Newly Released CBP HQ Rulings Feb. 28
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated on Feb. 28 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.
H319171: Application for Further Review of Protest No. 3029-21-100294; Classification of Stop Collars and Centralizers from the United Kingdom
| Ruling: The subject merchandise is classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 8431, specifically under subheading 8431.43.80, which provides for, “Parts suitable for use with the machinery of headings 8425 to 8430: Of machinery of heading 8426, 8429 or 8430: Parts for boring or sinking machinery of subheading 8430.41 or 8430.49: Of offshore oil and natural gas drilling and production platforms.” |
| Issue: Are the subject stop collars and centralizers classified under 8431, as parts suitable for use solely or principally with the machinery of heading 8430, or under heading 7326, as other articles of iron or steel? |
| Item: certain Halliburton Energy Services' stop collars and centralizers for offshore oil rigs |
| Reason: After considering the characteristics of the merchandise, CBP found that “[t]he primary function of the float collar and float shoe [was] to guide an oil well casing into a wellbore,” as opposed to primarily functioning as a valve. In prior CBP rulings, CBP classified other devices used in drilling equipment under heading 8431, including a “head assembly for a mineral bit fitted on a drilling rig” and “various parts used in down-hole drilling.” As for the subject stop collars, their purpose is to keep the centralizers in place and limit the movement of the centralizers (and other casing attachments) along the casing string. Securing the placement of the centralizers directly facilitates the even distribution of cement, which in turn prevents the negative ramifications outlined above. CBP found that the subject stop collars are also “integral, constituent, component” parts of the drilling machinery are classifiable under heading 8431. |
| Ruling Date: June 13, 2024 |
H334641: Coastwise Transportation; Outer Continental Shelf; Cable Laying; 46 U.S.C. §§ 55102, 55103, and 55109; 19 CFR §§ 4.80a and 4.80b
| Ruling: The transportation of subsea power cable from a foreign or a U.S. port by a foreign vessel, as described above, prior to cable lay operations as described above would not violate the Jones Act. The use of a foreign vessel to lay subsea power cable, as described above, would not violate the Jones Act. The return of a de minimis amount of excess power cable by a foreign cable installation vessel to the exact location from which it was laden, as described above, would not violate the Jones Act. The transportation of a de minimis amount of excess power cable by a foreign cable installation vessel between U.S. ports, as described above, would not violate the Jones Act so long as the de minimis amount of cable consists of 5% or less of the cable initially laded aboard the vessel. The transportation of more than 5% of cable would violate the Jones Act. The employment by a foreign vessel of a pure chain cutting device, a hybrid water jet/chain cutter device, or a pure water jet device on the OCS seabed to bury subsea power cable on the Outer Continental Shelf, as described above, would not violate the Dredging Statute. The use of a foreign vessel to engage in a pre-lay grapnel removal of out-of-service communications cable and debris, as described above, would not violate the Dredging Statute. The subsequent transportation of out-of-service cable and debris removed from the seabed from an OCS location to a U.S. port utilizing a coastwise-qualified vessel would not violate the coastwise laws. The transportation of containers containing cable protection materials between two U.S. ports by a foreign cable installation vessel, as described above, would not violate the Jones Act. The use of a foreign vessel to conduct survey operations, as described above, would not violate the coastwise laws. The transportation of marine crew personnel between points in the United States by a foreign cable installation vessel, out of service cable removal vessel, pre-lay grapnel run vessel, and survey vessel, as described above, would not violate the Passenger Vessel Services Act. |
| Issues: See ruling. |
| Item: unnamed company's vessel activities relating to the installation of a subsea power cable on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf by non-coastwise-qualified vessels |
| Reason: See ruling |
| Ruling Date: Dec. 17, 2024 |
H342414: Accent Touch Lamp; Country of Origin; Substantial Transformation; Generalized System of Preferences
| Ruling: The accent lamp imported into the U.S. from Cambodia is eligible for preferential tariff treatment under the GSP, provided the 35% value-content and the “imported directly” requirements are met at the time of entry. |
| Issue: What is the country of origin of the accent touch lamp? Does the accent touch lamp qualify for the duty exemption under the Generalized System of Preferences when imported from Cambodia into the U.S.? |
| Item: Dollar General's accent touch lamp used for household purposes |
| Reason: The materials will undergo a substantial transformation in Cambodia. The same analysis applies for purposes of the GSP, and therefore the accent lamp may be considered a “product of” Cambodia. In this case, only the metal neck, which is formed from metal tubing, is a new and distinct intermediate article of commerce with a new character and use. The machine sawing and shaping transforms the material into the metal neck, a distinct article of commerce with a new character and new use used to make the midsection for the accent lamp. Furthermore, the additional assembly of this piece into the finished accept lamp constitutes the second substantial transformation. However, the other Chinese components only undergo assembly to make the accept lamp, and therefore, they don't undergo a double substantial transformation, and their cost may not be included in the 35% value-content requirement. |
| Ruling Date: Jan. 27, 2025 |