Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Cars face border roadblock

GREG KEENAN

From Friday's Globe and Mail

Latest comment posted at 6:18 PM EST 25/11/07

New Transport Canada regulation stops car buyers from making it back across the border ...Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. bob loblaw from Canada writes: This takes the award for Stupid Nanny State Bureaucracy Costing Real People Real Money Award for 2007.
  2. Devil's Advocate from Canada writes: "Any notion that car companies are using the issue to bolster their battle to keep Canadians buying here is misguided, spokesmen for several auto makers say."

    Excuse me? That is pure BS. automakers are changing their policies to make it very difficult and not worth the time of Canadians to get the 30% discount (when adjusted for dollar) Americans are getting on vehicles. Here's some examples...

    Honda, Acura, Chrysler, Mazda, Mitsubishi will not give you ANY warranty coverage. If you import the vehicle into Canada.

    Other makes will NOT give you warranty if you buy the vehicle brand new - it has to be used.

    I've heard Honda is also no longer giving out recall clearance letters to Canadians - you have to have one to bring a car across the border, but Honda no longer will give you one.

    They are doing everything they can to ensure they can continue to rape their Canadian customers.
  3. Gary Dare from Portland, Oregon, Canada, writes: There is no reason why Canada has to "harmonize", i.e., knuckle under, to the standards set by the US regulators. US regulations are under question domestically, as in California (backed up by OR and WA) pushing for more stringent emissions standards than the rest of the US. I have yet to hear US west coast voices asking to suck up to present EPA regulations.
  4. Bert Russell Paradox, BC from Canada writes:
    This is a long story about an "immobalizer" and makes many other distracting information bits in its course. The gentleman with the problem can have an immobalizer installed (after market). As far as EPA regulations in the States? It appears they were designed for marketing the North American Mfgs. Ever try to get the mileage they project for the GM Ford and Chrysler cars they produce. They must run the tests on a downhill road with the ignition off. (Talk about your truth in advertising and Free trade?)
  5. Paul Bowler from CANBERRA, Australia writes: Why are not all cars manufactured with immobilisers? These items are just as necessary as seat belts, airbags and disc brakes! Are Ford CV's - only made in Canada, I believe - built either with or without immobilisers, depending on whether or not they destined for places across the Windsor Bridge? Give us a break!
  6. Tom Willette from Canada writes: Before the courts decided that stealing was a bad habit that needed to be corrected, rather like picking your nose, instead of a criminal offence that needed a jail sentence, arrest and detention was the device that deterred car thieves.
  7. W. Mayne from Canada writes: You must remember that car theft is only a problem in Canada, why should money be wasted installing immobalizers on cars destined for the US??
  8. A Canadian from Cole Harbour, Canada writes: the article states: Auto makers say there is no after-market kit for installing the devices that will meet the Canadian regulation.)

    This is not true. On the Insurance Bureau of Canada it says:

    If your car does not have an electronic immobilizer, you can get one from an after-market supplier. IBC currently recognizes four after-market systems as meeting the National Standard of Canada ULC-S338/98:

    PFK Autowatch 329 Ti Immobilizer
    PFK Autowatch 573 PPi Immobilizer
    MasterGard M6000 Immobilizer
    Powerlock-Canada Immobilizer
  9. J G from Canada writes: Cars should not only be the same as US cars but less as dollar is above parity. The Smart car is 11,700 in the US and 16,800 in Canada. The email I got from Mercedes states one of the reason is there are government rebates in Canada thanks to low fuel consumption!!!!!!!!!! So the government giveth and Mercedes/Smart steals your rebate. The C$ has gained over the Euro so all the more reason for any car made in Europe to be reduced in price. And while I am on the subject, why do we pay an air conditioning tax of $100? Damn we as consumers are stupid.
  10. Tom Bone from Clearwater for the Winter, Canada writes: Can anybody help? 1. If I buy a "demo" (Sales Manager's Car) in the US and bring it back to Canada, is it considered a "used" car?
    2. I own a winter home in Florida. If I buy a car there, licence it and insure it there, can I bring it back to Canada for six months and then take it back to Florida each year?
  11. G Money from Hamilton, Canada writes: Free trade forever!
  12. Anthony B from Sydney, NS, Canada writes: "The Canadian anti-theft requirement, meanwhile, has auto makers seeing red because they have been pushing Ottawa for years to harmonize our regulations with those south of the border and not introduce standards that apply only in this country"

    Maybe they should be "pushing" Washington to harmonize their regulations with those north of the border. OK, that's not going to happen, so maybe Canadian car buyers will have to accept that this is not the US. Meanwhile, why not require those auto makers who are "seeing red" to justify the price difference versus the true cost of upgrading their products to Canadian standards?
  13. Georges Clermont from Ottawa, Canada writes: Typical of bureaucrats in Ottawa who are determined to show that Canada is not USA. If it's good enough for the USA and the rest of the world, why isn't it good enough for Canadians?
    OF course, one could also suspect the hand of the Canadian car manufacturers behind this...
  14. Andrew Skujins @ www.skuj.com from Aurora, Canada writes: Gary Dare from Portland, Oregon, Canada, writes: There is no reason why Canada has to "harmonize", i.e., knuckle under, to the standards set by the US regulators.

    The US isn't asking here. Canadians are getting screwed by OUR laws.
  15. Marshal Cheung from Canada writes: Canada is a nanny state. The job of the government is first to protect its own interest (tax revenue), the second the interest of big businesses. Small businesses and consumer? forget about it.
    Everything is much more expensive in Canada. This has been true for many years, and it just becomes even clear nowadays. Canada worker can only receive lower salary, because that is the only cost that you can effectively lower. In this case, it is the government that protects the auto businesses, to allow them to continue to rip off Canadians.
  16. Ryan Ginger from Ottawa, Canada writes: Marshal Cheung - frankly you don't know what you're talking about. Yes, I think for the most part Canadians are still being gouged but there will never be parity between Canada and US retail prices because it costs more to do business in Canada. Employers here have larger health care expenses, wages are generally higher, and business taxes are higher.

    Georges Clermont writes: "If it's good enough for the USA and the rest of the world, why isn't it good enough for Canadians?" Please say that was tongue-in-cheek? Never were more asinine words spoken.
  17. Timber 'n from Arrggh!, Canada writes: "The Canadian anti-theft requirement, meanwhile, has auto makers seeing red because they have been pushing Ottawa for years to harmonize our regulations with those south of the border and not introduce standards that apply only in this country."

    Unbelievable. Regulation run a-mock. It's not even about safety. Clearly there are too many people working in the federal government, they have too much time, wasting it developing trade barriers instead of harmonizing them.

    Another example, Canada has a separate standard for the size of a baby food jar....American jars come in various sizes, so not allowed....that is bull, the baby doesn't care....and if I want a immobilizer I'll buy a car with one, harmonization of standards is far more important.
  18. I. M. Al Wayswright from Canada writes: Another regulation designed to ensure that large corporations can reap off customers as freely as they want. LOL
  19. Jacob Kasperowicz from Kirkland, Canada writes: In the U.S., the customer is king/queen. What can I do for you? What do you need? How can I help? In Canada, you walk into a dealership and if you don't look like you will buy or lease that day, the sales reps ignore you. That is why I have stuck to buying used cars since 1999 and not from a dealer. Anything that can be done to rattle the cage of the Canadian auto industry from the factory to the dealer is fine by me. We should be allowed to bring any vehicle across from the U.S. with a 72hr notice to make any modifications required to comply with our socialist laws.
  20. D W from Canada writes: A "base" corvette in Canada is approx $70000 CDN. There is a dealer in Wisconsin advertising new 2008 Corvettes from $39900 US. While at the moment the RIV site does not permit the 2008 models into Canada it probably will in the future as other corvettes up to and including the model year 2007 are permitted. Is it any surprise preowned corvettes are much less expensive in the US.....?
  21. Just trying to make sense of it all from Canada writes: Only one factor accounts for cheaper cars in US: rapid change in exchange rates. Should the American dealers increase the cost of their vehicles 30%? That's the changes in exchange. It'll never fly. If we think they're going to lower prices in Canada by 30% because of the strong dollar, we're fooling ourselves too. It's not like cars have increased in cost by 30%. . . just our dollar now buys a lot more south of the border. Of course the manufacturers want to maximize their profit, using any legal means possible. So we need to either buy here, or cross the border and deal with the hassle. Retrofit with an immobilizer, costs less than $500.00, it's simple. I'm tired of this story.
  22. Jose Jimanez from Espanola, Canada writes: Free Trade Rocks...sorry ROTS. It is great for Multinationals but not for the average Canadian. We are over taxed, under served, and Ripped Off! Solution...like any Canadian, I will complain, pay my taxes, and keep paying what The Man tells me too! Will voting NDP help?
  23. Lane Myers from Canada writes: Just another example of how Canadian consumers are being gouged by Corporate Canada. Domestic auto manufacturers have received billions of government subsidies all paid for by consumers and they still have the gall to rip us off at every opportunity. I recently purchased a Lexus which I have since discovered could be purchased in Maine for $8400 less than the Canadian price. If one takes the current rate of exchange into account there is another $3200 saving for a total of $11,600. Perhaps it is time for the government to set these parasites adrift and let them go it alone without any benevolent subsidies.
  24. Global Citizen from Canada writes: If these Transport Canada type don't make their only UNIQUE standard, they would have no job, would they?

    What a waste of tax payer's money!
  25. Vincent Clement from Windsor, Canada writes: Lane: Since you willingly paid the price you negotiated for that Lexus, could you explain how you were gouged?
  26. Geriatric Personage from Canada writes: Just cross the border to a "Canada Friendly" dealer as we have here in St. Stephen's, NB. they will do all the paper work make sure the car meets requirements tell you when to meet them at the border crossing and make sure your car is processed and imported free and clear and even guarantee that if there is a problem they will look after it or refund.
    Also why would anyone want to import a Corvette? Surely the bottom echelon of sports carts available today! Finally most of these obstacles, and there are many, are introduced so as to make NAFTA either ineffective or at least diminish its intent.
  27. Stephano Daliwal from Canada writes: If the BIg Three Auto companies are intent on shaking down Canadians, they ought not to get our business on either side of the border. Sorry, people may say that they produce cars in Canada and employ Canaidians but at the end of the day they are U.S. subsidiaries. All their decisions are made at their headquarters in Detroit. Let's wise up.

    Buy Honda, Toyota and Mazda- fuel efficient and more reliable.
  28. Rob Meyer from New England, United States writes: that's a $30,000.00 anti-theft device eh.
  29. claude saumure from kelowna, Canada writes: perhaps if the feds,who are trying desparately looking for ways to protect the canadian auto industry,should pass a law that would make it illegal for canadian car dealers to import used american autos for resale in canada.
  30. Durward Saar from Canada writes: If we were too actually punish car thieves we would not need the nanny state to force immobilizers on us.
  31. Rumon Fastaker from Yuho, United States Outlying writes: Why doesn't this article mention installing an aftermarket immobilizer - they are only about $100 installed!
  32. Erling Erickson from Vernon, BC, Canada writes: Re question from Anthony B in Sydney, NS. I called Canadian Border Services and was told that I could buy and license a auto in the U.S. (where I have a vacation home) and use it when returning (without importing it) to Canada by (1) paying import duties if the car is not of North America manufacture, and (2) several other minor fees. I plan to do this but am going to check with Border Services again before doing so.
  33. Duffman from Beamerville from Canada writes: Vincent Clement from Windsor, Canada writes: Lane: Since you willingly paid the price you negotiated for that Lexus, could you explain how you were gouged?

    It is simple. Canadians in general are getting gouged by having to pay prices that are not justified by the smaller Canadian economy. Not everyone has the time to negotiate a deal in the US and go through all the other admin issues. For anyone that has the time, don't buy in Canada. Also, if car companies would price their products fairly, maybe Canadians might buy more of those vehicles that are assembled in Windsor which would help out your city.
  34. I R from White Rock, BC, Canada writes: This is not unique to the car industry or snow mobiles. Anyone try to purchase a pair of Levis lately from a US store? Good luck because they are not permitted to ship these items for export. And what of airline fares?

    In the European Union such activity is called anti-competitive and incurs the wrath of fines by the European Commission. In North America, it is business as usual. So much for NAFTA and free trade. For a political establishment currently bent on liberal economics and removing trade barriers, they sure are ready to fling them up.
  35. I R from White Rock, BC, Canada writes: ...I wonder if our future is within the European Union and Asian/Chinese economic spheres and not that of the United States - especially as the US is now in decline...
  36. Steve *** from United States writes: I am no lawyer but somehow I get the feeling domestic auto manufacturers are violating NAFTA by blocking Canadians to buy cars in US.
  37. Bryan Kim from Canada writes: The Japanese are doing the same thing!
    HONDA, TOYOTA.....
  38. Laura Taman from Toronto, Canada writes: The answer is simple: don't buy a car. Canadian auto dealers, the feds, everyone, would be a lot more accommodating to consumers if the bottom were to fall out of the car business for a few months. The government is not going to help you and the car companies will do everything they can to take every dollar in your pocket. Don't buy a car unless you absolutely have to.
  39. Timber 'n from Somewhere, Canada writes: BTW: Boomerang Tracking Inc. says a study it conducted from 2003-2007 showed 36 per cent of stolen vehicles the company recovered had Insurance Bureau of Canada-approved immobilizer devices.
    -So the effectiveness of this is VERY questionable
    -Professionals won't be stopped by this
    -Don't lose your key, chipped keys cost a fortune and take forever to replace from some dealers.
    Is the moto of the Canadian government, "regulate, and ask questions later...nah don't ask."
  40. Bob Kay from Midland, Canada writes: I have only one question the government needs to answer. If the condition of a new or used vehicle is not acceptable to Canadian standards to be owned and driven by a Canadian, then what on earth are we doing allowing foreigners, Americans, to be driving these banned vehicles in our country?????
  41. Omnibot 2000 from Canada writes: "...auto makers seeing red because they have been pushing Ottawa for years to harmonize our regulations with those south of the border and not introduce standards that apply only in this country."

    Omnibot sez WHOA! So, in other words the auto makers have been pushing Ottawa to reduce the safety of cars by lowering our bumper crash requirements, which are higher than in USA. Anyone other than me see a problem with this?!
  42. Luke R from Toronto, Canada writes: People please! Do you really want a race to the bottom in terms of health, safety and environmental protection so we can "harmonize" (read: make our regualtions less effective) with the US? It's not just cars people. Toys, cosmetics, consumer electronics, drugs, food and the list goes on. Canadian standards are much higher for reasons of safety and I would rather keep that then save a few bucks. Besides, are you people so naive as to think that the extra bumper and immobilizer costs really amount to an extra $30,000 on the sticker price? It's red herring being cleverly used by the industries that are ripping Canadians off.
  43. A A from Canada writes: We just found the answer as to why cars are priced higher in Canada than the US. It costs $20,000 to install an immobilizer and daytime running lights on a Lexus LS460.

    Why is'nt the auto industry using this as their rationale for higher prices in Canada?

    I just find it funny how people are buying vehicles like Ridgelines, Corollas, RX350's, Silverado's, Civics, Caravans, Torrents,...... (do I need to go on?) in the US when they are built in Canada.
  44. mike cornmeal from Canada writes: So some schmoe can't buy a 2008 corvette and bring it into Canada... Boo Hoo (BTW What's the diff between a corvette and a cactus? In a corvette, the pricks are on the inside).

    This article is a 'plant' by the auto industry. Take your focus off government regulations and put it back on the car manufacturers. The real story is the price differential between the two countries. Don't lose focus.
  45. Smart Alec from Canada, Canada writes: So, no aftermarket immobilizer meets the Transport Canada standards? What are the standards, because I purchased an immobilizer for my vehicle that is auto-arming and a two point immobilizer, installed for about $400. My car was broken into once (didn't get in, but did damage to the doors), and stolen once in a three month period. I was told by my insurance company (ICBC- BC government insurance) to get an approved immobilizer, and they gave me a discount for trying to keep my car out of theif's hands. -- So why the disconnect with Transport Canada? -- Free trade my @$$!
  46. Robert Blakey from Calgary, Canada writes: Wow, I can't believe how short our memories are. Just a few years ago, when our dollar was worth 65 cents US, Americans were coming to Canada to buy our new cars because they were so much cheaper, until Canadian dealers were ordered by the manufacturers not to sell to Americans. We Canadians (except car dealers) were totally silent on this because we didn't give a damn, as long as we were the ones getting the sweet deals. I don't deny that the car industry and our government should quit being bullies right now and try to work out a compromise, but there's only one way to stop these extreme price differences from ever happening again, and that's to adopt a common currency with the United States. The Europeans did that, adopting the euro. Of course, there will always be regional price variations based on taxes, transportation and the cost of doing business. That's why a Volkswagen costs more in Britain than in Germany (whose car dealers, last time I looked it up, were forbidden to sell to Brits.)
  47. J. R. from Halifax, Canada writes: Tom Bone:

    I think the answer to both of your questions is probably yes. As long as the demo is a few months old (built before Sept 1) you won't have a problem. There is usually a plaque on the driver's door jamb that tells you when the car is made. So a demo or a new car that has been sitting on the lot for a few months is fine. Any new 2007 model would be fine. Of course you'd still have to import the vehicle and pay Canadian taxes and duties, all of which is a hassle.

    The second question depends on the rules for motor vehicle registration in your home province. Most provinces want you to register your car there if you've been there more than a few months, but lots of people flaunt that rule. If you can argue that Florida is your 'permanent residence,' I think you could get away with keeping your car registered in Florida, and you'd have no problem.
  48. N. M. from Hamilton, Canada writes: "Employers here have larger health care expenses".

    Well, I don't think so. In Canada the employer doesn't have health care expenses at all.
  49. rm Nickel from Canada writes: When returning to Canada after an absence of over 5 years I was eligible to purchase a vehicle duty free and import it into Canada. When I asked for a block heater the US dealer was non plussed having never heard of such a beast but he got one. THen He asked whether I needed Rocky Mountain spec, California specs, Florida specs etc etc. Yes they can adapt cars but it takes patience. The car that was delivered, made in Canada and specified for export back to Canada, came with a mileage speedometer instead of the kilometers being prominent. We didn't cavil further as it was already 3 months late. We no longer drive GM! Sad
  50. Robert Vincent from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Ii agree with the enforcement of the regs on automobiles at the border, particularly where they include such positive innovations as: Immobilizers, bumper strength, etc. What I would like to see is the Cdn Gov;'t adding to that list such things as California emission controls and auto-on headlights. With respect to thelatter, those auto-on headlight rules should be amended to include auto-on tail lights, as well. So many people are cruising around at night these days, becasue they aren't aware that their tail lights aren't on. In many cases, becasue they vave obviously not turned on their headlights, they are also driving around with an unlit instrument panel, so they should notice that lights aren't on.
  51. Green Canada from Edmonton, Canada writes: Ryan Ginger states "Employers here have larger health care expenses" ... I hope you are joking right? take a look at the companies health care costs in the US in some auto plants they pay $2g a month per employee. Canada is far cheaper. I can agree with your other assertions though..
  52. Dick Nails from Happy Home Owner, Canada writes: mike cornmeal from Canada writes: So some schmoe can't buy a 2008 corvette and bring it into Canada... Boo Hoo (BTW What's the diff between a corvette and a cactus? In a corvette, the pricks are on the inside).

    This article is a 'plant' by the auto industry. Take your focus off government regulations and put it back on the car manufacturers. The real story is the price differential between the two countries. Don't lose focus.

    >>So how was your bus ride today mike? You doubtless paid too much for it. Ride a bike, don't lose foucs.
  53. J. R. from Halifax, Canada writes: Why do people have such a problem with Canada setting our own standards for automobile safety, etc? Automobile standards are highly, highly regulated and if you shop outside of Canada for a car you bear the burden of making sure that that car is legal in Canada. Canada isn't any more of a 'nanny state" than the US is, cars are highly regulated there too, and you would face similar problems (probably more) if you wanted to buy a car in Canada and register it in the US. Good luck taking any Canadian car to California and getting it registered. It is not done for protectionist reasons, it is not being done to increase the price of imported vehicles. That being said, why should the Canadian government relax those rules for the sole reason of allowing you to take your $50,000 and give it to a business south of the border?
  54. bill johnson from Quebec, Canada writes: Sales of US vehicles in Canada were 25000 last year. If this rate continues, that would mean about 250000-300000 cars per year. Canadian sales are 1.5 million, so we're talking about 1 out of 6 car imported from the US. At this rate, the Canadian retailers will be begging people to buy their stuff within 6 months.

    The industry is trying to pretend that this ia a small issue, but believe me, they are sweating right now.

    Buy in the USA and save thousands. As noted above, many dealers there will take care of your paperwork. Don't contribute to the Great Canadian Ripoff.
  55. The human race is a failed experiment Creator from Canada writes: J.R. from Halifax. You make a statement like that and show that you have no idea of what the issues are. You should stick to what you know. In your case that means don't say anything. ever again.
  56. Frankie @^_^@ from Canada writes: HAHAHAHA The big fat CEOS at honda and TOYOTA are breaking open big bottles of champaigne and laughing at all the dumb canadians who have to overpay for their cars by 5000 minimum. They are going to say WE ARE NOT SELLING YOU US CARS BECAUSE THEY DO NOT MEET CANADIAN STANDARDS. They will use this answer to deflect from the real reson THEY WANT TO RESTRICT SALES SO THAT CANADIANS HAVE TO PAY 5-15000 MORE FOR A CAR IN CANADA. Honda and toyota lift their glasses to all canadians and say with a toast SUCKERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  57. art in calgary from Canada writes: Where is BUZZ Hargrove on this issue?
    Gotta protect CDN autoworkers.
    Beat on Harper to allow CDN's to buy CDN built cars in the US!
  58. J K GALBRAITH from Canada writes: Thank you Robert Blakey from Calgary for reminding all these outraged people that this is not something new that was invented by the auto companies as soon as the loonie got to parity! While it may be frustrating to some people there has been and will continue to be for a long time different standards and requirements in each country. I suspec the reason that generally warranties are not valid on either side of the border has to do with different standards, liability issues, and attempts to secure the markets for its dealers on each side of the border.

    Shop around, look for bargains, and let's turn our outrage more important issues than whether I got the cheapest car in the world.
  59. B Lam from Canada writes: Georges Clermont from Ottawa, Canada writes: Typical of bureaucrats in Ottawa who are determined to show that Canada is not USA. If it's good enough for the USA and the rest of the world, why isn't it good enough for Canadians?
    OF course, one could also suspect the hand of the Canadian car manufacturers behind this...

    The private medic care in the US is good enough for Canada? The stupid US legal system is good enough for Canada? The all you-can-own guns system in the US is good enough for Canada? My answers are no, no and no.

    The immobalizer and daytime running light system are proven devices to save lives and I want to keep them here in Canada.
  60. B R from Waterloo, Canada writes: Seems like an easy solution is to buy a used car in the states from a private sales point (re: non-dealer)...
  61. Jason Thorne from Vancouver, Canada writes: B Lam from Canada, please explain how an immobalizer saves lives.
    Transport Canada shouldn't be making it a requirement for vehicles to have immobalizers on vehicles being brought into the country for private use. It has nothing to do with the safe operation of the vehicle. I have no problem with them making it a requirment for cars sold here, but for an individual importing a car, it shouldn't. Also, I get the feeling that NAFTA is being ignored in all of this.
  62. Mark H from Columbus, IN, United States writes: "Gary Dare from Portland, Oregon, Canada, writes: There is no reason why Canada has to "harmonize", i.e., knuckle under, to the standards set by the US regulators. US regulations are under question domestically, as in California (backed up by OR and WA) pushing for more stringent emissions standards than the rest of the US. I have yet to hear US west coast voices asking to suck up to present EPA regulations. "

    That's because there's alot of nuts on the Left Coast who would rather pay an extra $5000 for a car with a low-e system. The rest of the coutnry doesn't really care.
  63. GlynnMhor of Skywall from Canada writes: A good 'theft immobilizer' would be a system that floods the passenger compartment with carbon monoxide.

    After all, 'justice delayed is justice denied'.
  64. J. R. from Halifax, Canada writes: "The human race is a failed experiment Creator from Canada writes: J.R. from Halifax. You make a statement like that and show that you have no idea of what the issues are. You should stick to what you know. In your case that means don't say anything. ever again."

    I made a couple of statements. It would be helpful to know which one of them you think betrays my inveterate stupidity. Please clarify.
  65. ra ku from Canada writes: Just trying to make sense of it all from Canada writes: Retrofit with an immobilizer, costs less than $500.00, it's simple. I'm tired of this story.

    No it is not that simple. You can retrofit all you want, but because of immobilizer pseudo-issue many car (some even with immobilizers apparently not up to CAN standarts) are on Inadmissible list, you will just not be able to bring them into CAN

    Manufacturers, especially Honda, are exploiting the immobilizer issue to their advantage to screw Canadians with over 30% markups. In that sense I do think there is something to that "conspiracy" story that immobilizer thing has at least partially been negotiated by manufactures to their benefit. Perhaps they have been opposing it initially and going back'n'forth with Transport Canada for 4 years, but sometime last year they saw that they can derive a HUGE benefit from it and agreed.

    Transport Canada is a sheep. They have no credibility. Anyone saw that CBC report on that Canadian-produced electric car that has been trying for years to get approval of TC after being long approved in US and Europe? After CBC documentary they got their papers in 2 days. The owner was incredulous: he said he hasn;t even sent a new application TC required, before he got an approval. TC "high and exacting standards" are easily moved by CBC story and so much more easily bent to the will of car makers. They are a laughingstock not a serious govn't agency.
  66. Peter Harrison from Edmonton, Canada writes: Somehow I have a hard time buying the argument from the manufacturers that these cars can't be modified to meet Canadian standards seeing as they sell those exact same models in Canada.

    Clearly it is possible it is possible to modify these vehicles to meet Canadian standards and if a buyer is willing to make these modifications at their own expense the manufacturer should have no legitimate complaint. Unfortunately they need some excuse to justify in the case of the Corvette maintaining a >$30 000 price difference--this has nothing to do with Canadian vehicle standards it's all about gaming the system in order to continue extracting money from Canadian consumers.
  67. ra ku from Canada writes: J. R. from Halifax, Canada writes: Why do people have such a problem with Canada setting our own standards for automobile safety, etc?

    J.R. allow me to educate you on the process of setting our own safety standards at least as far as transport canada goes. They do not CHECK anything regarding car safety. They simply allow the manufactures to submit letters of compliance before adding their models on the admissibility list. Do not believe me: send them a letter, pretending you want to buy, or have actually bought, a vehicle that is suddenly inadmissible (they keep changing their list every couple of days) and ask them why you cannot prove to them it actually meets all their, ahem, safety standards. You will learn that they rely SOLELY on letters of compliance from manufactures. And these are now exploiting that to withhold sales of US cars to Canadians, so that they can reap $15,000 extra profit per car.

    Leave it to our beaurocracy to enrich Co's like Honda, whose cars produced in Canada,. with all the government handouts, cannot be imported into canada any more, so that Honda can sell them directly to you for thousands of dollars more.
  68. Reasonable Ranter from Toronto, Canada writes: FYI, I have some industry expertise in vehicle importation, so take what I say below as the truth. Re: the earlier posting about the following immobilizers (see list). They may be accepted by IBC as a means of securing their $40/yr premium discount, but they are not currently accepted by RIV or Transport Canada as means of complying with the immobilizer regulation (which came into effect in 2004...it's not new, so its not some trumped up instrument by OEMs to restrict trade). Only the OEMs are regulated by Transport, which means there is no real oversight of the aftermarket and therefore no real means by which A/M immobilizers may be used to make a vehicle compliant unless Transport puts in a policy to turn a blind eye. I think the OEMs would feel pretty peeved about being held to a standard noone else is, so fat chance of that happening. It may happen, but then owners bear the operational risks of installing an immobilizer over a factory immobilizer that is integrated with the engine and fuel system electrical controls. Electrical Short=Fire=Your Problem. PFK Autowatch 329 Ti Immobilizer PFK Autowatch 573 PPi Immobilizer MasterGard M6000 Immobilizer Powerlock-Canada Immobilizer BTW, J.R.s comments are right on target. Comments by The Human Race is a Failed Experiment are not worth reading, as the guy is clearly an idiot.
  69. John L. Murlowe from Canada writes: The Canadian anti-theft requirement, meanwhile, has auto makers seeing red because they have been pushing Ottawa for years to harmonize our regulations with those south of the border and not introduce standards that apply only in this country
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Do I read this as the makers wanting lower US standards? Anti-theft immobilizes ought to be on all cars regardless of country of destination. Auto-makers come out looking like punks.
  70. Just a Thinker from Bloomfield, Canada writes: Ok, I have no problem with having a immobilizer installed in any car, or having bumpers that need to be able to with stand a certain impact. But to regulate that cars HAVE to have them in order to enter this country is just another example of how our Country is a nanny state. Is so sick of the "Oh, but sir, you may hurt yourself" mentality of our governments.
    If an Immobilizer, or a bumper that can withstand a .5mph faster impact is important to me then I simply won't buy a car without it.
  71. Angus S Miskers from victoria, Canada writes: Just get with the program and buy a USED CAR. I have bought 2 new cars, and in each case I feel disappointed by the experience - even though I paid LESS for these cars than they were selling for in the US (03, 04 models). It is much easier to import a used car, and much smarter to strip off some of the depreciation. There is no way a manufacturer can restrict used car sales to Canuckians. I plan to buy one in LA this winter, and expect to save about $20K
  72. Gary Dare from Portland, Oregon, Canada, writes: By the way, folks, please don't get the impression that I may think that either set of regulators (US or Canada) are right. I think that the real solution is for the auto industry to propose a standard (Detroit, Japan and the Euros) for North America and have the US and Canadian governments sign off on it. It works well in communications, for example. The bureaucrats still justify their existence by conducting reviews (and dolling out spectrum, which won't apply for autos).
  73. s k from Toronto, Canada writes: Mr Low wonders why Transport Canada has not worked to harmonize standards across North America. I wonder why it is always Canada who has to harmonize down to US standards. Let the auto industry harmonize up to California emission standards across North America.
  74. N J from Canada writes: Write to Transport Canada Minister:

    The Honourable Lawrence Cannon
    Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities
    Tower C - 330 Sparks St.
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    K1A 0N5

    Telephone:
    613-991-0700

    Fax:
    613-995-0327

    E-mail:
    mintc@tc.gc.ca
  75. Ian Patterson from Waterloo, Canada writes: Ha ha, thanks mike cornmeal, your cactus comment gave me a very good laugh, although I'd like to think that I'm being realistic about it, given it affects virtually all 2008 GM and Honda vehicles, among others, as opposed to just being a prick. ;-) My contacting Greg about this issue was primarily due to the $30K difference in Canadian versus US pricing, because as a Canadian I would like to see my money stay in the country, but not at that kind of inexplicable surcharge. It expanded to this article once yet another road block, for the immobilizer, (a cheap, attainable after-market device) marked virtually all of the 2008 GM and Honda cars as "inadmissable" into Canada. This is on top of all the other existing roadblocks, real and perceived, such as requiring a US address to purchase a new car, licensing it in the US, getting the recall clearance letter (and not giving it to Canadians), not honouring warranty repairs, etc. Corvettes have long suffered from the 8km/h test issue for bumper foam density as a deterrent, and there is a cheap and easy modification available, but I cannot even bring the 2008 model car into Canada to get these modifications done, nor can I get them done in the US in such a way that RIV will allow the car in at this point in time; if a car is listed in the "inadmissible" column, you are SOL until such time as they deem to make it admissible with modification conditions. Long story short, I will likely buy used in the US, and GM Canada is very unlikely to see a penny from me again. Thanks all! imp.
  76. B Lam from Canada writes: ra ku from Canada writes: J.R. allow me to educate you on the process of setting our own safety standards at least as far as transport canada goes. They do not CHECK anything regarding car safety. They simply allow the manufactures to submit letters of compliance before adding their models on the admissibility list.

    Ra ku, please allow me to educate you on govenment approvals or certifications. Manufacturers' self declaration of compliance does not mean that it is not effective. If fact, it is far more efficient than having TC to test every single vehicle imported into Canada themselves. Auto makers will not fabricate test results to make their vechilces on the admissibility list, they have to protect thier own reputations and legal liability.
  77. W Ross from Up North, Canada writes: Ah yes, the perfect storm of the automotive purchase rip-off. May we please have 10 more reasons why we should not enjoy being taken for $1000s when we buy a car in Canada! Is there anyone out there with a ethical and legitimate good deal?
  78. Mickey Hickey from Toronto, Canada writes: A brief history. During 2003-2004 Transport Canada (TC) Decided to adopt an United Nations theft deterrent and immobilizer standard. After consultation with the Auto mfrs, Insurance Bureau Canada, ICBC and other auto and insurance industry groups TC decided to jettison Canadian Motor Vehicle Standard 114 and replace it with the UN standard effective Sept 01 2007. That is cars manufactured before Sept. 01 2007 fall under the old standard which essentially was a copy of FMVSS 114 the US standard and the European Standard was also deemed to conform. The Canadian Motor vehicle Association did object and the IBC and ICBC also objected to the amended CMVSS114 during the consultation process in 2003-2004. ICBC/IBC wanted a common standard i.e. FMVSS114 with the option for Canadians importing from US to install a home grown version of CMVSS/FMVSS 114 (BC home grown!!!). Major problems arose beginning Sept. 01 2007 when most auto mfrs looked for ways to impose non tariff barriers to private auto imports from the US. CMVSS114 was the ideal candidate and most auto mfrs are flogging it to death. If CMVSS 114 did not exist they would look around for something else. The solution is simple and can be easily implemented by Lawrence Cannon Minister of Transport and Privy Council. Mr Cannon instructs his bureaucrats to rewrite CMVSS114 so that it cannot be used as a non tariff trade barrier that is adding $4,000 to $40,000 to the cost of each new auto bough in Canada. Of interest is that the cost benefit analysis used by TC took $32 as the cost of mod to each car. I do not blame the auto mfrs, if I was handed an advantage of $4,000 to $40,000 per unit I would happily exploit it and applaud the wisdom of our "new Gov't.
  79. Luc Lafrance from Ottawa, Canada writes: A few weeks ago a friend of mine suggested that car manufacturers would curb the import of US cars by building these cars so that they would fail to comply to some CDN standard. This is it. A silver bullet served by our own bureaucracy. There are still options: buying a pre-08 [used] vehicule or buying one that is manufactured with an immobilizer even when destined for the US. The problem with the latter is that such a car will most likely not be built in NA and therefore subject to import duty.
  80. Rum Bunny from Etobicoke-on-Sea, Canada writes: OK listen up. There is a HUGE underwater values off lease overhang coming due over the next few years that is going to wreak havoc. You will get your wish for cheap cars bigtime. Of course the car you now own will be part of the herd as well. The industry that lived off dimwits renting wheels they couldn't afford any other way for three or four years is going to take a monumental bath and any tag along businesses dependent on the sector will tank.
  81. George BrownIII from Christmas Island writes: JG and they charge GST on the air conditioning tax too!
  82. Jim Corrigan from Toronto, Canada writes: I think we all know by now that the North American auto industry is using Canadian's ignorance as a means of offsetting their US dollar losses. Many of these cars are built in Canada in the first place and I do find it alarming at the amount of 'creativity' we're seeing from the auto industry to scare away people from buying cars from the US.

