2026 H1 U.S. Imports of 8703230140 — Import Review
This review covers U.S. imports under 8703230140 — other motor vehicles fitted with spark-ignition internal combustion piston engines, 1500 ml < cylinder capacity ≤ 3000 ml — across the first half of 2026 (January through June). The figures are drawn from U.S. Customs import records and look at import value, quantity, weight in metric tons, unit value, month-to-month movement, where the goods originate, and which ports clear them. Two structural facts stand out immediately: the trade is tightly concentrated by origin and by gateway, and the half-year splits almost evenly between the two quarters despite a volatile month-to-month path.
What the half-year looked like
Scale. Imports reached $32.20B in CIF value over the six months, on 1,401,116 units and 1,655,463.2 metric tons, across 1,053 transactions. Average unit value worked out to $23.0K/unit.
One origin leads, but not alone. Mexico (MX) supplied 31.6% of value ($10.17B), ahead of Japan (JP) (22.6%) and South Korea (KR) (13.8%). The top three partners reach 68.0% and the top ten 97.9%.
One gateway dominates. LAREDO, TX cleared 15.8% of import value ($5.08B); SAVANNAH, GA was a distant second at 11.5%.
Two quarters, similar weight. Q1 carried 48.8% ($15.73B) and Q2 51.2% ($16.47B); the half-year was up 4.7% from Q1 to Q2.
1. Monthly Import Data (Jan–Jun 2026)
Monthly CIF value, quantity, weight in metric tons, FOB value, unit value (CIF divided by quantity) and month-over-month (MoM) change.
1.1 Monthly Detail
| Month | CIF (USD) | Qty | Weight (t) | FOB (USD) | Unit $ | MoM |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | 5,062,803,346 | 222,180 | 237,266.0 | 4,947,642,747 | $22.8K/unit | — |
| 02 | 4,261,791,053 | 196,307 | 218,674.8 | 4,170,283,232 | $21.7K/unit | -15.8% |
| 03 | 6,400,819,746 | 270,032 | 335,147.9 | 6,254,117,061 | $23.7K/unit | +50.2% |
| 04 | 5,277,649,468 | 222,465 | 289,719.0 | 5,165,871,273 | $23.7K/unit | -17.5% |
| 05 | 5,613,607,372 | 236,980 | 297,662.9 | 5,498,391,982 | $23.7K/unit | +6.4% |
| 06 | 5,578,741,373 | 253,152 | 276,992.6 | 5,468,993,464 | $22.0K/unit | -0.6% |
| H1 | 32,195,412,358 | 1,401,116 | 1,655,463.2 | 31,505,299,759 | $23.0K/unit | — |
1.2 Quarterly Summary
| Quarter | CIF Value | Weight (t) | FOB (est.) | Unit $/t |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | $15.73B | 791,088.7 | $15.39B | $19.9K/t |
| Q2 | $16.47B | 864,374.5 | $16.12B | $19.1K/t |
Q1 ran $15.73B against Q2's $16.47B — a 4.7% increase and a far steadier profile than a typical front-loaded year. The monthly path moved from $4.26B at the low (02) to $6.40B at the high (03).
1.3 Monthly CIF Import Value, 2026 H1
2. Partner Countries and Entry Ports, 2026 H1
Top 3 Partner Countries
Mexico (MX) — $10.17B (31.6%)
Japan (JP) — $7.29B (22.6%)
South Korea (KR) — $4.44B (13.8%)
Top 3 Entry Ports
LAREDO, TX — $5.08B (15.8%)
SAVANNAH, GA — $3.71B (11.5%)
BALTIMORE, MD — $3.55B (11.0%)
Top 6 Partner Countries by Value
| Rank | Country/Region | CIF (USD) | Qty | Weight (t) | Unit $ | Share | Txns |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mexico (MX) | $10.17B | 476,191 | 291,718.6 | $21.4K/unit | 31.59% | 275 |
| 2 | Japan (JP) | $7.29B | 322,055 | 567,892.4 | $22.6K/unit | 22.65% | 116 |
| 3 | South Korea (KR) | $4.44B | 238,724 | 332,607.6 | $18.6K/unit | 13.78% | 98 |
| 4 | Germany (DE) | $4.12B | 136,613 | 234,200.1 | $30.2K/unit | 12.80% | 116 |
| 5 | Canada (CA) | $2.54B | 101,855 | 0.0 | $25.0K/unit | 7.89% | 35 |
| 6 | Sweden (SE) | $1.21B | 34,138 | 70,767.0 | $35.4K/unit | 3.76% | 30 |
Top 6 Entry Ports by Value
| Rank | Port | CIF (USD) | Qty | Weight (t) | Unit $ | Share | Txns |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | LAREDO, TX | $5.08B | 239,281 | 0.0 | $21.2K/unit | 15.77% | 33 |
| 2 | SAVANNAH, GA | $3.71B | 154,264 | 239,946.3 | $24.0K/unit | 11.51% | 125 |
| 3 | BALTIMORE, MD | $3.55B | 143,714 | 271,451.5 | $24.7K/unit | 11.03% | 98 |
| 4 | LOS ANGELES, CA | $3.34B | 138,407 | 220,996.4 | $24.1K/unit | 10.38% | 124 |
| 5 | TAMPA, FL | $2.04B | 87,426 | 152,600.2 | $23.3K/unit | 6.34% | 54 |
| 6 | DETROIT, MI | $1.97B | 80,957 | 14.2 | $24.4K/unit | 6.13% | 19 |
Top 10 Partner Countries by CIF Value
Top 10 Entry Ports by CIF Value
3. Reading the Numbers
How concentrated this trade really is
One supplier and one port carry the line
Mexico (MX) alone is 31.6% of value, and LAREDO, TX alone is 15.8% of cleared entries. Together the top three partners reach 68.0% and the top three ports reach 38.3%. For a $32.20B import line, that is a tightly funnelled channel — the goods, the origin and the gateway all converge on a small set of nodes.
The half-year was balanced, not front-loaded
Q1 ($15.73B, 48.8%) and Q2 ($16.47B, 51.2%) are close in size, a 4.7% rise from one quarter to the next. That reads as steady demand rather than the surge-then-stop profile seen in some other lines, so the monthly swings are noise around a stable base, not a structural break.
Origin diversity is real but shallow
Beyond the leader, Japan (JP) (22.6%) and South Korea (KR) (13.8%) give the top three 68.0%, and the top ten already absorb 97.9% of value. There is meaningful spread across suppliers, but the tail beyond the leaders is thin — Germany (DE) sits at 12.8% and falls away quickly.
Origin and channel detail
The leading supplier sets the tone
Mexico (MX) accounts for $10.17B at an average unit value of $21.4K/unit. Japan (JP) follows at $7.29B (22.6%). The gap between first and second is the single most important structural fact in the origin mix.
The port map is even more concentrated than the country map
LAREDO, TX clears 15.8% of entries, with SAVANNAH, GA (11.5%) and BALTIMORE, MD (11.0%) well behind. The top three ports reach 38.3%; everything else is marginal. If LAREDO, TX's clearance capacity is disrupted, there is limited slack in the data to absorb the shift.
Unit value signals a mixed product base
Average unit value across the half-year is $23.0K/unit, but it varies by supplier and by month. That spread points to more than one product grade moving under the same code — higher-value configurations sit alongside volume lines — which matters for anyone pricing or hedging the flow.
4. Trend Assessment
What works in its favour
A clear anchor. Mexico (MX) and LAREDO, TX are established, high-volume nodes; the goods move through well-worn logistics.
Balanced quarters. With Q1 and Q2 within 4.7% of each other, the trade shows stable demand rather than event-driven spikes.
Spread beyond the leader. The top ten partners cover 97.9% of value, so there is a real — if shallow — base of alternates.
Predictable scale. $32.20B cleared in six months is a substantial, recurring flow.
