7 replies to this topic

[mariner]

Maybe a topic only a beancounter like me would think of but in recent read on the Bahamas Speed Weeks I noticed that several US owner/drivers reportedly had their European built cars delivered to the Speed Weeks so they could then import them into the USA as " second hand" - having already raced them.

 

I also read somewhere that the Indy Lotus 38's were for legal purposes "built" in the Bahamas by a Lotus subsidiary called "World Wide Racing ". That company did exist as it was used to enter the Lotus 56 GP car at Monza following the Rindt crash legal issues..

 

Does anybody know how often such schemes were used? I know customs was always a big paperwork problem in the days of customs bonds etc. but that was usually just a going to a  race and back to base sort of problem not via an intermediary stop as it were.

 

 

[barrykm]

...Interesting, looking forward to informed replies.

[Ray Bell]

I'm pretty sure the 'World Wide Racing' name was used on the Tasman Cup entries of 1969...

 

I'll check it out.

[Emery0323]

Maybe different than the situation you had in mind, but there are examples where, for example,  the chassis serial numbers on Porsche 917s were swapped rather freely to circumvent customs paperwork (carnets).

There were a couple of cases in which a chassis incurred major crash damage and JW shipped the damaged space-frame back to Porsche in Germany. Once back in Stuttgart, the damaged chassis would be "repaired" by swapping the serial numbers with a new, undamaged chassis that Porsche had in inventory.  

The "repaired" chassis was then shipped back to JW in the UK with the same serial number it had when going from the UK to Germany, which avoided customs duties that would be due on a "new" example. This is documented in a couple of books on the 917 which list full chassis histories.

This example was one of the better documented ones, but other manufacturers (e.g. Alfa, etc.) did similar things - the practice was fairly common.

Edited by Emery0323, 19 April 2021 - 18:10.

[Vitesse2]

Probably worth cross-referencing the various shenanigans in this thread: Same Plates, Different Cars?

[Bikr7549]

I can see these sorts of things going on with teams and small business outfits, but its odd to me that a large company would do this. The potential liability (in fines and reputation and future international shipments) would certainly have been pretty serious. Of course things are different now. What kind of charges would be involved for tariffs back then, and what was the cost of a new 917 chassis?

 

Bob

[mariner]

Swapping chassis plates is certainly dodgy but defining where and under what terms you sell is up to the seller.. Selling "FOB" means loaded on the ship for export  "DDU" mens deiivered duty unpaid.etc. In the Terry O'Neil Bahamas book there is a picture of an invoice for a new FJ Merlyn with the sale specified as FOB Nassau. It would then be up to the new owner to agree an import price into , say, Miami and argue the value must be second hand as it had  been raced at Nassau.

 

Of course as the total value of a racing car far exceeds its component parts prices there are more creative opportunities to " assemble" the parts sold at cost in country A into the car in country B and then sell the car at full price to country C with the profit being mostly in country B ....

 

 

 Maybe many a racing car was "built" on it's way through Switzerland?

Edited by mariner, 19 April 2021 - 21:30.

[Doug Nye]

I am told there was an HM Customs Office form 115D covering cars on 'temporary import' which was widely used by British-based racers running foreign-made cars like Ferraris, Porsches etc.  

 

Colonel Hoare and Tommy Sopwith, one presumes David Piper too, would all have employed such an option to cover their contemporary Ferraris as first users ex-works.  

 

Notably, when the Colonel's Maranello Concessionaires team Ferrari 250GTO/64 '4399GT' was sold to Gordon Durham for 1965, it was invoiced to him directly by the factory in Italy - zero reference being made to Maranello Concessionaires. Whether he then held it for entrant John Dawnay on 'temporary export' or not, I really don't know...  I would assume that facility was a one-hit option?  

 

But to be honest such fiscal fine-points somewhat exceed my boredom threshold.   

 

DCN