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 0086305 - HQ 0086382 > HQ 0086353

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

---

HQ 086353

February 20, 1990

CLA-2 CO:R:C:G 086353 NLP

CATEGORY: CLASSIFICATION

TARIFF NO.: 766.2560

District Director of Customs
40 South Gay Street
Baltimore, MD 21202

RE: Decision on Application for Further Review of Protest No. 1303-8-000453

Dear Sir:

This protest was filed against your decisions in the liquidations of various entries covering shipments of porcelain articles produced in China.

FACTS:

The articles at issue in this protest are various porcelain vases and jars which were imported by Peking Arts, Inc., of Rockville, Maryland, from the People's Republic of China. The dates of entry for the merchandise were November 12, 1987, December 2, 1987, and December 31, 1987. On importation, the porcelain vases and jars were classified in 534.9400, Tariff Schedules of the United States Annotated (TSUSA), which provides for articles of non-bone chinaware or of subporcelain, dutiable at 9 percent, and also subject to an additional duty of 6.6 percent ad valorem under item 766.30, TSUS, which provides for articles imported for sale and claimed to be classifiable under item 766.20, TSUS, or 766.25, TSUS, but which were found not to be authentic antiques. The protestant states that the Chinese porcelain vases and jars were made over 100 years before the date of their entry and, as a result, they should have been classified under 766.25 TSUS, which provides duty free treatment for antique articles.

ISSUE:

Did the evidence submitted by the protestant show that the merchandise involved was over 100 years old at the date of entry?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

The protestant has submitted as evidence of antiquity documentation attesting to the authenticity of the imported antiques. This documentation includes:

1. A statement, dated February 12, 1988, from the Director of Sotheby's Chinese Works of Art Division that the celadon-glazed vase and blue and white vase were manufactured more than 100 years before the date of their entry;

2. A letter, dated February 10, 1988, to the District Director Of Customs from the manager of the Tianjin Branch of the China National Arts and Crafts Import & Export Corporation, together with three certificates of Antiquity issued by them;

3. A memorandum, dated February 11, 1988, from the Tianjin City Government Foreign Trade Bureau attesting to the validity of the certifications in number 2, above;

4. A letter, dated February 18,1988, to the District Director of Customs in Baltimore from Wenchow Importing Co., an importer of Chinese art and furniture, attesting to the fact that, based on the samples and the photographs they received, the vases and jars were over 100 years old;

5. A letter, dated March 8, 1988 from Barry Rogers, Appraiser, confirming that the listed articles were made between 1800 and 1860;

6. A letter, dated July, 22, 1988, from Jane Marsden Antiques, a dealer of antique Chinese porcelainware, as to the authenticity of the subject articles;

7. A letter, dated September 22, 1988, from Boone Antiques, Inc., attesting to the authenticity of the Celadon vases and the blue and white vases;

There is no indication as to why these certifications and letters were not deemed to be conclusive evidence that the porcelain vases and jars were over 100 years old at the date of their entry into the United States. It is our position that based on the evidence submitted, the imported articles are properly classifiable as other antiques under item 766.2560, TSUSA, and entitled to free entry.

HOLDING:

The protest should be allowed. A copy of this decision should be attached to your Form 19 Notice of Action to be sent to the protestant.

Sincerely,

John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division

Previous Ruling Next Ruling