Importer Says US Trying to Expand Scope of HTS Heading to Include Catalytic Converters
Importer Mitsubishi Power Americas asked leave Feb. 18 from the Court of International Trade to file a short sur-reply to the U.S.’s support of a cross-motion for judgment (Mitsubishi Power Americas v. United States, CIT # 21-00573).
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.
It said the U.S. filing (see 2502140054) had relied “on additional argument, which was not previously raised in its filings with the Court or related materials.”
The government, it said, claimed that catalytic converters are classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 8421, and “specifically under 8421.39.40.” That wasn’t true, Mitsubishi said -- heading 8421 doesn’t mention the term “catalytic converters,” referring instead only to “filtering or purifying machinery and apparatus, for … gases.”
This “violates the well-established principle of tariff classification under General Rule of Interpretation ('GRI') 1,” in that, when making a classification determination, the decision-maker must first look to overall classification headings before considering subheadings, it said.
It said the U.S. was relying on the subheading's language to impermissibly "expand the scope of heading 8421," which "only provides" for puryfing or filtering apparatus "for gases." It argued that it had already shown that its products were neither filters nor purifiers, and it asked the court to deny the government’s cross-motion for judgment.