CIT Rules That Plates Used in Printing Process are Photographic Plates
In Agfa Corporation, ("Agfa") v. U.S., the Court of International Trade agreed with Customs and ruled that certain plates imported by Agfa to be used in photolithography should be classified in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule under HTS 3701.30.00, a provision covering photographic plates.
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.
Agfa imported the plates to be used in a photomechanical printing process (photolithography). As imported, these unexposed plates were composed of two layers, (1) a grained and anodized aluminum substrate, and (2) a photosensitive "polymer or emulsion" layer, both of which are sensitive to specific wavelengths of light.
U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) classified the plates under HTS 3701.30.00 as photographic plates, sensitized, and unexposed photosensitive plates to be used in lithography. Agfa challenged CBP's classification stating that the plates were not photographic plates, but instead should be classified under HTS 8442.50.10 as "blocks, plates, cylinders and lithographic stones, prepared for printing purposes"
In making its decision, the CIT looked to General Rule of Interpretation (GRI) 1, which states the "classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relevant section or chapter notes." Heading 3701 in HTS Chapter 37 covers "photographic plates and filmflat, sensitized, unexposed, of any material other than paper, paperboard or textiles" Both parties had agreed that the plates were not made of the excluded materials, and that they were flat, sensitized, and unexposed. The issue to be decided was whether or not the plates were "photographic."
Agfa argued that "photographic plates" as used in Heading 3701 is a term of art used only in the "art of photography." The CIT rejected this argument, stating (1) that Note 2 to Chapter 37 provides a clear definition of the word "photographic" stating that this is a "process by which visible images are formed, directly or indirectly, by the action of light or other forms of radiation on photosensitive surfaces"; and (2) that the HTS states that "plates" are composed "of any material other than paper, paperboard, or textiles." The CIT stated: "While the court does not treat Explanatory Notes as binding authority, the court is required by GRI 1 to use the Chapter Notes which are part of the statute, to determine the meaning of tariff headings." Accordingly, the CIT ruled that the plates were correctly classified by CBP.
CIT Slip Op. 07-802 (dated 05/21/07) available at: http://www.cit.uscourts.gov/slip_op/Slip_op07/07-80.pdf