Defender U.S. Duty/Tariff Rates
- Thread starter Dipodomys
- Start date
Mirrajumper
Well-known member
You bought a military truck and want to register it as a passenger vehicle?
It being a military vehicle really doesn't have anything to do with its tariff classification, and I figure it's worth a shot. It certainly wasn't designed to carry cargo, which is what would tip it into the "light truck" category. My wife's Acura RDX has more cargo space than this thing, and it was designed to carry a passenger in the back. I think a fair argument can be made, but we'll see.
Rear seats is usally the loose definition Customs goes with. I had rear seats put in my 110 beacuse PO had taken them out. Trip to junk yard and loosely bolted in saved my money. The D90 I imported had rear jumpseats so was classfied as passenger. Its the 2 door 110s that usually get screwed. Sounds like you are getting screwed because it is military, but if it has seats in the back, you should push for passenger status. Royal paion in the butt. Your Customs agent should be able to deal with this. Good luck.
evilfij
Well-known member
I thought customs closed that loophole?
Not sure of the latest
Recent Customs decisions have indicated that tip-up rear jump seats seats aren't good enough, because they allow the vehicle to be instantly converted to a "cargo" vehicle.
Regardless, whatever the rule may be, it is inconsistently applied. Plenty of folks have imported non-station wagon 90s and even 2-door 110s under the 2.5% rate, rear seats or not. A good friend of mine imported an ex-MOD 2-door 110 three years ago, and also a long wheelbase Toyota HJ75, both with no rear seats, and they came in at the lower rate.
Here's a photo of the rear of my 90. The radio battery box and radio operator's "table" take up 2/3 of the floor space, with only 18 inches between the rear door and the radio box. Note also the radio operator's seat (complete with seatbelts), which intrudes into the "cargo" area and doesn't even tip out of the way. In all, I've got about four square feet of "cargo" space. My wife's Acura has more free cargo space.
The rate applied to my vehicle is clearly absurd. I just need to take the time to write up a compelling case for reversal.
meatblanket
Well-known member
I imported a military 110 (no rear seating) back in 2011 and paid the 2.5% rate. It looks like they are changing the rules to grab some cash from Ford. Hopefully US Customs and Border Protection will limit this retroactive duty determination to manufacturers.
This sucks as I was toying with the idea of importing a Wolf XD. If this is now the rule, we'll also be paying a 25% duty on an 80" Series 1 unless it's a Tickford station wagon.
This sucks as I was toying with the idea of importing a Wolf XD. If this is now the rule, we'll also be paying a 25% duty on an 80" Series 1 unless it's a Tickford station wagon.
Government always looking for money.
I had received a sales tax bill from NYS over a year after registration claiming I never paid sales tax. When you register for the first time in NY you pay the sales tax. I had to prove my innocence otherwise pay 1500+ in fees(this is on top of port fees paid)
Again, good ol government serving the people.
I had received a sales tax bill from NYS over a year after registration claiming I never paid sales tax. When you register for the first time in NY you pay the sales tax. I had to prove my innocence otherwise pay 1500+ in fees(this is on top of port fees paid)
Again, good ol government serving the people.
Siia109
Well-known member
May'21 for mine and it was feared the chicken tax would get me - but my rate was 2.5% via Baltimore - How the hell has 2 years gone pass already and I still haven't started the rebuild!!!
Hi All! New to the site, so hello everyone! a Brit implant in the US.
Saw this post during some research and wanted to give my perspective. I used to import into Newark and have imported non-LR and LR 90's and they all came in at 2.5% (last one into Newark was late 2021). We've since moved west and are coming into Port Hueneme, and we saw one Defender 90 at 2.5% but now currently have 3 held by Customs for the 'this isn't 2.5% its a 25%' change of terms . We are not sure which of the 3 (or if they are proposing all 3) as all 3 are on the same BOL, and they only give a response at the BOL level. 2 of them have proper rear seating, 1 of them has audio set up in the rear also. We're disputing the request and provided information to back up our case on each car and are awaiting back to see what the final determination is, and what vehicle(s).
1998 Defender 90 2500 (rear benches, audio etc. which is classed as 'furnishings in the rules that would help make it a 'car')
1997 Defender XD Wolf (like the above, but with two full rear benches to seat 4)
1971 Series IIA with rear fixed benches / No roof, completely open
We've heard recently of others we know who import Defenders having the 2.5% adjusted to 25% coming into Florida, South Carolina and Southern California ports. Newark still remains to be 2.5% from what we have heard. The main thing here is the inconsistency, which makes for a good legal case (We've pinged William too on this).
There is also no transparency into the way in which the determination is managed. Unfortunately in some of these ports, people differ and ones view of a car is not the same as the next, or one is a jobs worth and fancies creating some unnecessary stops and changes. The wording we've seen on the guidance and determination is very vague, open to interpretation and we've also reviewed some previous disputes which were rejected, and the details of the rejections; most of which are inconsistent. Its a cash grab from CBP and its having an impact on some dealers businesses and it may stop people importing these as much as they do.
