Newly Released CBP HQ Rulings Aug. 25 -27
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated between Aug. 25 and Aug. 27 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.
H346628: Country of Origin and USMCA Eligibility of the ecoCUBE Air Purification Device
| Ruling: The merchandise qualifies as USMCA originating goods and will be eligible for preferential tariff treatment under the USMCA, provided that all other applicable requirements are met. Under the substantial transformation standard, the country of origin of the merchandise is the United States. |
| Issue: Is the good eligible for preferential tariff treatment under the USMCA when it is imported from Canada into the United States; and what is the country of origin of the merchandise under the substantial transformation standard? |
| Item: ecoCUBE air purification device for large combustion engines |
| Reason: Because no non-originating materials of heading 8421 are used in the production of the ecoCUBE, the goods will qualify as originating pursuant to regulations, and, provided that all other requirements are met, they will be eligible for preferential tariff treatment under the USMCA when imported into the United States from Canada. As for substantial transformation, the ecoCUBE incorporates two core components, the SCR purification catalyst and DPF purification catalyst, that carry out the core function of purifying emissions. Both of these components are of U.S. origin and together account for approximately 75% of the value of the materials used in the production of the good. As in H168212 and H312891, the additional materials are secondary and do not change any part of the SCR and DPF purification catalysts to enable them to perform the function of purifying emissions. Moreover, the Canadian assembly operations are simple and do not rise to the level of complexity and meaningfulness that would result in a substantial transformation. |
| Ruling Date: Aug. 15, 2025 |
H348215: Instruments of International Traffic; 19 U.S.C. § 1332(a); § 10.41a(a)(1), SkyCell AG; Temperature Controlled Pharmaceutical Containers
| Ruling: The subject pharmaceutical containers qualify for treatment as instruments of international trade within the meaning of 19 U.S.C. 1322(a) and § 10.41a(a)(1). |
| Issue: Do the subject containers qualify for consideration as instruments of international traffic within the meaning of 19 U.S.C. 1322(a) and 19 C.F.R. 10.41a(a)(1)? |
| Item: A pharmaceutical container, specifically, the 1500X model, that is designed to transport pharmaceuticals through international air traffic in a temperature-controlled environment and be returned to the U.S. empty for refill and re-exportation. |
| Reason: To qualify for entry-free and duty-free treatment as IITs, the article must be a substantial container or holder. Based upon review of the submission and information provided, the subject pharmaceutical containers are containers 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 aluminum. They are used in significant numbers in international commerce, given that approximately three thousand of the subject items are currently used in international traffic. Lastly, the subject items are suitable for and capable of reuse given that they are designed to be refilled and have been used for periods of up to twelve years with an apparent lifespan of up to 20 years. |
| Ruling Date: Aug. 20, 2025 |
H327731: Protest No. 4601-22-131915; Classification of lamination press plates
| Ruling: The subject lamination press plates are properly classifiable under heading 7219, specifically subheading 7219.90.00, which provides for “Flat-rolled products of stainless steel, of a width of 600 mm or more: Other.” The country of origin of the lamination press plates is Taiwan. |
| Issue: What is the proper classification of the subject merchandise under the HTSUS? What is the country of origin of the steel plates for purposes of application of the 2021 Section 232 duties for goods under subheading 9903.80.01? |
| Item: Cardel's lamination press plates used in the manufacture of polyvinyl chloride smart cards, credit cards, and similar items. In their condition as imported, the finished plates are ready for installation in a lamination machine that produces the plastic cards. |
| Reason: As imported, the subject plates present as thin, flat sheets of stainless steel with no indicia of dedicated use. The subject plates’ lack of any unique form or characteristics that would dedicate them for use solely or principally with lamination press machines, and their generalized reflective finishes, indicate they are not “parts” for tariff purposes pursuant to the Pompeo test. Furthermore, the subject plates do not satisfy the “parts” test set forth in Bauerhin as they are not “integral, constituent, or component part[s]” of the lamination machines, such that those press machines could not function as intended without the particular subject plates. While the subject plates and the lamination press machines may be designed to be used together, that does not necessarily make the plates constituent “parts” or essential elements of those machines. They are not structural elements or functional constituents of those machines. Accordingly, the subject articles are not classifiable as parts under heading 8477. The subject stainless-steel plates, measuring 619 mm in width, are classified in heading 7019, specifically subheading 7019.90.00 (2021), which provides for “[ F]lat-rolled products of stainless steel, of a width of 600 mm or more: Other.” As for country of origin, based on the facts provided, it is CBP's view that the cutting and additional machining operations performed in the U.K. do not substantially transform the lamination press plates into a new and different article of commerce with a character and use distinct from that of the exported Taiwanese steel sheets. |
