Newly Released CBP HQ Rulings for Jan. 21-25
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated Jan. 21 and again Jan. 25 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
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.
H311480: Country of Origin of Utility Knife
| Ruling: The country of origin of the utility knife is Vietnam. The utility knife’s country of origin marking requirements are met so long as the product is marked as “Made in Vietnam” or “Product of Vietnam." |
| Issue: What is the country of origin of the utility knife? |
| Item: A retractable steel blade utility knife for general and utility cutting purposes. The steel blade is disposable and can be replaced by the ultimate purchaser. The knife is shipped with the blade partially extended from the utility knife so that the ultimate purchaser can see that a blade is included and installed at the time of purchase. The utility knife’s handle body blade holder ("knife body") is made in Vietnam from die-cast, zinc alloy from Vietnam or third countries. The steel utility knife blade is made by a third party in Vietnam. The blade handle and blade are shipped to China, where zinc or aluminum blocks are die-cast to make the back section of the utility knife handle. These two sides are assembled to the Vietnamese knife head with various Chinese springs, screws, washers and a comfort grip. |
| Reason: The steel disposable blades and knife body are both made in Vietnam and either assembled together in Vietnam as a "knife head” or exported separately to China for assembly with the Chinese knife handle in China. The assembly processes in China are minor and there is no substantial transformation in China. |
| Ruling Date: Sept. 29, 2021 |
H315299: Country of origin of an Automotive Power Seat Cushion Frame for Section 301 trade remedy and marking
| Ruling: The country of origin of the automotive power seat cushion frame for the purpose of Section 301 measures will be Mexico under all production scenarios. The country of origin of the automotive power seat cushion frame for the purposes of marking under all five scenarios will be Mexico. |
| Issue: What is the country of origin of the automotive power seat cushion frame in each of the five scenarios for purposes of applying Section 301 trade remedies? What is the country of origin of the automotive power seat cushion frame for marking purposes? |
| Item: An automotive power seat cushion frame classified under subheading 9401.90.10. It will be manufactured from components mostly of Mexican origin, including motors, and some components of Chinese origin. The components of Chinese origin may include a motor, a hose and two shafts, stamped side brackets, actuating tube subassembly and cross tube subassembly (also of subheading 9401.90.10). |
| Reason: The Chinese origin components alone will be insufficient to create the automotive power seat cushion frame and a majority of the components in each scenario will be of Mexican origin. When combined with the Mexican components, the Chinese components will lose their individual identities and become an integral part of automotive power seat cushion frame. Although CBP generally considers the origin of a motor to be an important factor and some production scenarios include an assembled or unassembled motor from China, each of these scenarios also includes two motors from Mexico. The Chinese components will be substantially transformed by the processing in Mexico. |
| Ruling Date: Jan. 4, 2022 |
H319823: Country of Origin; Section 301; Portable Air Conditioners
| Ruling: The country of origin of the window air conditioners is Taiwan for purposes of Section 301 trade remedies. |
| Issue: What is the country of origin of portable air conditioners for purposes of Section 301 trade remedies? |
| Item: Portable air conditioner units assembled in Taiwan, packaged with accessories from China, e.g., a remote control assembly, a heat exhaust hose, connectors, screws and nuts, a soft cap, plug and window plates, which allow the portable air conditioner units to be used as window units. The components of the compressor assembly are primarily from China, with the exception of the silicon steel material and the rotor core assembly from Taiwan. The assembly of each compressor assembly begins in China with the assembly of the rotor and stator assemblies. In Taiwan, the rotor and stator assemblies and the Chinese pump assembly are connected to each other. The condenser and the evaporator are from Taiwan. |
| Reason: The essence of the finished air conditioning unit is the cooling unit that consists of three components: the compressor, the condenser and the evaporator. The condenser and the evaporator are from Taiwan, and the compressor is from China. Since the majority of the components that constitute the cooling unit are from Taiwan, the country of origin of the air conditioning unit is Taiwan for purposes of Section 301 trade remedies. |
| Ruling Date: Jan. 4, 2021 |
H312866: Application for Further Review of Protest No. 3401-19-100172; 1520(d) Claim Denial; Brokerage Fees
| Ruling: The protest should be granted in part and denied in part. The NAFTA claim should be granted, but brokerage fees may not be deducted. |
| Issue: Whether the protestant’s NAFTA preferential tariff treatment claim under 19 U.S.C. § 1520(d) should be granted. Whether the brokerage fees are dutiable. |
| Item: Men’s synthetic hooded sweatshirts produced in Canada. CBP denied the manufacturer's post-importation NAFTA claim under 19 U.S.C. § 1520(d) on April 1, 2020, stating that the ultimate consignee on the entry summary and CF 7501 show a foreign importer of record, which is not acceptable; that with the ultimate consignee listed as a foreign entity, it appears that the goods are in Canada; that the terms of sale are not listed on the invoice; and that the deduction of brokerage fees was not substantiated. Subsequently, the protestant filed the protest claiming that the ultimate consignee was reported correctly at the time of entry and that the deduction of brokerage fees was substantiated. |
| Reason: Since the protestant’s post-importation NAFTA claim was timely filed within one year from the date of importation of the merchandise and the NAFTA Certificate of Origin covering the merchandise at issue was submitted, the protestant's post-importation NAFTA preference claim pursuant to 19 U.S.C. § 1520(d) should be granted. The ultimate consignee designation is not a basis for denial of the protestant’s 19 U.S.C. § 1520(d) claim. Even though the invoice does not list the term of sale, it indicates “bill brokerage service charges to shipper.” However, the brokerage charges are not separately listed. Further, evidence of actual costs of brokerage charges were not provided. Accordingly, brokerage charges may not be deducted from the price actually paid or payable for the imported merchandise. |
| Ruling Date: Oct. 5, 2021 |