Home » Why People Are Asking If The 25-Year Import Ban Is Dead

Why People Are Asking If The 25-Year Import Ban Is Dead

Volkswagen T Roc Cabriolet

For decades, the United States government has been a thorn in the backside of car enthusiasts. Thanks to the infamous so-called “25-Year Rule,” if an enthusiast loves a car that was never sold in America, they almost always have to wait until that vehicle is at least 25 years old before they can enjoy that car. Now, the White House’s trade war is muddying the waters. The United States and Europe are ironing out a trade agreement, and a key part of it is that the United States and Europe could agree to accept each other’s auto standards. The impact of this could be huge, and it makes us wonder, what does this mean about the 25-Year Rule?

This puzzling question comes to us from Automotive News, which asked the same question on August 22. The United States and European Union announced an updated trade deal framework on August 21. As part of the deal, there will be a baseline 15 percent tariff on goods coming in from the EU, while the EU will be spending $750 billion on U.S. energy and investing another $600 billion in the States.

Vidframe Min Top
Vidframe Min Bottom

But it’s what’s in store for cars that has the potential to change the auto industry, and perhaps, also make being an enthusiast even more fun than it already is. As of right now, Automotive News reports there will be no changes to the auto tariffs, meaning that vehicles coming in from Europe are still getting hit by the 25 percent auto tariff.

VW

However, President Trump has offered Europe a deal where, if Europe introduces legislation to reduce tariffs on American industrial goods, agricultural products, and seafood, then the United States would agree to lower the auto tariff from 25 percent to 15 percent. The U.S. sweetened the deal by saying that the auto tariff reduction would be retroactive to August 1, when the latest tariffs went live, which would save importers a ton of cash.

A Potential Game-Changer

As Automotive News reports, Europe is working fast to satisfy the requirements to get that reduction in place. The big news, at least for the purposes of this piece, is Article 8 of the joint statement published by the U.S. and the EU, from the White House:

8. ​The United States and the European Union commit to work together to reduce or eliminate non-tariff barriers. With respect to automobiles, the United States and the European Union intend to accept and provide mutual recognition to each other’s standards. Cooperation on standards plays a crucial role in enhancing the transatlantic marketplace. The European Union and United States commit to enhance opportunities for technical cooperation between EU- and U.S.-domiciled standards development organizations with the objective of identifying and developing standards for the transatlantic marketplace in key sectors of mutual interest. The United States and the European Union commit to facilitate conformity assessments to cover additional industrial sectors.

Automotive News asked some valid questions:

If Article 8 means that vehicles meeting either EU and U.S. safety and emissions regulations can be sold in each other’s markets as built, there are plenty of unanswered questions:

– Would vehicles made in Mexico or Canada as part of the USMCA trade agreement qualify for European export?
– When would the potential changes go into effect?
– Would franchised dealers be able to order models not intended for the United States, such as diesel-powered Land Rover Defenders, or the Ferrari FXX K Evo?
– Does the proposed rule mean that EU-built used vehicles no longer have to be 25 years from the date of manufacture before they can be legally imported to the United States? Around 20,000 used vehicles from Asia and Europe come to the U.S. each year as private imports brought in by specialty used-car dealers, car collectors and others.
– Can an EU-compliant vehicle be sold in California and the 17 states that follow the state’s emissions regulation?

It’s also not clear which American-made vehicles would appeal to European buyers.

What About The 25-Year Rule?

Renault Avantime 2002 Hd Aed29d421be93c25214bdee95d0490098605d5be6
Renault

All of these are valid questions. But the one I’m most fascinated by is the potential damage it could have against the 25-Year Rule. The short version of the rule is that a vehicle has to be built to Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards and Environmental Protection Agency standards to be eligible for importation as a road vehicle. This is usually verified by the existence of either FMVSS and EPA stickers on the vehicle, or a letter from the vehicle manufacturer stating that the imported vehicle either meets standards or is “substantially similar” to a compliant vehicle sold in America.

Now, that substantially similar clause really means that the imported vehicle is pretty much the same as its U.S. equivalent. The clause is largely used for cars coming in from Canada that have direct equivalents that are or were sold in the United States.

