In the 80s I owned a new Isuzu Trooper II and a new Subaru Brat...

[2Bits]

The '86 Trooper II was imported into the U.S. with no rear seat (you could purchase one as an option) This was said to be because it would get the lower tariff rate of a truck.

Now in the U.S., Brats, as you may recall, were tiny pickup “trucks” that from 1977 until 1985 came with 2 “Jumpseats” facing backwards in the bed. This is described on Wikipedia as a "tariff-avoidance ploy (Subaru BRAT - Wikipedia).

How could both these claims be true? Did tariff rules flip-flop in 1985?

(my '88 Brat came without the seats.)

[WildaBeast]

@2Bits

The '86 Trooper II was imported into the U.S. with no rear seat (you could purchase one as an option) This was said to be because it would get the lower tariff rate of a truck.

This seems backwards to me. The current Ford Transit Connect is imported with rear seats so the lower passenger car tariff rate applies. Once the vans arrive in the US Ford throws out the back seats, covers up the rear windows, and turns them into cargo vans. Doing it that way allows them to avoid the much higher “truck” rate, even though it seems wasteful.

I wonder if it was some other loophole Isuzu was exploiting by getting them classified as trucks, like less stringent safety or emissions standards.

[2Bits]

@WildaBeast

This seems backwards to me. The current Ford Transit Connect is imported with rear seats so the lower passenger car tariff rate applies. Once the vans arrive in the US Ford throws out the back seats, covers up the rear windows, and turns them into cargo vans. Doing it that way allows them to avoid the much higher “truck” rate, even though it seems wasteful.

I wonder if it was some other loophole Isuzu was exploiting by getting them classified as trucks, like less stringent safety or emissions standards.

I can’t find a good cite for the Trooper II tariff-avoidance claim. It was my understanding at the time and apparently other folk’s as well (it pops up in some automobile-related web forums)

[jz78817]

@2Bits

The '86 Trooper II was imported into the U.S. with no rear seat (you could purchase one as an option) This was said to be because it would get the lower tariff rate of a truck.

Now in the U.S., Brats, as you may recall, were tiny pickup “trucks” that from 1977 until 1985 came with 2 “Jumpseats” facing backwards in the bed. This is described on Wikipedia as a "tariff-avoidance ploy (Subaru BRAT - Wikipedia).

How could both these claims be true? Did tariff rules flip-flop in 1985?

(my '88 Brat came without the seats.)

looks like it.

Chicken tax

“The U.S. Customs Service changed vehicle classifications in 1989, automatically relegating two-door SUVs to light-truck status.”

[2Bits]

Hmmm… well that was 1989.
And my ‘86 Trooper II was a four door.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[scr4]

Maybe they imported it with the seats (avoiding the Chicken Tax) but then removed the seats to sell it as a truck to circumvent some domestic tax or fuel economy regulation?

Though I think the Trooper II would have been classified as a light truck for CAFE even with the rear seats installed…

[TriPolar]

@jz78817

looks like it.

Chicken tax - Wikipedia

“The U.S. Customs Service changed vehicle classifications in 1989, automatically relegating two-door SUVs to light-truck status.”

Beat me to it. It’s still in effect as far as I know, with a lot of ways to avoid it.

[puddleglum]

The two vehicles tried to avoid the chicken tax, which only applies to light trucks, in two ways. The Brat by adding seats and thus being imported as a car, and the Trooper by ripping out seats and thus being imported as a cargo truck.

[scr4]

@puddleglum

The two vehicles tried to avoid the chicken tax, which only applies to light trucks, in two ways. The Brat by adding seats and thus being imported as a car, and the Trooper by ripping out seats and thus being imported as a cargo truck.

But why did the Chicken Tax apply to truck/van versions of the VW bus, but not the Trooper II?

[WildaBeast]

@puddleglum

and the Trooper by ripping out seats and thus being imported as a cargo truck.

I’m still confused as to how removing seats avoided the Chicken Tax. In the example of the Transit Connect I mentioned yesterday, Ford has to add seats to avoid the Chicken Tax. I’m guessing the rules were different in the 1980s, but I can’t wrap my head around how having a back seat makes it a “truck” to which the Chicken Tax would apply, while removing that seat makes it “not a truck” which can avoid the Chicken Tax.