CAFC Affirms CIT's Ruling that Stones that Polish Are Classifiable as Marble
On August 25, 2004, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a ruling in Intercontinental Marble Corporation v. U.S. affirming an earlier Court of International Trade (CIT) decision that "all stones that polish" are classifiable as marble. Like the CIT, the CAFC rejected Customs' arguments that marble should be defined by its geological definition rather than its commercial meaning.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
According to the CAFC, the merchandise at issue in this appeal has the following qualities: (1) it is stone slab under the definition set forth in Additional Note 1 to Chapter 68 of the HTS, (2) it is not geological marble, but is instead non-crystalline limestone; and (3) it is capable of taking a polish.
Customs classified imports of this merchandise under HTS 6802.92.0000 (4.9%, 2004), which provides for other calcareous stone; however, ICM contends that the correct classification is 6802.91.0500 (2.5%, 2004), which provides for marble slabs.
Courts Reject Customs' Use of Geological Definitions Over Commercial Meaning
Under the Tariff Schedule of the U.S. (TSUS), all stones that polish, whether or not such stone met the technical definition of marble, were classified by Customs as marble. However, Customs states that when the U.S. adopted the HTS, it settled upon the commonly-accepted geological definition of various stones to determine proper classification.
Both the CAFC and CIT rejected this reasoning because they found no indication that Congress intended to change the meaning of the term "marble" under the HTS. Because the courts were unable to find authority for Customs' narrowing definition, the CAFC and the CIT both conclude that marble retained its broader commercial meaning under the HTS.
CAFC Affirmation of CIT's ruling (Court No. 03-1555, dated 08/25/04) available at http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/03-1555.doc
CIT Opinion and Order (Slip Op. 03-47, dated 04/30/03) available at http://www.cit.uscourts.gov/slip_op/slip_op03/Slip%20Op%2003-047.pdf
CIT Judgment (Slip Op. 03-63, dated 06/10/03) available athttp://www.cit.uscourts.gov/slip_op/slip_op03/Slip%20Op%2003-063.pdf
BP Note
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has not yet updated its informed compliance publication (ICP) entitled "What Every Member of the Trade Community Should Know About: Classification of Marble" to reflect the reasoning set forth in the CAFC and CIT rulings. (See ITT's Online Archives or 11/28/01 news, 01112825, for BP summary of this publication, which was last revised in September 2001.)