There are exemptions to these rules. You can import a non-conforming car temporarily for tourism, testing, advertising, visiting military, or other similar purposes. Likewise, you can import a non-conforming car for display and education if you’re a museum. Further, you can import a non-conforming car if it’s so rare and historically significant that the government thinks it’s good enough to be here. The government doesn’t just hand out the Show Or Display exemption, and the current list of eligible cars is shorter than you think.

Isyrv5mvsomly7d7qvka
Mercedes Streeter

Finally, there’s one last major way to get around the law, and it’s to go through the convoluted process to have a non-compliant car converted to U.S. safety and emissions standards. This means petitioning the government, going through a Registered Importer, having the modifications done, getting crash testing done, and spending tons of cash. Typically, those taking this route are trying to sell a certain model here, not just importing a single car. This is why a late-year first-generation Smart Fortwo is technically exempt from the 25-Year Rule, so long as it has been converted.

For an enthusiast in pretty much every other situation, you have to wait until your favorite car hits the ripe old age of 25.

The Headache Of Import Enthusiasts

Nissan Skyline Gt R V Spec Ii 20
Nissan

What’s fascinating is what led to the 25-Year Rule. Officially, the law that led to the rule is the Imported Vehicle Safety Compliance Act of 1988. An oft-repeated story is that Mercedes-Benz didn’t like how Americans were importing cheaper gray market cars from Europe, and it successfully lobbied to ban the importation of gray market cars. The truth is quite the rollercoaster ride.

As I wrote back in 2022, the world of car importation used to be unregulated and wild. America went through a huge import fever in the 1970s and 1980s. Motorcycles from Europe and Japan offered riders a vastly different riding experience than the ones that they got from bike builders at home, and often, these imported bikes were cheaper, too. Even Harley-Davidson started importing small Aermacchi Italian motorcycles.

These imports grew to become more than just cheap alternatives to what was already in America. People discovered that those Honda motorcycles didn’t break down nearly as often as their old American bikes did, and that a Mercedes-Benz offered a kind of sporty luxury that you could not get in a Cadillac.

8c5d827c2b55073fa06c96d2a1aaf1bb
Honda

It wasn’t long before Americans discovered that there was a way to get imported goods for even cheaper, and that’s through the gray market. In short, a gray market good is a product that’s sold through an unofficial channel. A lot of gray market goods weren’t vehicles, but household goods. For example, instead of paying a television shop a lot of money for a U.S. market TV, consumers were able to buy cheaper examples that were imported directly from Japan.

It was a similar deal with cars and motorcycles. If you walked into a Mercedes dealership and didn’t like either the price or the options of the cars available, you were often able to find a dealer who had the car you wanted imported directly from Europe. Buyers got these cars for a discount over buying from an official channel. Sure, you didn’t get a warranty, but many Americans felt that the discount was good enough to take the risk.

Gray market goods became commonplace in America. Department stores like K-Mart thrived on putting gray market goods on their shelves and selling them for up to 40 percent cheaper than the same products sold through official means. The ads below show some of what K-Mart sold in the 1970s and 1980s, but these products weren’t necessarily gray market:

Kmartads
K-Mart via eBay and eBay

Kiplinger’s Personal Finance noted in November 1985 that from 1980, some 65,000 gray market cars had been imported into the States. Kiplinger’s figured that once the final numbers came in from 1985, they would have indicated 60,000 gray market cars sold in that year alone. How crazy did it get? In December 1984, the Washington Post reported that more than 20 percent of the new Mercedes-Benz cars sold in America were gray market models.

The twist was that it was official Mercedes-Benz franchised dealers who often sold these cars. So, the U.S. arm of Mercedes-Benz might have been angry that it was missing out on sales, but a lot of the blame was on its own dealers. Still, automakers and dealership lobbying groups fought to stop gray market import cars.

Then came the safety aspect.

725fe7b787f861beb5d05c42a963b9cd
Mercedes-Benz

In the past, the government did not regulate the gray market car conversion industry. Anyone with a wrench could convert a gray market car to American safety standards, and it was on the owner of the vehicle to prove compliance. As a result, the quality of the conversion work ranged widely. As I reported in 2022, Mercedes-Benz and several government agencies conducted studies into converted gray market cars. The government came to the conclusion that 60 percent or more of the gray market cars that flooded America were non-compliant with safety regulations.

Non-profit trade groups like the Automobile Importers Compliance Association (AICA) fought against the notion that these cars needed to be banned. As far as AICA noted to the New York Times, the problem wasn’t the cars themselves, but the fact that there was no government oversight of gray market conversions, leading to operators who blatantly didn’t follow the rules. AICA believed that all the government needed to do was clamp down on who could do the conversions.

Sadly, it wasn’t enough. While the government took AICA’s advice and restricted who could convert vehicles, the government also banned them until they reach 25 years of age, too. If you want to read more of my history on the 25-Year Rule, click here.

The Potential Impact Of Article 8

Volkswagen T Roc Cabriolet 2022 Wallpaper
VW

That brings us back to Trump’s agreement with Europe. Sadly, the government has not provided any clarity whatsoever on what’s going on here. However, we do know that the White House is looking to ink similar trade deals with Japan and South Korea.

If the United States suddenly begins recognizing European, Japanese, and South Korean safety and emissions standards as being equal to America’s, what does that mean for the 25-Year Rule? Nobody really knows. NHTSA has not gotten back to us as of publishing, and even reporting from Automotive News isn’t super certain:

Some believe that, if enacted, the new rules would allow imported vehicles from each other’s regions to be sold on both sides of the Atlantic without meeting the same safety and emissions standards.

Others said automakers would still be required to tailor vehicles to each market. But the potential changes could push the regions to accept the other’s safety, emissions and fuel economy test results.

The changes are likely aspirational. The intention to recognize each other’s standards is not a commitment, said Jennifer Smith-Veluz, international trade attorney at Butzel.

Smart

Note that none of these brings up the 25-Year Rule at all. In fact, it’s entirely possible that, if these rules go live, they would apply only to new cars. It might even apply only to cars imported through official sales channels. Unfortunately, it’s impossible to know or even take an educated guess because, as of publishing, the White House has provided no further clarification. It sort of just dropped this bomb without further explanation.

But in theory, if America suddenly begins recognizing the emissions and safety standards of at least Europe, and then maybe later Japan and South Korea, then automakers who haven’t sold certain models here on the basis of the costs of compliance might feel inclined to give America a go. Maybe I might be so lucky as to see my beloved Smart make a return to America. Maybe, when the economy sucks, we could see some Japanese Kei cars. The possibilities could be endless.

However, we won’t know for sure until further clarification of Article 8 is provided. Still, that won’t stop enthusiasts from dreaming. Did America accidentally kill the 25-Year Rule? I’m going to say probably not, but we’ll have to see.

Share on facebook
Facebook
Share on whatsapp
WhatsApp
Share on twitter
Twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn
Share on reddit
Reddit
Subscribe
Notify of
112 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
D0nut
Member
D0nut
6 months ago

Are the EU emissions standards stricter than the same stateside? I’m assuming that’s the case, and if so, I could see as being the biggest hurtle. Like would a US hellcat be legal in the EU, because that’s one area I don’t think the EU would simply relax.

Mike Smith - PLC devotee
Member
Mike Smith - PLC devotee
6 months ago
Reply to  D0nut

Contrary to popular opinion, it’s the other way around. US is more stringent on so-called criteria pollutants* (NOx / hydrocarbons) than EU is, but the tradeoff the EU expects is to get better fuel economy (~CO2) in return.

*The one place that may not be true anymore is on particulates – the EU is pushing particulate standards that are starting to require particulate filters like we have on diesel trucks today on gasoline powered cars. Approximately no one is happy about this, nor should they be.

D0nut
Member
D0nut
6 months ago

Thanks! Super helpful.

Kevin Rhodes
Member
Kevin Rhodes
6 months ago

And aside from what Mike said about emissions, safety stuff is also regulated, and often just “different” rather than really better or worse.

EricTheViking
EricTheViking
6 months ago
Reply to  D0nut

EPA and EU have been trying to harmonise their standards as to reduce the headache of engineering and testing the emission control equipments. However, EPA and EU can’t agree on measurement system: EPA wants gram/mile while EU wants gram/kilometre. They are still holding their breaths until one of them gave out.

Spikedlemon
Spikedlemon
6 months ago

I think this is a dream.

US safety standards are an intentional barrier to entry. They’ve had ample reason to harmonize, and more incentive (before the tariffs) to do so.