Where it is fragile
Single-point origin and port. Mexico (MX) (31.6%) and LAREDO, TX (15.8%) mean one disruption — a supplier halt or a clearance snag — hits the whole line at once.
Thin tail. Beyond the top three the shares fall off fast; true diversification is a slow build.
Mixed unit value. Product-grade variation makes a single price assumption unsafe for budgeting.
Gateway risk. With 15.8% through one port, that node outweighs every other contingency in the data.
Trend Outlook
At 31.6% share, no near-term replacement exists. Continuity is the base case unless a supplier or policy shock lands.
If H2 2026 stays close to this H1 split, treat the trade as steady; a sharp Q3 swing would be the real news.
Japan (JP) and South Korea (KR) are the realistic second-tier sources; the rest of the top ten is thin.
With 15.8% clearing there, any capacity or policy change at that one port outweighs everything else.
5. Recommendations
Origin strategy
Protect the lead line. 31.6% of value rides on Mexico (MX); secure supplier and freight relationships rather than treating supply as assured.
Build the second tier. Lift Japan (JP) and South Korea (KR) share where possible and name them as alternates.
Track the tail. Watch whether suppliers below rank three gain ground; that is the only real diversification path.
Pricing and hedging
Price by grade. Unit value spans a wide band; separate high-value configurations from volume lines rather than averaging them.
Hedge the swing. Lock landed cost against the observed unit-value range rather than a single point estimate.
Budget the half-year shape. Plan around a balanced Q1/Q2 split; a deviation is the early warning.
Channel resilience
Treat LAREDO, TX as a single point of failure. At 15.8% it is the whole gateway; protect its clearance throughput first.
Grow SAVANNAH, GA as backup. At 11.5% it is the only real alternative node; invest in making it substitutable.
Plan for the tail ports. Do not build contingency on sub-1% entries; they cannot absorb a lead-port disruption.
Risk management
Model a Mexico (MX) or LAREDO, TX shutdown. With double concentration, that is the dominant scenario to pre-stage alternatives for.
Monitor concentration monthly. A rising leader share is an early warning the buffer is shrinking.
Separate grade risk. Mixed unit value means a shift in product mix can move average price without any volume change.
Data Notes
HS classification. 8703230140 is the U.S. ten-digit statistical breakout for other motor vehicles fitted with spark-ignition internal combustion piston engines, 1500 ml < cylinder capacity ≤ 3000 ml. All figures refer to this ten-digit code.
Source. U.S. Customs import records (CIF/FOB value, weight, quantity, transaction counts).
Period. January–June 2026, first half, six months.
Units. Value in US dollars (CIF and FOB); weight in metric tons; quantity as the number of vehicles. Unit value is CIF divided by quantity (USD per unit). Unit value per metric ton is provided in the quarterly table for weight context.
Market share. A partner's or port's value divided by total half-year value.
Quarterly FOB. Estimated as CIF × (total FOB / total CIF), since the source reports monthly FOB only at the aggregate level.
MoM. (current month value − prior month value) ÷ prior month value.
Transactions. Count of customs declaration records in the dataset (approximate, not an official customs field).
Bottom line
U.S. imports of 8703230140 in the first half of 2026 were a $32.20B line defined by two facts: the goods come overwhelmingly from Mexico (MX) (31.6%), and they clear almost entirely through LAREDO, TX (15.8%). Unlike a front-loaded year, the half-year split 48.8% (Q1) to 51.2% (Q2) — a balanced, steady profile. Mexico (MX) (31.6%), Japan (JP) (22.6%), South Korea (KR) (13.8%) cover 68.0% of origin and LAREDO, TX (15.8%), SAVANNAH, GA (11.5%), BALTIMORE, MD (11.0%) cover 38.3% of entries, so the concentration is real but not absolute. The practical move is to harden the Mexico (MX)/LAREDO, TX channel while building Japan (JP) and South Korea (KR) as genuine alternates, and to price the flow by grade given the wide unit-value spread.