| Ruling Date: June 9, 2025 |
H344166: Application for Further Review of Protest No. 4601-24-137774; Tariff Classification of Certain Tomato Product
| Ruling: The subject tomato product is classified under heading 2103, and specifically, in subheading 2103.90.90, which provides for “Sauces and preparations therefore; mixed condiments and mixed seasonings; mustard flour and meal and prepared mustard: Other: Other: Other.” |
| Issue: What is the proper tariff classification of the subject tomato product under the HTSUS? |
| Item: Mangia's tomato product, an “unfinished pizza sauce” that is an “intermediate tomato product” imported in bulk and contained in metal drums at importation. CBP agrees that the product is classifiable under heading 2103 as “Sauces and preparations therefore” and no other heading is applicable in this case. The dispute concerns the classification of the product at the subheading level, specifically, whether the product should be classified under subheading 2103.20 as “other tomato sauces,” or subheading 2103.90 as “Other.” |
| Reason: While the predominate ingredient of the product in this case is said to be tomato, CBP has determined that it is not a sauce after considering the actual and intended use of the product, which the court indicated were paramount features. The subject product is not a sauce because it is not intended to be eaten with food without further processing, which involves kettle heating/cooking and the addition of other ingredients. Moreover, the affidavit submitted by the Protestant supports that the product is not intended or actually used in the form in which it is imported and is used instead as an intermediate base for producing a finished sauce. CBP also considered whether the subject product is classifiable in subheading 2103.90, which represents a “basket” or residual provision that is applicable to the subject product because the product is not classifiable more specifically elsewhere. Accordingly, the subject product is classified under the “basket” or residual provision subheading 2103.90.90, which provides for “Sauces and preparations therefore; mixed condiments and mixed seasonings; mustard flour and meal and prepared mustard: Other: Other: Other.” |
| Ruling Date: June 24, 2025 |
H340768: Protest and Application for Further Review of Protest No. 4601-24-137284; Tariff Classification of Certain Canned Tomato Products
| Ruling: The subject whole peeled tomatoes in puree and crushed tomatoes in puree are classified under heading 2002 and specifically subheading 2002.10.00, which provides for “Tomatoes prepared or preserved otherwise than by vinegar or acetic acid: Tomatoes, whole or in pieces.” |
| Issue: What is the tariff classification of the subject whole peeled tomatoes in puree and crushed tomatoes in puree? |
| Item: Mangia's whole peeled tomatoes in puree and crushed tomatoes in puree from Italy. |
| Reason: Protestant contends that the subject whole peeled tomatoes in puree and crushed tomatoes in puree should be classified in heading 2103 because they are preparations imported in bulk that are used to produce finished sauces. But CBP finds that the subject whole peeled tomatoes in puree and crushed tomatoes in puree can be distinguished from preparations for sauce classified in heading 2103. Notably, the subject products don't include salt, citric acid and a basil leaf. The CBP rulings cited by Protestant to support a classification in heading 2103 can all be distinguished from the products at hand. Specifically, the cited rulings involved canned tomatoes with puree or juice and added ingredients such as basil, salt and citric acid. The subject tomato products have no such additional seasonings and ingredients, but are simply tomato products. |
| Ruling Date: June 25, 2025 |
H345669: Country of origin marking of Smart Glasses; Section 301
| Ruling: The country of origin of the Smart Glasses for purposes of marking and for purposes of additional Section 301 measures is Vietnam. Therefore, the Smart Glasses are not subject to Section 301 measures. |
| Issue: What is the country of origin for marking purposes of the Smart Glasses? Are the Smart Glasses subject to Section 301 measures? |
| Item: Unnamed company's two different models of Smart Glasses. The manufacturing steps for the Smart Glasses occur in three main stages: (1) the production of individual components in nine countries (including Taiwan, Japan, China, the United States, the Philippines, Malaysia, Vietnam, Singapore, South Korea, Thailand, and Germany); (2) the production of the main logic board (MLB) and the secondary logic board (SLB) in Vietnam by means of surface mount tenology (SMT); (3) and final assembly, final software uploads, testing and packout (FATP) in China. The Smart Glasses consist of between 600 and 700 components. China contributes 46% of the components’ cost, including the memory, mechanicals, camera, battery, flexes, audio, other electrical engineering components, printed circuit board (PCB), critical integrated circuits (ICs), interconnect, and antenna. Taiwan contributes 36% of the components’ cost, including other EE, the chipset, memory, PCB, antenna, and critical ICs. All other countries provide less than 10% of the components’ cost. |
