Bill Seeking to Ban Importation of Cars Older than 13 Years Collapses Parliament’s rejection of the proposed 13-year vehicle import limit underscores the difficult balance between environmental reform and economic reality, as lawmakers prioritize affordability over policy ambition. While government sought cleaner, more efficient cars and higher revenues, concerns over rising transport costs and limited access to vehicles ultimately prevailed, leaving the long-standing 15-year import threshold intact for now. The debate signals tensions in shaping sustainable transport policies amid growing urban pressures.

A government proposal to tighten vehicle importation rules has collapsed after facing strong resistance in Parliament, bringing to an end months of debate over affordability, environmental protection, and economic policy.

In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Parliament indicated that “after a protracted debate, the Traffic & Road Safety (Amendment) Bill, 2026, has collapsed and stands withdrawn.”

The Bill had sought to reduce the allowable age of imported vehicles from 15 years to 13 years, a move government argued was necessary to modernise Uganda’s vehicle fleet.

The proposal was part of broader reforms under the Revenue Enhancement and Compliance Measures for the 2026/27 financial year.

Government’s plan aimed to phase out older, less efficient cars while encouraging the uptake of newer, environmentally friendly models.

Government had argued that aging vehicles continue to impose a growing burden on the economy through frequent breakdowns, high demand for imported spare parts, and increased fuel consumption, factors that strain Uganda’s foreign exchange reserves.

They also pointed to rising emissions and pollution linked to older vehicles.

Alongside the revised age limit, government had proposed a new environmental levy structure targeting vehicles aged nine years and above.

Under the plan, 13-year-old vehicles would attract a 50% levy, followed by 40% for 12-year-old vehicles, 30% for 11-year-old vehicles, 20% for 10-year-old vehicles, and 10% for nine-year-old vehicles.

Vehicles below nine years old would remain exempt. The measures were expected to generate about UGX 19 billion in additional domestic revenue.

However, the proposals met resistance from MPs, particularly over their impact on ordinary Ugandans.

In its report, Parliament noted that the Finance Committee had rejected the plan to reduce the import age limit, arguing that it would significantly increase vehicle prices and make car ownership less accessible to middle- and low-income households.

Parliament also noted that Mukono District Woman MP Hanifa Nabukeera, in her minority report on Clause 3 of the Bill, which proposed to introduce the environmental tax, warned that the measures would have a ripple effect on the wider economy.

She argued that higher vehicle costs would inevitably translate into increased transport fares, placing additional financial strain on citizens already grappling with rising living costs.

The collapse of the Bill leaves the current policy unchanged, with the import age limit remaining at 15 years, a threshold first introduced in the early 2000s to balance affordability and road safety in a smaller economy.

Over time, however, the policy has come under pressure as Uganda’s vehicle population grows, with older imports linked to urban pollution, frequent mechanical failures, and increased reliance on imported spare parts.

While previous budgets attempted to address these issues through taxes and levies, the age limit itself had remained largely untouched until this latest push.

The failed reform highlights a deeper policy tension: balancing environmental sustainability and economic efficiency against the immediate realities of affordability for Ugandan households.

The rejection of the Bill signals that future attempts to overhaul vehicle importation rules will need to reconcile environmental ambitions with the financial realities facing ordinary citizens.