    When my lease comes up, I'll walk away and go south to shop. If I can't bring a Honda or GM back, I'll find something that I can. One of my friends just brought up the Acura MDX without hassle. He did this after his friend brought up a Range Rover with COMPLETE WARRANTY. And ya, NO PROBLEMS!!!!

    Don't be fooled by the hype. You can still bring cars up here. Of course, all you'll get from the media is scare tactics carefully delivered by the Canadian auto dealers.

    Now that I've seen these facts in real life, you won't see me looking at the ticket price of a brand new car in Canada for a LONG TIME. The fact that local dealers have made little effort to change their prices is just another reminder that ignorance is bliss in this part of the world.
  83. Peter Cromerovich from Erehwon, Canada writes: Isn't it great to know that Transport Canada is out there doing its job and keeping us safe from ourselves.
  84. norm johnson from Calgary, Canada writes: I recently imported a new Subaru Tribeca and saved $15k (33%). The Helena Montana dealer was great and Subaru USA was upfront with me about warranty issues. They told me that I must pay for the warrant work performed in Canada and then submit the invoice to Subaru USA for repayment. For $15k I can live with that. Inspection took under 5 minutes but paper work took nearly 3 weeks to arrive from RIV. Face it the flood gates have been opened and Canadians will continue to find ways to buy cars in the USA. Even our slimy Canadian car dealers will continue to slither down to the USA to scope up bargains until prices drop in Canada. Sales of new cars in Canada will slump sharply, Canadian divisions of the automakers will not make the sale quotes and inventories will rise in Canada. No sales bonuses, lower profits and layoffs will make everyone in the Canadian auto industry very unhappy. My response to their plight is simply “Suck it up Princess you created the problem in the first place”!! Maybe then the automakers will realize that the Canadian consumer is not stupid. Maybe then they will react. Maybe then our inept Canadian government will go after all of the automakers for price fixing and collusion. Maybe then I will not have to listen to those incredibly stupid explanations of why cars in Canada should cost 20 – 30% more than in the US. Maybe then the Canadian consumer will be treated fairly. Then again maybe there is a Santa Claus?
  85. Luc Lafrance from Ottawa, Canada writes: This is not as bad I initially thought. I just went over TC's list of '08 models inadmissible for import and here's my summary: Any GM built after August. Any honda except the S2000. Most Nissan's. Some Subaru's. VW Jetta GLI and Golf GTI. A lot of nice cars in that bunch but hey, you know what? That leaves a heck of other nice cars to pick from. Personally, I was looking at an '08 Cadillac CTS; maybe I'll go for the redesigned '09 TSX that Acura will launch in the Spring (my lease is up at that time anyway). Happy car shopping south of the border!
  86. Luc Lafrance from Ottawa, Canada writes: Another reason why this isn't so bad after all is that the TC guide clearly says that the installation of an after-market immobilizer is possible (unlike what some posters have said). TC's warning about doing that is to check with the manufacturer to ensure that the after-market installation will not alter/void the original warranty. So this issue of the lack of an immobilizer in some US cars might be just a red herring after all.
  87. Gary Pinkham from Edmonton, Canada writes: I understand that Bombardier sells a sea doo in the U.S. for $3000- $4000 less than in Canada. Yeah they are made here and they are also subsidized by the Canadian Federal Government. Huh! I too am looking to buy a new Diesel truck and want to shop in the states. Further south you go better the deal. I need to find out if warranty will be covered,and what changes on the vehicles are required to meet Canadian standards. So far I am looking at saving about $10,000.00 over all. Why are Canada's auto prices higher? Will they change? I am frustrated over the situation and feel that something should be done aout it to make it fair. What with free trade and all.
  88. otmar zambo from Canada writes: Does anyone need more proof that the auto makers are robbing Canadians?
  89. J. Citron from Toronto, Canada writes: Of course the immobilizer issue is a red herring. And why should TC care whether the car is easier or harder for someone to steal? That should be up to the consumer. I can possibly understand if there was an environmental issue but this is ridiculous.
  90. Broken Record from Victoria, B.C., Canada writes: It's ALL about protectionism! When I get my new car home I can remove the immobiliser if I want. I can change the bumpers if I want. Transport Canada no longer cares because the trade impediment posed by their oddball standards has served its purpose: it has made importing a vehicle costlier and more difficult. Once a car is registered, it will never be regularly inspected by Transport Canada to ensure their requirements are maintained. The car can fall apart on the road for all they care. Unless Transport Canada are willing to impose a national vehicle safety inspection regime they have no business making vehicle regulations. As long as the vehicle meets U.S. or Eur