LionZoo
Member
LionZoo
6 months ago

First of all, I don’t see how you can apply this retroactively. Even if you have standards alignment, the cars built before alignment are probably not consistent with the standards of the other jurisdiction. Second of all, even if aligned going forward, you’ll still need certification from the governing body of the sales destination to be sold; just because you can meet that standard doesn’t mean you have the certification as certification is an affirmative process. In that situation, maybe the manufacturer will issue you a letter stating that they meet standards even if not certified, but honestly that feels like a lot of liability for the manufacturer to take on.

Drew
Member
Drew
6 months ago

Did America accidentally kill the 25-Year Rule? I’m going to say probably not, but we’ll have to see.

I agree with you here. This looks a lot more like aligning things so that new vehicles will be available for sale here and in Europe (and even that is not fleshed out and agreed-upon). I don’t see this ending the 25 year rule, but making more European vehicles initially available in the US is also good! It would be great if we could all get on the same vehicle standards, but at least making strides to accept European test results and such would be a good start.

Grey alien in a beige sedan
Member
Grey alien in a beige sedan
6 months ago

Too bad this might not extend to Asian countries…. who wouldn’t want a diesel-powered Hilux as their work vehicle?

Jon Myers
Jon Myers
6 months ago

I’ve seen too many diesel powered Hiaces where I live. They appear to have absolutely no emissions equipment. You can smell them from far away. I suspect they pollute more than 100’s of EPA compliant passenger vehicles.

Scott
Member
Scott
6 months ago

That two-door Renault minivan looking thing is very interesting, what is it?

Also, though I’d probably not buy another VW product, and a convertible crossover is probably the least practical kind of crossover possible (no disrespect to Autopian’s Murano convertible intended) that VW convertible crossover pictured twice (first in red at the top, and in light blue near the bottom) is a pretty interesting item as well, whatever it is.

OrigamiSensei
Member
OrigamiSensei
6 months ago
Reply to  Scott

That’s a Renault Avantime. They are strange-looking beasts but rather cool in their own way.

Scott
Member
Scott
6 months ago
Reply to  OrigamiSensei

Thanks!

EmotionalSupportBMW
EmotionalSupportBMW
6 months ago

Trade Proposal:

EU receives- 600 billion in energy and the entire Jacksonville Jaguars
US receive- 599 billion in various Fiat Pandas. When all available Pandas are acquired, we’ll supplement with Sendros. Also, we get Athelico Madrid.

Art of the deal, folks!

Drew
Member
Drew
6 months ago

EU receives- 600 billion in energy and the entire Jacksonville Jaguars

Let’s see if we can improve this deal for the US.

EmotionalSupportBMW
EmotionalSupportBMW
6 months ago
Reply to  Drew

EU says no. We’d have to throw in the Movie Industry or something valuable for them to take all that dead cap money.

LionZoo
Member
LionZoo
6 months ago

What did Athletico Madrid do to deserve Florida???

Drew
Member
Drew
6 months ago
Reply to  LionZoo

Hey, we don’t have to put them in Florida! No one deserves that. We can find a nice reasonable place to put them: like the Canadian border, so that they can eventually end up in Canada.
I’m imagining that they could keep renovating and just slowly edge their way across the border.

Last edited 6 months ago by Drew
LionZoo
Member
LionZoo
6 months ago
Reply to  Drew

Imagine them having to move from Madrid to Maine though.

Drew
Member
Drew
6 months ago
Reply to  LionZoo

Bring them to NW Washington. They’ll creep up to BC and it’ll be great!

EmotionalSupportBMW
EmotionalSupportBMW
6 months ago
Reply to  LionZoo

Buenos Diaz tu Atletico Bangor, bub!

SNL-LOL Jr
Member
SNL-LOL Jr
6 months ago

Athetico Madrid? I’d rather have the Real one.

PresterJohn
Member
PresterJohn
6 months ago

Automotive News? Nah I scooped them by over a day:

https://www.theautopian.com/californias-new-attempts-to-protect-the-environment-seem-stupidly-shortsighted/comment-page-1/#comment-737276

In all seriousness thank you for investigating this Mercedes!

Last edited 6 months ago by PresterJohn
Cheats McCheats
Cheats McCheats
6 months ago

Just give me my lada already!

