Marketing Materials Show Chest of Drawers for Bedroom Use, Subject to AD Duties, Commerce Says
Chests of drawers imported by Mitchell Gold are covered by antidumping duties on wooden bedroom furniture from China (A-570-970), but separately imported metal bases and drawer pulls for those chests are not, the Commerce Department said in a scope ruling issued April 19.
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.
Imported as stand-alone, multi-purpose, accent pieces of furniture that are part a collection that can be used in a variety of settings, including the bedroom, the main issue in the scope inquiry was whether the chests were for bedroom or non-bedroom use. Commerce, applying its four-part Ethan Allen test, derived from a court case involving Ethan Allen chests, found that the chests are suitable for bedroom use, they are sometimes marketed as bedroom furniture.
The four Ethan Allen factors are (1) whether the chests are part of a bedroom or non-bedroom set of furniture; (2) the overall dimensions of the chests and of the drawers in the chests; (3) whether there are any decorative aspects that indicate that they are non-bedroom furniture (living room chests are more decorative than bedroom chests); and (4) any other evidence regarding whether the chests were “intended and designed” as bedroom or non-bedroom furniture.
Commerce found the first factor ambiguous, as the chests are not imported in a set. As for dimensions, Commerce compared the chests to those subject to past scope rulings, as well as other Mitchell Gold chests, and found they are suitable for holding clothes, with similar dimensions to other chests marketed by Mitchell Gold as bedroom furniture.
Mitchell Gold had argued that the decorative characteristics of the chests meant they are more suitable for non-bedroom use, but while the chests are similar to non-bedroom chests in that they are finished on all sides, the finishes themselves are more aptly described as a minimum surface treatment to finish the chests. “Decorative characteristics that distinguish non-bedroom chests from bedroom chests should involve something more -- an embellishment, beyond a minimum surface treatment, which increases the ornateness of the furniture piece or which gives the furniture piece a certain style such as surfaces with mirrored glass, upholstered material, metal cladding, or graphic designs,” Commerce said.
In the end, however, Mitchell Gold’s marketing materials were the clearest factor in favor of finding the chests subject to AD duties. “Despite evidence that Mitchell Gold intended the Ming Collection chests to be part of a multiuse versatile collection of furniture, we find that the manner in which Mitchell Gold advertised, described, and displayed the chests showcases their utility and, in particular, the intention that they function as bedroom furniture,” Commerce said.
Commerce noted that, in catalogs, the chests are shown in bedroom settings eight times and in living room or entryway settings seven times. “Here, the Ming Collection chests are not part of a living room set of furniture, and there is substantial evidence that Mitchell Gold commonly markets the Ming Collection chests as suitable for the bedroom,” Commerce said. “An important attribute of the Ming Collection chests is their ability to function as bedroom chests and/or nightstands. Therefore, we do not find the chests’ suitability for the bedroom to be an ancillary feature of the chests as Mitchell Gold appears to suggest,” the agency said.
Email ITTNews@warren-news.com for a copy of this scope ruling.