Newly Released CBP HQ Rulings July 1
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated on July 1 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.
H341021: Country of Origin; Marking; Bicycles
| Ruling: The country of origin of the Katahdin bicycle for marking purposes is China and it must be marked “Made in China." |
| Issue: What is the country of origin of the Katahdin bicycle for marking purposes? |
| Item: Cycles Panorama's Panorama Katahdin model bicycle. The component materials of the bicycle are purchased from Taiwan, China, Japan, and Canada including the frame, brakes, wheels, and saddle, all classified under heading 8714. Once all the components arrive in the warehouse in Canada, they are assembled into the final product. The bicycles are then imported into the U.S. 90% assembled, with the front wheel and the handlebar unattached. |
| Reason: As the change to the bicycle is as a result of the assembly of its parts, the Katahdin bicycle does not undergo the requisite tariff shift. The frame imparts the essential character to the Katahdin bicycle. The frame is the most costly component and imparts to the bicycle its overall shape, size, and character. Accordingly, because the material that imparts the essential character to the good, the frame, is of Chinese origin, the country of origin of the entire imported good is China for marking purposes and the bicycle needs to be marked as “Made in China.” |
| Ruling Date: Nov. 19, 2024 |
H347908: Instruments of International Traffic; 19 U.S.C. § 1332(a); § 10.41a(a)(1), Raedlinger Primus Line Inc.; Transport Units (Reels)
| Ruling: The subject reels that have not yet formally entered the United States qualify for treatment as instruments of international trade within the meaning of 19 U.S.C. § 1322(a) and § 10.41a(a)(1). However, those reels which were previously imported, entered, and for which duties were paid should be entered under subheading 9801.00.20 as “Articles, previously imported.” |
| Issue: Do the subject reels qualify for consideration as IIT within the meaning of 19 U.S.C. § 1322(a) and 19 C.F.R. § 10.41a(a)(1)? |
| Item: Raedlinger Primus Line is asking whether Transport Units (Reels) qualify as instruments of international traffic (IIT) |
| Reason: To qualify as an IIT within the meaning of 19 U.S.C. § 1322(a) and 19 C.F.R. § 10.41a(a)(1), an article used as a container or holder must be: (1) substantial, (2) suitable for and capable of repeated use, and (3) used in significant numbers in international traffic. The subject reels are containers that are substantial, suitable for and capable of repeated use, and used in significant numbers in international traffic. They are substantial in that they are made of steel and the component parts have an average lifespan of 15 years. They are used in significant numbers in international commerce, given that approximately 190 of these reels are currently in use in international traffic. Lastly, the subject reels are suitable for and capable of reuse given that these units are used approximately 12-15 times in a12 month period and are rated for 100 or more use cycles. Based on the foregoing, in general, the reels are eligible for designation as IITs; and would therefore qualify for entry-free and duty-free treatment as IITs pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 10.41a(a)(1). However, when originally imported, the subject reels underwent normal entry process and the payment of applicable duties. Consequently, upon eventual reimportation, these reels qualify for duty-free treatment under Subheading 9803.00.0, HTSUS, not as IITs, but as “of foreign production and previously imported and duty paid” substantial holders. The subject reels which have not yet formally entered the United States, as discussed above, qualify for entry-free and duty-free treatment as IITs pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 10.41a(a)(1). |
| Ruling Date: June 25, 2025 |
H345597: Instruments of International Traffic; 19 U.S.C. § 1322(a); 19 C.F.R. § 10.41a(a)(1); Wind Turbine Generator Component Transport Frames
| Ruling: The subject transport frames are Instruments of International Traffic within the meaning of 19 U.S.C. § 1322(a) and 19 C.F.R. § 10.41a(a)(1). |
| Issue: Do the various subject cargo transport frames qualify for consideration as IIT within the meaning of 19 U.S.C. § 1322(a) and 19 C.F.R. § 10.41a(a)(1)? |
| Item: Vesta American Wind Technologies is asking whether five variations of wind-energy cargo transport frames qualify as instruments of international traffic (IIT) |
| Reason: To qualify as an IIT within the meaning of 19 U.S.C. § 1322(a) and 19 C.F.R. § 10.41a(a)(1), an article used as a container or holder must be: (1) substantial, (2) suitable for and capable of repeated use, and (3) used in significant numbers in international traffic. All the frames are foreign-made and are constructed from heavy-duty welded steel. The subject frames are designed – either as a single component or by a combination of several components – to hold the merchandise. The subject transport frames can considered substantial. The frames have a lifespan of five to seven years and are expected to be used two or three times a year. The subject transport frames are suitable for and capable of repeated use. Furthermore, there are over seven thousand frames in Vestas’ inventory, all intended to be used for international transportation multiple times a year. There are significant numbers of each of the above-described transport frames. Therefore, the subject transport frames qualify as an instrument of international trade per 19 U.S.C. § 1322(a) and 19 C.F.R. § 10.41a(a)(1). |
| Ruling Date: June 25, 2025 |
H296919: Classification of certain crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules
| Ruling: The CSPV modules at issue are subject to the Solar 201 safeguard. As products of heading 9903.45.25, they are dutiable at the rates set forth in Chapter 99, Subchapter III, Note 18(f), in addition to any rates applicable under statistical reporting number 8541.43.0010. |
| Issue: Do the CSPV products at issue fall within the scope of the Solar 201 safeguard and are they consequently subject to increased duties? |
| Item: Cypress Creek Renewables' crystalline silicon photovoltaic (CSPV) modules imported from South Korea |
| Reason: The applicant asserted that because assembly of the CSPV panels at issue includes certain steps undertaken in the U.S., specifically the creation of the positive-negative (p/n) junction in the cells making up the panels, the products fall outside the scope of the Solar 201 safeguard. The applicant contended that because “the single most important attribute of a CSPV cell” is the p/n junction, which is created in the U.S., the cells are “manufactured in” the U.S. for purposes of the exclusion. However, Note 18(c)(ii)(3) applies only to CSPV cells of 9903.45.21 and 9903.45.22, rather than modules of heading 9903.45.25 into which they are assembled. Accordingly, even assuming that the cells making up the instant modules can be considered “manufactured in the U.S.,” those modules are not exempt under Note 18(c)(ii)(3). The product enters South Korea as phosphosilicate substrates leaves and enters the U.S. as high-output photovoltaic modules, both in name and character. Regarding the latter, this is a change extending far beyond mere cosmetic modification or simple assembly. Because the panels are accordingly “modules” which are “the product of a country other than a country described in note 18(b),” they fall within the scope of heading 9903.45.25. |
| Ruling Date: June 25, 2025 |