Manwich Sandwich
Member
Manwich Sandwich
6 months ago

It will Niva happen…

Huja Shaw
Huja Shaw
6 months ago

Mercedes (Streeter, not Benz) is killing it. I will never be shopping in the gray or 25-year-old car markets but this deep dive was a great read about that and a bunch of other tangential topics.

John Riley
John Riley
6 months ago

What about the chicken tax? I get that small vans did not sell in large numbers here, but lower numbers might be ok if Euro standards were OK, and there was a lower tariff.

CreamySmooth
Member
CreamySmooth
6 months ago
Reply to  John Riley

iirc, the questionable ways in which Ford, namely, was getting Transit Connects past the chicken tax basically killed them here. Ford was told to stop or be forced to pay back the dodged taxes plus interest to the tune of a few billion $.

i.e. importing them as passenger vans and literally throwing away the back seats after they passed through port to be sold as commercial vehicles.

4jim
4jim
6 months ago

If it goes away I still will not be able to afford both a 70 series land cruiser AND the shipping/import fees.

The NSX Was Only in Development for 4 Years
The NSX Was Only in Development for 4 Years
6 months ago

Even if the stupid rule accidentally gets axed as a result of all this fooling around, the cars will be tariffed so hard no non-rich person will be able to bring anything over.

And all it would take to undo everything is our Benevolent Leader getting wind that these foreign devil machines are flooding the streets of the Homeland and he’d stop any private auto imports immediately. And that’s to say nothing of what the states would do about this – they can barely tolerate a few kei trucks puttering around.

Brandon Forbes
Brandon Forbes
6 months ago

Not necessarily, tariffs are paid on the purchase price, so if I’m looking at a 10 year old Citroen, it would be like $5k, and even if you tack on 20% in tariffs, it’s still only $6k. Yes on the high end, looking at new cars would be awful, but for the older used stuff, it would be amazing!

Andy Individual
Andy Individual
6 months ago

” The Citroens are eating our dogs!”

Z4Zoe
Z4Zoe
6 months ago

All of this seems as likely to me as ‘Europe’ (which bits of it?!) investing $600 billion etc., etc. These are all exploratory talks, not actual deals, and will most likely amount to nothing.

What might be possible is for each region to accept crash testing and environmental assessments from the other which would keep costs lower for companies wishing to enter a new market. I don’t see why Europe can’t accept that a car deemed safe in America is perfectly good enough for use on our roads (it is) and vice versa.

There will always be localisation issues – plastic vs. glass headlamps, turn signal colour and so on but if an agreement could be reached on the core principles of safety and emissions that would be a breakthrough I think.

Tangentially, but related, I read this today: Potentially bad news for European classic owners in America and is, of course, entirely tariff related…

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/aug/25/postal-services-in-europe-suspend-parcel-shipments-to-us-amid-uncertainty-over-tariffs

Mike Harrell
Member
Mike Harrell
6 months ago
Reply to  Z4Zoe

Potentially bad news for European classic owners in America…

I don’t know that I’d call my 1972 Velorex 435 a “classic,” exactly, but I was just informed by a parts house in the Czech Republic that they aren’t currently fulfilling orders from the US. I need a set of brushes for its starter/generator so now I’m looking around for brushes that might be cut down to fit.

Dogisbadob
Dogisbadob
6 months ago

It’s time to accept the UNECE standards.

Mexico accepts both US and international standards. We can do the same.

Canada’s import ban used to be just 10 years, but they raised it to 15 for American reasons. The change is recent, well after 2000.

EricTheViking
EricTheViking
6 months ago
Reply to  Dogisbadob

Canada was this ->*<- close in adopting UNECE in 2000. The manufacturers threatened to move all of the production and manufacturing plants out of Canada if it was done deal. So, Canada gave in…

Younork
Younork
6 months ago

A few points:

  1. If this happens, it would be a really big win for enthusiasts on both sides of the pond. I’m sure there are European enthusiasts who would love some American metal (especially trucks); and there certainly enough enthusiasts here who could have their manual obsession satisfied at no additional cost to the OEM.
  2. I can’t imagine that this new agreement extends backwards. It only makes sense as a negotiation point when applied to new vehicles.
  3. The recent moves to deregulate vehicle emissions and generally kneecap the EPA seems directly at odds with this agreement. I don’t really see a world where both stand. Either we keep EPA regulations and form a reciprocal trade agreement with Europe, or we go back to filthy cars and trucks with no European agreement.
  4. Lastly, amber turn-signals in the US, or red turn-signals in the Europe, or both? Which is/are a likely outcome of this agreement?
Frank C.
Frank C.
6 months ago
Reply to  Younork

Your #3 is the most interesting here. With Trump kneecapping the EPA and rolling us back 30 years on pollution, any incoming Euro market vehicles would reverse his attempts. Those vehicles are built to the Paris Accords, something he pulled us out of. I welcome the end run on his idiotic policies.

GENERIC_NAME
GENERIC_NAME
6 months ago
Reply to  Younork

It’s not that hard to get US vehicles registered in Europe depending on the country. It’s just that few people choose to do so. You also get into things like the Cybertruck (and anything over 3.5 tonnes) being classified as a heavy goods vehicle and requiring a truck licence.

Phuzz
Member
Phuzz
6 months ago
Reply to  GENERIC_NAME

The Cybertruck has a lot more road-blocks to being road legal in the EU than the weight, mostly that the bodywork is far too angular to pass pedestrian safety standards.

Grey alien in a beige sedan
Member
Grey alien in a beige sedan
6 months ago
Reply to  Younork

Red turn signals to be outlawed in the USA. One can only dream of such a utopia.

Younork
Younork
6 months ago

While we’re on the topic, can we also ban turn signals which use LEDs to fade in and out. New Mazdas and BMWs are most guilty. Instead of a simple on off blink, they gradually fade. They do not get other drivers’ attention like they should, and when paired with horrific placement as seen on the likes of the CX-50, they are difficult to see unless you are specifically looking for them. Tacky design decision with major safety implications imo.

EricTheViking
EricTheViking
6 months ago
Reply to  Younork

And I absolutely hate those microscopic turn signal indicators and brake lamps. Most of newer Opel and Peugeot have turn signal indicators that are about one square centimetre, but they are painful to look at during the night driving.

Another issue is the long, thin indicators and brake lamps. One of them “overpowers” other due to the light frequency. Lot of people complained about not seeing the turn signal indicators when the brake lamps are illuminated.

Younork
Younork
6 months ago
Reply to  EricTheViking

The issue I see is turn signals being placed low on the bumper, so if you’re at a stop light behind someone, you cannot actually see their rear blinker. Or if they are facing you across the intersection, they’re easy to miss on a quick glance. Really wish regulation would address these issues instead of letting OEMs get cute with a safety device.

EricTheViking
EricTheViking
6 months ago
Reply to  Younork

The “bumper-mounted” taillamps were the legacy of Australian Design Rules where one side must be visible from other side at an angle when the spare tyre is attached to the tailgate. Thus, certain Land Rovers and Nissan have two sets of taillamps…

What me?
What me?
6 months ago
Reply to  Younork

I have to be a big fan to get a truck here in the Netherlands. I just checked a F150 Lariat with a weight of 2453 kg will set me back about € 550 in yearly road taxes,quarterly… So € 2200 ($2500) just in taxes. But that is peanuts compared to the taxes when I’m actually buying it…

When I buy it I also have to pay a special car tax. Which is dependent on CO2 emission. For a F150 Lariat the CO2 emission is a staggering 327 gram per km.

Now some math and tax tiers…
With a car which emits 0 gr/km you pay € 667 in tax, with every gram over that 0 you pay €2. So a car which emits 50 gr/km of CO2 that would cost € 667 + €100 = € 767
That’s till a max of 79 gr/km (which would equal € 825).
Then you go up a tier and you start paying €79 per gr/km. That tier goes to 101 gr/km which maxes it at € 2.563
Next tier is € 173 per gr/km, that tier goes to 141 gr/km, which maxes out at € 9.483
Next tier is € 284 per gr/km, that tier goes to 157 gr/km, which maxes out at € 14.027.
Above that 157 gr/km you pay an eye watering € 568 per gram of CO2 you emit.

