According to the US Customs regulations it is possible to import a vehicle for a maximum of one year then it must be exported. A bond may need to be posted. Has anyone actually done this ?. I am not referring to cars over 25 years old or using a Registered Importer to legally import and register a newer car.

There have been past threads on this that you can search out.

It can be done...but unless someone is paying to ship it back and forth, it generally isn't worth doing, maintenance costs will be higher for some import parts, plus getting insurance will be tough and expensive to get for a right hand drive car, plus it quickly sucks driving while being on the wrong side, not to mention you'll need to get your lights adjusted so they don't blind everyone.

Thanks I will pass the info on, it is someone from the Land Rover franternity in the UK wants to do it, I agree RHD stinks but people bring in old RHD Land Rovers all the time and think is is great, to each their own

RHD is great, no getting out into the flow of traffic!

Yes, lots of people do it, but they are all Canadians or Mexicans who just have to drive the vehicle over the border.

I think something is wrong here, I know several USAF personnel who bought cars in Europe and imported them here and still after many years run them, all they did was change the registration etc.
There are quite a few British cars I have seen running around here that are newer than 25 years. I see Land Rovers, Mini's and others Peugeot, Citroen etc that were not bought through any dealer but imported by the owner who bought them in Europe.
I don't understand the 1 year rule Bob mentioned.

The one year is for temp use of your car, so you don't have to import it and get it up to spec.

Most of those cars you mentioned can be bought here, so if in the armed forces, they probably got the dealer to spec out a US spec so they could bring it over easily.

Bringing a car over is easy enough, stick it in a container. It's getting it through customs and getting it road legal that's the problem, that and insurance. Don't do it properly and if you do get the car released from customs, you face getting it crushed.

They're buying US-spec cars. The US rules for "gray market imports" are designed to make such imports costly and difficult and to otherwise discourage you from trying.

To bring in a car less than 25 yrs old it must go through a Registered Importer who will carry out the modifications to make it comply with the DOT USHTA specs are per the US model. If no such model is in the USA for example a Land Rover 110 it can not be imported. The chap who posted on the Land Rover forum was trying to find a way to sneak in a new Land Rover.

As in my view the US DOT specs are far less rigorous than any British regulations I can't see what the US laws could be ?
No proper hand brake, the state of some rotten piles I see here amaze me such vehicles would not be allowed on the road in the UK. I see vehicles with no bumpers, half the front wings missing, lumps of steel sticking out, exposed exhaust pipes that could take the skin off a passing child who touched it, need I go on ?
US safety regs are a laugh

Indeed...but for imports, they're really high, especially emissions, and different requirements for bumpers.

That view would be wrong. DOT and EPA rules are pretty stringent.

But more to the point, the rules are intended to be unique, in part so that it is difficult to import a car not specifically made for the US. The Detroit automakers and Mercedes lobbied for rules against gray market imports during the 1980's, in order to protect their businesses from what were then relatively low-cost used luxury German cars that were being privately imported into the US.

You are confusing importation and production requirements, which are a federal matter, with roadworthy and emissions inspections, which are a state matter. Once you manage to get an import through the federal regulatory web (which is not easy), it becomes a state and local issue.

We did this with a motorbike as it got stuck in customs (we had so much trouble getting the information we needed from Suzuki regarding specifications in order to get it through as a permanent import, that it was either that or pay customs to crush it, we were racking up storage fees). My husband plans to take it apart and put the parts on a new frame which I don't think should be a problem.

We didn't have to post any bond, use a registered importer or supply any additional paperwork other than the registration paperwork we'd already given them - it was pretty easy. We just submitted a new form with a different box ticked (the one saying we were only importing it for a maximum of a year) and it was cleared within a day. Having said that though the difficulties may come when we try and register it or prove what we've done with the new frame. At the time we just needed our container to be released as we had items in it that we needed. I wouldn't particularly recommend anyone do it.

Well said.

I remember the days that the regulatory difference between US and European cars was in the headlights -- the US standard was the best and safest technology -- as of 1945 or so.

On the EPA standards, it pays to remember that California was granted an exemption on air standards in that California could impose stricter standards. I understand that other states are allowed to elect between Federal or California standards. There is a currently a regulatory dispute going on regarding the fleet greenhouse gas standards.

On the vehicle inspection front, you are right that it varies from state to state. Here in California, there is a requirement for bi-annual pollution inspection. If you don't pass, you cannot get a road-going registration. Even within California, the rural counties are exempt from this -- what can be registered in Modoc or Siskiyou counties can't be registered in LA minus the smog certificate.

I'm amused by posts noting how things are done differently [and of course, better] out side the US. I find out there is usually a reason, usually historical behind it.

FWIW, Dan Neil disagrees with you.