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 reported records (uniqueness unverified). 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 68.02% and the top ten 97.9%.
The largest gateway. LAREDO, TX cleared 15.8% of import value ($5.08B); SAVANNAH, GA ranked second at 11.5%.
Two quarters, similar weight. Q1 carried 48.8% ($15.73B) and Q2 51.2% ($16.47B); Q2 CIF value was 4.73% above Q1.
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 | $22,786.94/unit | — |
| 02 | 4,261,791,053 | 196,307 | 218,674.8 | 4,170,283,232 | $21,709.83/unit | -15.82% |
| 03 | 6,400,819,746 | 270,032 | 335,147.9 | 6,254,117,061 | $23,703.93/unit | +50.19% |
| 04 | 5,277,649,468 | 222,465 | 289,719.0 | 5,165,871,273 | $23,723.50/unit | -17.55% |
| 05 | 5,613,607,372 | 236,980 | 297,662.9 | 5,498,391,982 | $23,688.11/unit | +6.37% |
| 06 | 5,578,741,373 | 253,152 | 276,992.6 | 5,468,993,464 | $22,037.12/unit | -0.62% |
| H1 | 32,195,412,358 | 1,401,116 | 1,655,463.2 | 31,505,299,759 | $22,978.41/unit | — |
1.2 Quarterly Summary
| Quarter | CIF Value | Weight (t) | FOB (reported) * | Unit $/t |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | 15,725,414,145 | 791,088.7 | 15,372,043,040 | $19,878.19/t * |
| Q2 | 16,469,998,213 | 864,374.5 | 16,133,256,719 | $19,054.24/t * |
Q1 CIF value totals USD 15,725,414,145 and Q2 USD 16,469,998,213, an increase of 4.73%. February is the minimum (USD 4,261,791,053) and March the maximum (USD 6,400,819,746). A typical-year comparison requires a historical baseline.
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
Origin and gateway shares have different concentration levels
Mexico accounts for 31.59% of the published CIF value; LAREDO accounts for 15.77%. The top three origins sum to 68.02%, while the top three gateways sum to 38.31%, based on rounded table shares. These figures do not establish a direct Mexico–LAREDO route or limited spare capacity.
The half-year was balanced, not front-loaded
Q1 represents 48.84% and Q2 51.16% of published H1 CIF value. Similar quarterly totals do not establish stable demand or show that monthly changes are noise; inventory, timing and product mix may also affect imports.
Origin diversity is real but shallow
Beyond the leader, Japan (JP) (22.6%) and South Korea (KR) (13.8%) give the top three 68.02%, 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 top-three gateway share is below the top-three origin share
LAREDO, TX accounts for 15.77% of CIF value, with SAVANNAH, GA (11.5%) and BALTIMORE, MD (11.0%) well behind. The top three ports reach 38.31%; 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
Aggregate CIF unit value is USD 22,978.41 per reported vehicle. Differences across months or origins may reflect vehicle mix, freight, valuation or other factors. They do not identify price changes for identical vehicles.
4. Trend Assessment
What works in its favour
A clear anchor. Mexico and LAREDO are the largest published origin and gateway respectively; the dataset does not establish their direct routing or reliability.
Balanced quarters. Q2 CIF value is 4.73% above Q1; this does not independently establish stable demand.
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. USD 32,195,412,358 is the published six-month CIF sum; recurrence requires a longer time series.
Where it is fragile
Single-point origin and port. Mexico (MX) (31.6%) and LAREDO, TX (15.8%) identify exposures to investigate; a disruption would not automatically affect the entire import line.
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, operational exposure requires shipment routes, lead times and contingency capacity.
Trend Outlook
Mexico is the largest origin at 31.59%. This share does not establish whether alternative suppliers can replace affected vehicles.
Assess subsequent months using consistent coverage and definitions; the H1 quarterly split alone is not a forecast.
Japan and South Korea are major published origins. Germany also contributes 12.80%; substitution requires model, certification and capacity checks.
LAREDO has the largest individual gateway share, 15.77%. The relative importance of capacity or policy changes requires operational evidence.
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. Assess suppliers across all ranks; country shares alone do not establish product substitutability.
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. Budget by comparable vehicle specifications, freight terms and payment dates; aggregate unit-value ranges are not hedge prices.
Budget the half-year shape. Use demand, inventory and lead-time data when budgeting; do not assume the observed Q1/Q2 split will recur.
Channel resilience
Assess LAREDO exposure. At 15.77% of CIF value, it is the largest listed gateway; quantify affected routes and alternatives.
Grow SAVANNAH, GA as backup. Its 11.51% value share does not establish substitutability; compare routes, handling requirements and spare capacity across gateways.
Plan for the tail ports. Assess capacity and lead times at all feasible gateways; small observed shares do not prove a lack of spare capacity.
Risk management
Model a Mexico (MX) or LAREDO, TX shutdown. Model each exposure separately and check origin–gateway overlap before combining potential losses.
Monitor concentration monthly. A rising leader share warrants investigation; it does not measure inventory or spare capacity.
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. Only the supplied HTML was available. Its stated customs source, extraction date, filters and record identifiers have not been checked against raw data. Official methods: https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/data/IMDB.html and https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/reference/definitions/index.html . Arithmetic validation is not source validation.
Period. January–June 2026, first half, six months.
Units. Value in US dollars (CIF and FOB); published weight in metric tons (coverage unverified); quantity is reported as vehicles. * Zero or very low weights, including Canada, LAREDO and DETROIT, require checking transport coverage and missing-value codes; they are not confirmed physical masses. 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. Recomputed by summing the three published monthly FOB fields: Q1 USD 15,372,043,040 and Q2 USD 16,133,256,719. The source calls the field FOB; confirm whether it is customs value before using that label commercially.
MoM. (current month value − prior month value) ÷ prior month value.
Transactions. Reported count only; neither distinct customs declarations nor unique shipments have been verified.
Bottom line
Published H1 CIF values sum to USD 32,195,412,358 for 1,401,116 reported vehicles, or USD 22,978.41 per vehicle. Q2 value is 4.73% above Q1. Mexico represents 31.59% of value and LAREDO 15.77%; neither accounts for a majority. The top-three shares are 68.02% by origin and 38.31% by gateway. The arithmetic is checked, while source coverage, weight definitions, valuation and record counts remain unverified. Purchasing and routing decisions require vehicle-level and operational evidence.