So with your F150 and an emission of 327 you pay € 14.027for the first 157 grams of CO2. The remaining 169 grams of CO2 will cost you € 568 per gram!

that is a whooping € 110.000 (128.000) of just taxes…

A Ford transit van does 182 grams. That’s a big difference

* There is an exemption for companies, they pay € 74 per gr/km. So you see some trucks in the Netherlands but it is really only people who have their own company.

DialMforMiata
Member
DialMforMiata
6 months ago

GOOD NEWS! Dacia Sanderos for everybody!

Andreas8088
Member
Andreas8088
6 months ago
Reply to  DialMforMiata

COTD

Andy Individual
Andy Individual
6 months ago
Reply to  DialMforMiata

It Skoda be a good day!

Angry Bob
Member
Angry Bob
6 months ago

Finally, I can get a Ferrari FXX K Evo.

Grey alien in a beige sedan
Member
Grey alien in a beige sedan
6 months ago
Reply to  Angry Bob

I heard everyone has one in Europe.

TK-421
TK-421
6 months ago

“Sadly, the government has not provided any clarity whatsoever on what’s going on here.” You should assign that to the F5 key and just mash as needed every day.

Now being able to import a GR Yaris? That would interest me.

Younork
Younork
6 months ago
Reply to  TK-421

I just checked. Because of the strength of the Euro right now, a new GR Yaris would be $60,500 USD if the currency is simply converted.

Younork
Younork
6 months ago
Reply to  Younork

It seems that a 19% German VAT is added to the base price listed on the OEMs’ websites. I presume if you order a GR Yaris, or a wagon corolla, through a domestic Toyota dealer you wouldn’t need to pay additional taxes, but I suppose that is all up in the air right now.

AssMatt
Member
AssMatt
6 months ago
Reply to  TK-421

dropped this bomb without further explanation” is SOP, what keeps us all up at night, and how this will ultimately end.

The NSX Was Only in Development for 4 Years
The NSX Was Only in Development for 4 Years
6 months ago
Reply to  TK-421

I don’t understand the obsession people still have with the GR Yaris when the same drivetrain and most of the other bits are available in the Corolla.

TK-421
TK-421
6 months ago

I have the GR-C. Smaller car, less weight, 2 doors, same drive train and power? Sign me up.

Last edited 6 months ago by TK-421
Finalformminivan
Finalformminivan
6 months ago

People want what they can’t have.

Sammy B
Member
Sammy B
6 months ago

A common sense approach (meaning it would never happen) is to set it at maybe 10 years rather than 25. Heck I’d settle for 15 like Canada, but I think we can both do better. Ten years would keep the new car market happy enough I think. I mean 0 would be ideal, but 10 feels like a very fair and realistic compromise.

Last edited 6 months ago by Sammy B
Dogisbadob
Dogisbadob
6 months ago
Reply to  Sammy B

Canada’s 15-year rule used to be 10 years, but they raised it to 15 for American reasons. The change is recent, as in well after 2000.

Sammy B
Member
Sammy B
6 months ago
Reply to  Dogisbadob

dang I didn’t realize that! sigh.

Ranwhenparked
Member
Ranwhenparked
6 months ago

While this is actually something I could get behind, individual states have long since learned that they can nullify federal regulations in this area by simply refusing to register non-US spec vehicles. I suspect mine will continue to be one, unless, say, the CEO of Sallie Mae suddenly decides he really, really has to have a Citroen C6, then maybe the DMV would flex a little

William Domer
Member
William Domer
6 months ago
Reply to  Ranwhenparked

I want that car. In midnight blue.

Goof
Goof
6 months ago

Some believe that, if enacted, the new rules would allow imported vehicles from each other’s regions to be sold on both sides of the Atlantic without meeting the same safety and emissions standards.

Let’s now reboot the TV series “Sliders” and all slide into alternate reality where the Ford F-150 is Europe’s best selling vehicle by the year 2035 because of the rapid development and proliferation of cheap synthetic fuels in the parallel timeline.

Chirpy
Chirpy
6 months ago

Jimny!

MahNaMahNa
Member
MahNaMahNa
6 months ago
Reply to  Chirpy

Yes!!!

V10omous
Member
V10omous
6 months ago

Prices of old electronics are always amazing to see.

Ottomottopean
Member
Ottomottopean
6 months ago
Reply to  V10omous

Right?!? Prices never come down. Tech just gets better.