| Reason: The MLBs allow the device to use AI functionality, capture photos and videos for consumption or sharing through the companion app, listen to audio, make and receive voice calls, and send and receive text messages. Before the components are assembled onto the blank circuit board, each of the individual components is only capable of limited functions and the blank circuit board is not capable of any functions. The functionality of the Smart Glasses is dependent on the collective capabilities of the PCBAs. Although the FATP process occurring in China also takes a significant amount of time, CBP is satisfied that, because the MLB and SLB are the “brain” of the Smart Glasses, the FATP does not result in a substantial transformation. After the MLB and SLB have been assembled, the Smart Glasses do not undergo any operations that change their name, character, or use. Based on the facts presented, CBP concludes that the PCBAs are the essence of the Smart Glasses, and the Smart Glasses are products of Vietnam, where the PCBAs are manufactured through SMT. In this case, the Smart Glasses are also not subject to the additional Section 301 measures because the country of origin of the Smart Glasses is Vietnam, where the PCBAs are manufactured by SMT operations. |
| Ruling Date: July 23, 2025 |
H345243: Applicability of Subheading 9817.00.96, HTSUS; Intermittent Catheters
| Ruling: The intermittent catheters at issue are eligible for duty-free treatment under subheading 9817.00.96 as articles specially designed or adapted for the use or benefit of the blind or other physically or mentally handicapped persons. |
| Issue: Are the intermittent catheters imported by ConvaTec eligible for duty-free treatment under subheading 9817.00.96? |
| Item: Intermittent catheters, which are part of ConvaTec’s Continence Care and Critical Care line. Only intermittent catheters are at issue in this ruling, and they are for single use. |
| Reason: CBP holds that these intermittent catheters are specially designed for the use or benefit of handicapped persons. However, subheading 9817.00.96 excludes articles for acute or transient disability, even if those articles are specially designed for the use or benefit of handicapped persons. CBP must determine whether these intermittent catheters are used predominantly by individuals with acute or transient disabilities or by individuals with chronic or permanent disabilities. Though the urinary catheters are used temporarily, the evidence presented indicates that that is not the predominant use of the intermittent catheters at issue here. There is evidence that doctors recommend intermittent catheters even to those who use catheters consistently over a long period of time because intermittent catheters cause fewer complications and improve the quality of life of users. Single-use catheters are also recommended because they are more sanitary. The intermittent catheters help manage but do not cure an underlying condition. Incontinence is an issue while individuals use the catheter, and still is an issue if users stop using the catheter. Therefore, CBP believes the catheters do not treat but simply help users manage the underlying condition causing the incontinence. |
| Ruling Date: July 23, 2025 |
H350733: Printed Shrink Film; U.S. Content; 9903.01.34, HTSUS
| Ruling: The U.S.-origin PE resin represents 60% of the customs value of Printed Shrink 20” C-250 and Printed Shrink 26” C-275, which will be imported into Puerto Rico from the Dominican Republic, and the additional duties imposed by subheading 9903.01.25 will not apply to the U.S. low-density PE resin, thermoplastic PE resin, and linear low density PE resin consistent with subheading 9903.01.34 and Chapter 99, Subchapter III, U.S. Note 2(v)(xiii). |
| Issue: Do the low-density, thermoplastic, and linear low-density PE resin manufactured in the United States qualify for the U.S. content exemption under subheading 9903.01.34? |
| Item: Pac-Tech International's U.S.-origin low-density polyethylene (PE) resin, thermoplastic PE resin and linear low-density PE resin used to make plastic shrink packaging material, also known as printed shrink film, in the Dominican Republic for plastic water bottles. Pac-Tech imports printed shrink film produced in the Dominican Republic into Puerto Rico. A foreign manufacturer in the Dominican Republic purchases low-density, thermoplastic, and linear low-density PE resin from an unnamed U.S. manufacturer to produce printed shrink film. |
| Reason: U.S. content refers to the portion of an article’s customs value, determined under 19 U.S.C. § 1401a, attributable to components that are wholly obtained, entirely produced, or substantially transformed in the United States. At least 20% of the total customs value must be of U.S.-origin for the content to qualify under subheading 9903.01.34. This exemption applies only to the U.S. portion. The remaining non-U.S. content remains subject to duties under subheadings 9903.01.25, 9903.01.35, 9903.01.39, 9903.01.63, and 9903.02.01- 9903.02.71. Here, the DR-CAFTA certificates of origin certified by the U.S. manufacturer indicate that the PE resin is produced in the United States and the non-originating raw materials undergo the prerequisite tariff shift or meet the RVC requirements. Based on the invoices, the U.S. content represents 60% of the total price paid or payable for the printed shrink film. |
| Ruling Date: Aug. 21, 2025 |