Fleet Tracking Device Shouldn't Be Dutiable as 'Radio Navigational Aid', Importer Says
Importer Geotab said in a Sept. 30 complaint that its "GO Devices" -- used for “vehicle tracking and telematics” -- should've been classified as “other apparatus for the transmission or reception of voice, images or other data,” not “radio navigational aid apparatus.” As a result, they should have been liquidated under Harmonized Tariff Schedule heading 8517, which provides for a 7.5% Section 301 duty on Chinese-origin products, not heading 8526, which carries a 25% Section 301 duty (Geotab Inc. v. United States, CIT # 23-00185).
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.
The device is installed into vehicles so that companies can monitor their fleets, Geotab said. In its complaint, the importer said that heading 8517 is a principal use provision and that, applying the usual Carborundum factors, the GO Devices fall under it. Alternatively, it said, the heading applies based on HTS Section 16’s Note 4, which locates machines made up of individual components that are “intended to contribute together to a clearly defined function covered by one of the headings in Chapter 84 or Chapter 85” in that particular heading.
The importer also said the product can’t be used as a radio navigational aid because it doesn’t have a screen or user controls.