Thanks all, and looking forward to being part of this site
Saw this post during some research and wanted to give my perspective. I used to import into Newark and have imported non-LR and LR 90's and they all came in at 2.5% (last one into Newark was late 2021). We've since moved west and are coming into Port Hueneme, and we saw one Defender 90 at 2.5% but now currently have 3 held by Customs for the 'this isn't 2.5% its a 25%' change of terms . We are not sure which of the 3 (or if they are proposing all 3) as all 3 are on the same BOL, and they only give a response at the BOL level. 2 of them have proper rear seating, 1 of them has audio set up in the rear also. We're disputing the request and provided information to back up our case on each car and are awaiting back to see what the final determination is, and what vehicle(s).
1998 Defender 90 2500 (rear benches, audio etc. which is classed as 'furnishings in the rules that would help make it a 'car')
1997 Defender XD Wolf (like the above, but with two full rear benches to seat 4)
1971 Series IIA with rear fixed benches / No roof, completely open
We've heard recently of others we know who import Defenders having the 2.5% adjusted to 25% coming into Florida, South Carolina and Southern California ports. Newark still remains to be 2.5% from what we have heard. The main thing here is the inconsistency, which makes for a good legal case (We've pinged William too on this).
There is also no transparency into the way in which the determination is managed. Unfortunately in some of these ports, people differ and ones view of a car is not the same as the next, or one is a jobs worth and fancies creating some unnecessary stops and changes. The wording we've seen on the guidance and determination is very vague, open to interpretation and we've also reviewed some previous disputes which were rejected, and the details of the rejections; most of which are inconsistent. Its a cash grab from CBP and its having an impact on some dealers businesses and it may stop people importing these as much as they do.
Thanks all, and looking forward to being part of this site
rocky
NAS-ROW Addict
Inevitably they'll all move to 25%.
One of two things will happen. If the charge is incorrect based on statute and or regulations and someone or group is willing to fund the litigation. The Defender of Defenders can be hired.
Two: Prices of existing Defenders primarily ROW might rise a little as the 25% tax will discourage many people from importing.
One of two things will happen. If the charge is incorrect based on statute and or regulations and someone or group is willing to fund the litigation. The Defender of Defenders can be hired.
Two: Prices of existing Defenders primarily ROW might rise a little as the 25% tax will discourage many people from importing.
If it brings money in, then they'll always try to squeeze it!
I have pinged William on this, and will see what he comes back with. I'm happy to work on it, but also have to be cautious not to say too much 'Well we've done a ton at 2.5%' incase they try to back date all of our 2.5% and set an example!
I have pinged William on this, and will see what he comes back with. I'm happy to work on it, but also have to be cautious not to say too much 'Well we've done a ton at 2.5%' incase they try to back date all of our 2.5% and set an example!
Z.G
Well-known member
I can only imagine how much MB spent to get the 25 year law enacted, even combined I wouldn't think we're capable of getting anything changed haha
donb
Well-known member
And MB did that a few decades ago which I'm sure was cheaper and easier.
I was just listening to this week's Truck Show podcast and they were talking about some EPA/CARB policies that had me shaking my head in disbelief. They do not make it easy the little guy and actually help the big companies.
They make a lot more money from the big companies than they do the little guys, so their favoritism is always leaning slightly towards them.
Will keep digging and let people know what I find out / what I can try to do to help. Had another importer just say recently they got in at 2.5% for something others are being dinged 25% on...
Thanks to all who have contributed to this thread. I contacted the Defender of Defenders attorney but never received a response. If folks want to go in on a legal complaint on this matter, I'd be happy to be a party and to contribute to the costs. I have a few months remaining to file an appeal. I planned to submit it myself, but would love to have some legal chops behind it.
The operative phrase here concerning the government's inconsistent action is "arbitrary and capricious." It is simply luck-of-the-draw as to which rate you'll be charged, and depends on the port and the whims of the particular custom's agent handling each vehicle. There is no consistent application of policy, and the definition of what constitutes a passenger vehicle vs. light truck is not well defined when it comes to these types of vehicles. My vehicle came in through Port Hueneme in December. There were a half-dozen other Defender's waiting on the dock when I picked it up in early January. I expect they all suffered the same fate, but you never know if a different agent was on shift when those vehicles came through. If I'd brought it in through another port, I likely would have had a different outcome. That ain't right.
One place to start might be a FOIA request to see the duty rates charged for all Defenders coming in over the last few years. The results would almost certainly show the arbitrary application of whatever "policy" they are using.
The operative phrase here concerning the government's inconsistent action is "arbitrary and capricious." It is simply luck-of-the-draw as to which rate you'll be charged, and depends on the port and the whims of the particular custom's agent handling each vehicle. There is no consistent application of policy, and the definition of what constitutes a passenger vehicle vs. light truck is not well defined when it comes to these types of vehicles. My vehicle came in through Port Hueneme in December. There were a half-dozen other Defender's waiting on the dock when I picked it up in early January. I expect they all suffered the same fate, but you never know if a different agent was on shift when those vehicles came through. If I'd brought it in through another port, I likely would have had a different outcome. That ain't right.
One place to start might be a FOIA request to see the duty rates charged for all Defenders coming in over the last few years. The results would almost certainly show the arbitrary application of whatever "policy" they are using.
As a followup, a boatload of recent and not-so-recent Customs rulings concerning Land Rovers can be found at the link below. These are rulings where someone contested the 25% levy. As can be seen, even these rulings are not consistent in their rationale. This is consistent with the experiences conveyed on this board and elsewhere by others concerning rates they were levied.
Customs Land Rover Rulings
Customs Land Rover Rulings