V10omous
Member
V10omous
6 months ago
Reply to  Ottomottopean

I actually do believe you could buy a 19″ TV for less than $479 in 1978 dollars ($2500 adjusted) right now.

That is if any 19″ TVs still exist.

Cheap Bastard
Member
Cheap Bastard
6 months ago
Reply to  V10omous

Sure you can. We just call them monitors:

https://www.amazon.com/19-inch-monitor/s?k=19+inch+monitor

That 19″ Zenith TV cost $479. Today you can buy a 19″ monitor for about 1/5th -1/10th that price.

Frank Wrench
Frank Wrench
6 months ago
Reply to  Cheap Bastard

I just disposed of my 15″ CRT monitor I bought in 1996 for $500. The depth of the thing was more like 20 inches. They were laughing at it at the dump

Ottomottopean
Member
Ottomottopean
6 months ago
Reply to  V10omous

Yeah, I get that. I was referring to tech just getting better as a method of comparison where we look at a “typical TV for average household.”

19″ TV might be equivalent to a 55″ or 65″ today which you can get for around that price still.

So, a 19″ might have been aspirational at the time, but still achievable.
I also bought an early version of a HD TV from Sharp when they first came out. Only 720p and a 36″ flat screen LCD for $2500. A few years ago I also bought an OLED 65″ TV for $2500.

Rick Cavaretti
Rick Cavaretti
6 months ago

Here’s what hilarious about the US accepting European car standards. On one hand, the Trump administration is trying to kill the EPA and has already dropped us from international emissions treaties. Yet European automobiles are built with those very issues in mind; ever decreasing emissions and increasing fuel economy. Remember the price of gas in Europe and other parts of the world is not artificially kept down by subsidies. They all pay a real world price for it.

Frank C.
Frank C.
6 months ago
Reply to  Rick Cavaretti

Wait until he realizes this action nullifies his prior actions.

Jon L
Jon L
6 months ago
Reply to  Rick Cavaretti

Trump Logic: those emissions standards make the cars more expensive. US built cars will be much cheaper to buy since no standards so they will sell more and make US built cars more profitable.

Grey alien in a beige sedan
Member
Grey alien in a beige sedan
6 months ago
Reply to  Jon L

Don’t forget we can enhance the octane of the gas with a little special molecule called tetraethyl lead. It’s far cheaper than most currently used additives! Let’s bring that back too!

Spikedlemon
Spikedlemon
6 months ago

With a fuel shark, and the power of magnets: you’ll all be laughing at the gains.

99 Sport
Member
99 Sport
6 months ago
Reply to  Rick Cavaretti

There are a bunch of people claiming switching to EU emissions standards would be a “reimplementation” of emissions standards. This is not the case. US (and especially CARB standards) are MUCH tougher than EU. In the motorcycle world, everyone wants an EU map / tune on their KTM as they are much richer.

Below are three sources that confirm it. The third link has numbers. Chart 10 “US and European standards are not equivalent” shows US limits are about one tenth the EU limits. The EU may have tighter limits on fuel economy (and much higher fuel prices), but tailpipe emission limits are FAR higher. Switching to EU standards would be equivalent to rolling back US emissions standards at least 3 decades for NOx (see chart 12)

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/ATAG/2017/595363/IPOL_ATA(2017)595363_EN.pdf
US federal emissions standards are broadly more ambitious
for key local air quality pollutants, particularly NOx, than EU 
standards.

https://www.aem.org/news/what-the-looming-carb-regulations-mean-for-equipment-manufacturers#:~:text=According%20to%20Neva%2C%20CARB%27s%20proposed,Aftertreatment%20Systems
According to Neva, CARB’s proposed emission limits for criteria pollutants are even more onerous than the European Union’s (EU) Stage V requirements. As compared to Tier 4 Final and EU Stage V, CARB wants to see NOx emissions reduced by another 90%

https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/ICCT_comparison%20Euro%20v%20US.pdf

Frank C.
Frank C.
6 months ago
Reply to  99 Sport

Here’s a reminder. Trump is at war with California and therefore CARB. The last thing he wants is numbers set to CARB’s requirements. That’s the whole point of killing the EPA, and California’s requirements.

Last edited 6 months ago by Frank C.
112
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x