Sign In Join 



Importing Car into Canada from US

4513 messages,  Last post on Dec 02, 2009 at 8:40 PM

You are in the Smart Shopper Forum. Your Hosts are kirstie_h & tidester

What is this discussion about? Car Buying, Legislation, SUV


Messages Page 234 of 452
1
...
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
...
452
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#2324 of 4513
Re: pre Sept 1 2007 [eieio2] by hammatime
Nov 21, 2007 (7:45 am)
Reply

Replying to: eieio2 (Nov 21, 2007 7:31 am)

and to answer your other query:
 
yes, you pay Excise Tax at the border when you pay your GST; and, GST is payable on the US dollar amount you paid for your vehicle after it is converted to Can$ at the prevailing exchange rate. On Monday, that exchange rate was 0.9808 .
#2325 of 4513
Re: Manufacture Date? [bodble2] by volvomax
Nov 21, 2007 (8:13 am)
Reply

Replying to: bodble2 (Nov 20, 2007 2:02 pm)

We can debate till the cows come home whether the immobilizer is effective or not. Data suggest that it is, as opposed to alarm systems, which generally are not effective. But it doesn't matter here. My point is that the intent, I repeat, the intent, of the immobilization standard is for public safety and security, not as a tool for manufacturers to stop importation of cars into Canada.
 
Sorry, but it isn't debateable.
I live in a state with one of the highest stolen car rates in the US.
Having an immobilzer doesn't lessen the chance of having your car stolen by a PROFESSIONAL. it just doesn't.
If someone wants your car, they are gonna get it.
 

Are you kidding me?! What's in it for them? Is that what you said? There's everything in it for the manufacturers!! They can artificially keep prices high!! There may actually be very little impact on the dealers if the manufacturers adjust Canadian prices to fall in line with US prices. Lower MSRP, lower invoice cost = similar margin. In fact, I dare say if the manufacturers adjusted Canadian prices, the Canadian dealers will stand to gain, because more people will buy cars in Canada. Almost every dealer in Canada is hurting right now due to the disparity between Canadian & US prices.
  
You are so out to lunch on this one.

 
Respectfully, I don't think you are thinking this through.
The Canadian motor companies cannot simply "reprice" their cars.
First of all, neither you nor I knows all the components that go into pricing a car in Canada.
Second, re-pricing cars would have a disasterous effect on lease residuals, to say nothing of used car values.
Chances are, the parity between the Loonie and the US dollar won't last.
Sooner or later, probably sooner, the Canadian Gov't will close the door to importing US cars.
Only a fraction of Canadian auto buyers have the wherewithall to take advantage of the current situation, because you have to pay cash for a US car.
For the motor companies, and the dealers this isn't th ebig deal you think it is.
The motor co's are banking on this fizzling out after a while and they are probably correct that it will.
#2326 of 4513
Parliamentary Committee Canada by dreyfus1
Nov 21, 2007 (8:28 am)
Reply
We now know who benefits from and wants to maintain and preferably expand non tariff trade barriers such as CMVSS114.
The CVMA and AIAMC have appeared before a parliamentary committee in Ottawa.
Private importing is now approaching 10% of the 1.6 million cars sold in Canada annually, even worse it is continuing to grow. Having sucked deeply on CMVSS114 and the $3k to $30k premium per car sold in Canada both associations are anxious to see that the gouging continues. The sensitive "jobs" issue was raised, if CVMA/AIAMC members were concerned about Canadian auto manufacturing jobs they would remove their embargo on importing Canadian manufactured cars into Canada. I would like to believe that our MPs are not drunks, clowns and fools, only time will tell.
If the benefits of NAFTA are solely for manufacturers and are withheld from ordinary citizens it is time for us to rethink our trade policies.
#2327 of 4513
Re: nightmare experience [defrederick] by netdog
Nov 21, 2007 (8:32 am)
Reply

Replying to: defrederick (Nov 21, 2007 7:41 am)

defrederick, your advice to gaut is practical however it fails to recognize the additional financial risk of losing the GST paid at the border and possibly the PST if you are able to also register the vehicle, in the event that the RIV issues an export order against the vehicle. It's a risk not everyone is willing to take.
 
netdog
#2328 of 4513
Re: pre Sept 1 2007 [hammatime] by silver_fox
Nov 21, 2007 (8:38 am)
Reply

Replying to: hammatime (Nov 21, 2007 7:11 am)

Not all border crossings or customs agents are charging this excise green tax. I crossed the Sweetgrass border fully expecting to pay the $1000 tax which according to the list is the amount due for my specific vehicle and they never charged me, nor did I ask them to.
I considered it an extra savings as I know the tax is part of the retail price when the same vehicle is purchased in Canada.
#2329 of 4513
Re: nightmare experience [defrederick] by silver_fox
Nov 21, 2007 (8:47 am)
Reply

Replying to: defrederick (Nov 21, 2007 7:41 am)

"If you can get it registered (I know you can in Alberta), then you'll also be able to drive it for at least 45 days before TC tries to make you send it back. And then if you ignore TC, it doesn't sound like they'll have any clue about how to make you give it back. "
 
What? It CAN"T be registered as RIV will not issue the form 2 needed for registration in Alberta. I may be wrong, but that is what I was told by the Alberta registries office when I registered my vehicle.
#2332 of 4513
Re: nightmare experience [silver_fox] by defrederick
Nov 21, 2007 (9:00 am)
Reply

Replying to: silver_fox (Nov 21, 2007 8:47 am)

I thought the same thing, and it appears that maybe some registries are confused about the requirements. I registered my own vehicle before receiving the Form 2, and I've seen someone else on this board who's done it with an inadmissable 2008. I'm thinking that when/if it hits the fan there's going to be a lot to unravel.
 
Also, good point about the GST and PST, netdog. I hadn't considered that and it could make a difference on the economic decision.
#2333 of 4513
Re: Statement of Compliance Label [beaurocratsuck] by hammatime
Nov 21, 2007 (9:08 am)
Reply

dreyfus1 may just be thinking out loud.
 
beaurocratsuck is right. Look there's a ton of illegal things that can be done, but please, please, don't go there.
 
You don't have to. My gut feeling is that those who purchased their vehicles when they were admissible will be permitted.

Messages Page 234 of 452
1
...
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
...
452
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement