United States International Trade Commision Rulings And Harmonized Tariff Schedule
faqs.org  Rulings By Number  Rulings By Category  Tariff Numbers
faqs.org > Rulings and Tariffs Home > Rulings By Number > 1990 HQ Rulings > HQ 0082266 - HQ 0082524 > HQ 0082365

Previous Ruling Next Ruling



HQ 082365


March 30, 1989

CLA-2 CO:R:G 082365 JH

CATEGORY: CLASSIFICATION

TARIFF NO.: 494.60, TSUS

District Director of Customs
Detroit, Michigan 48226-2568

RE: Classification of a Urethane Sealant Adhesive

Dear Sir:

This is a decision on an application for further review of Protest No. 3801-7-001162.

FACTS:

The imported product is an urethane based material used in the automotive industry. In the United States a pre-polymer solution is produced which is sent to Canada where it is made into a urethane sealant. It is shipped back to the United States and used in the automotive industry to adhere windshields to the frame of the automobile. The composition is given as diphenylmethane diisocyanate based urethane polymer-55 percent by weight, toluene-5 percent by weight, carbon black-15 percent by weight, and aluminum silicate-25 percent by weight.

ISSUE:

Whether the urethane sealant is classifiable under the provision for polyurethane resins in item 409.14, Tariff Schedules of the United States (TSUS), or the provision for cements, not specially provided for, in item 494.60, TSUS.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

A spokesman for the importing company stated that the product is based on a polyurethane polymer and is used to seal windshields to the frame of the automobile. He indicated that the product was made in compliance with federal regulations on the subject and met all the standards, especially in regard to impact and crash specifications. In the Handbook of Adhesives, it is noted that most polyisocyante urethane sealants are used in the automobile industry for sealing windshields.

Under the Tariff Schedules of the United States, Customs initially took the view that although many plastics materials had adhesive qualities, in those instances where the materials were imported in bulk and met the definitions of synthetic plastics materials, as reflected in Headnote 2, Part 4A, Schedule 4, TSUS, they would be classified as plastics materials. However, this view was modified by court decisions such as Naftone, Inc. v. United States, C.D. 4578, which concerned the classification of a plastics material used as a cement. The court noted that the evidence established overwhelmingly that the product was a cement within the common meaning of the term. It went on to state that a substance which is specifically designed for the cementing of materials to each other and which in its imported condition can accomplish this purpose, is a cement within the meaning of the term.

In this case the imported product is a plastics material which is specifically made as a urethane sealant for, and used by, the automotive industry to seal windshields to the frame.

HOLDING:

The protest is allowed in full.

A copy of this decision should be furnished to the importer with the Form 19 Notice of Action.

Sincerely,

John Durant, Director

Previous Ruling Next Ruling