to report the findings of these studies in one document that provides a comprehensive reference for researchers, students, and engineers who are interested in this technology. Therefore, this thesis presents a comprehensive overview that focus on the structure of transmitter and receiver pad reported in the literature. Different types of windings (e.g. litz, magneto-plate, magneto-coated, tubular copper, REBCO, Cu-clad-Al, etc.), magnetic materials (ferrite, nanoparticle, magnetizable concrete, flexible core, etc.), and shielding (passive, active and reactive) are summarized, explored and compared. In addition, the different pad structures (circular, rectangular, double-D, double-DQ, bipolar, tri-polar, multiple-coil homogeneous, quadrupole, etc.) are presented, and compared, in terms of performance, transmission distance, leakage flux, interoperability, tolerance to misalignment, etc. Also, the thesis presents the current-state-of-the-art of the developed inductive charger prototypes, commercial products available in the market, and international standards, either released or under preparation, associated with this technology. Outdoor installation of inductive chargers at public stations, parking and garages is promising to maximize the system utilization and compensate for its high initial cost. Such a public inductive transmitter must be able to charge vehicles with different models, sizes, and manufactures, which potentially means different receivers. The standard SAE J2954A recommended a universal transmitter at WPT3 level (11.1 kVA) based on the rectangular pad, which must be able to operate with both the rectangular and double-D (DD) receivers. Therefore, this study investigates the interoperability of the universal rectangular transmitter (RT) pad, rectangular receiver (RR), and DD receiver (DDR) reported by the standard J2954A for WPT3 at different Z-classes. These designs are modeled using circuit and 3D finite-element analysis. These models are validated based on the reported performance in the standard J2954A and analyzed to perform the interoperability tests. The circuit models are used to define the operating frequency and the compensating network parameters that achieve the nominal power transfer at maximum efficiency. The interoperability is evaluated using several performance indices, such as coupling factor, transmission power and efficiency, and leakage magnetic fields. These indices are evaluated at perfect alignment, and different linear and rotational misalignments in the system. The outcomes show that both receivers can operate with the universal transmitter and provide the required power to the vehicle at reasonable efficiency (within the acceptable limit [>85%]). Furthermore, both systems realize leakage magnetic fields less than the safe limit (15 µT) for living objects and medical devices, however, operating the DDR with RT shows electric fields higher than the permissible limits (83 V/m). Also, four solenoid models were designed at receiver side, considering a DD coil at transmitter side. These models were compared in terms of power, efficiency, weight, volume and cost. The lowest cost design, which gives the same power and efficiency, is chosen (Design D). The selected design was compared with the DDT/DDR model and an interoperability analysis was made in terms of power and efficiency. The outcomes show that both DDT/DDR and DDT/SR can operate and provide the same power to the vehicle, where the efficiency is within the acceptable range.