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 > 1991 HQ Rulings > HQ 0087878 - HQ 0087958 > HQ 0087886

Previous Ruling Next Ruling


HQ 087886


May 31, 1991

CLA-2 CO:R:C:G 087886 WAW

CATEGORY: CLASSIFICATION

TARIFF NO.: 9603.10.4000, 9603.10.5000, 9603.10.6000

Donald S. Stein, Esq.
Brownstein Zeidman and Schomer
Suite 900
1401 New York Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005-2102

RE: Brooms with a mixture of broom corn and polypropylene fibers

Dear Mr. Stein:

This letter is in response to your inquiry, dated August 7, 1990, on behalf of your client, Escobera La Reynera, S.A., of Cadereyta Jimemez, Nuevo Leon, Mexico, concerning the tariff classification of brooms which consist of a mixture of broom corn and polypropylene fibers from Mexico. Samples of the merchandise were submitted along with your request for a ruling.

FACTS:

The subject merchandise consists of brooms which are made of a combination of polypropylene fibers and broom corn. The importer maintains that the mix of polypropylene fibers and broom corn may vary, but in all cases the polypropylene fibers will account for over 50 percent of the constituent materials used in the brooms.

It is your opinion as counsel for the importer that the brooms which consist of a blend of broom corn and polypropylene fibers should be classified under subheading 9603.90.80, HTSUSA, as brooms other than of twigs or other vegetable materials bound together, subject to a General rate of duty of 5.6 percent, but eligible for duty-free treatment under the United States Generalized System of Preferences program.

We have considered submissions from counsel dated August 23, 1990, and December 10, 1990 which discuss the importer's arguments in support of the conclusion that the broom should be classified under subheading 9603.90, HTSUSA. We had an opportunity to meet with the importer and counsel on January 31, 1991.

ISSUE:

What is the proper classification of brooms which consist of a combination of broom corn and polypropylene fibers under the HTSUSA?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

The General Rules of Interpretation (GRI's) set forth the manner in which merchandise is to be classified under the HTSUSA. GRI 1 requires that classification be determined first according to the terms of the headings of the tariff and any relative section or chapter notes and, unless otherwise required, according to the remaining GRI's, taken in order.

In the instant case, we find no headings within the nomenclature whose terms would specifically include brooms such as these. In addition, the brooms at issue are not covered by any Legal Notes, at either the Section or Chapter level. GRI 1 is, therefore, inconclusive, and the remaining GRI's, taken in order, must be consulted.

With regard to the subject merchandise, the broom corn and the polypropylene fiber material qualify as a composite good for tariff purposes. They are two components attached to each other to form a practically inseparable whole. Composite goods are classified by reference to GRI's 2 and 3. Under GRI 2, any reference to a material or an article made of a material includes goods made wholly or in part of that material. GRI 2(b), HTSUSA, provides in pertinent part that "[t]he classification of goods consisting of more than one material or substance shall be according to the principles of GRI 3."

GRI 3, HTSUSA, provides in pertinent part the following:

When, by application of Rule 2(b) or for any other reason, goods are, prima facie, classifiable under two or more headings, classification shall be effected as follows:

(a) The heading which provides the most specific description shall be preferred to headings providing a more general description. However, when two or more headings each refer to part only of the materials or substances contained in mixed or composite goods or to part only of the items in a set put up for retail sale, those headings are to be regarded as equally specific in relation to those goods, even if one of them gives a more complete or precise description of the goods.
Since both the broom corn and polypropylene fibers fall under separate headings in the tariff schedule which describe only a portion of the materials in the entire broom, the headings are to be regarded as equally specific under GRI 3(a). Therefore, GRI 3(a) fails in establishing classification, and GRI 3(b) becomes applicable.

GRI 3(b) states in pertinent part:

(b) Mixtures, composite goods consisting of different materials or made up of different components, and goods put up in sets for retail sale, which cannot be classified by reference to 3(a), shall be classified as if they consisted of the material or component which gives them their essential character, insofar as this criterion is applicable.

The Explanatory Notes to the HTSUSA, although not legally binding, represent the official interpretation of the tariff at the international level. The Explanatory Notes offer guidance in understanding the scope of the provisions within each chapter of the schedule. Explanatory Note VIII to GRI 3(b) provides that among the factors which may affect the essential character determination of an imported article are "the nature of the material or component, its bulk, quantity, weight or value, or by the role of a constituent material in relation to the use of the goods." Essential character has been construed to mean the attribute which strongly marks or serves to distinguish an article.

In the instant case, the component material which constitutes the most distinctive feature of the broom is the broom corn material. Upon examination of the mixed broom corn and polypropylene broom which was submitted along with your ruling request, it is clear that the polypropylene "filler" material is concentrated predominately in the center of the broom, and is surrounded by the broom corn material which covers the outside of the broom. While the polypropylene fibers may be stronger and more durable than the broom corn, you have conceded that the sweeping characteristics of the two materials are virtually the same. We also believe that it is the covering of the broom corn which enhances the aesthetic appeal and marketability of the broom to the consumer, and not the polypropylene. Although the comparative values that you have submitted of the broom corn and polypropylene fibers reveal that the broom corn does not predominate in value, we believe that this is not in and of itself determinative. Value is only one of the several factors to be considered. Based on the foregoing reasons, it is the determination of this office that the broom corn imparts the essential character of the broom.

HOLDING:

The essential character of the sample broom which consists of polypropylene fiber and broom corn is the broom corn material. Accordingly the brooms are properly classified under subheading 9603.10.40, HTSUSA, or subheading 9603.10.50, HTSUSA, depending on whether or not the quantitative limits set forth in subheading 9603.10.40, HTSUSA, have been reached prior to the entry or withdrawal from warehouse for consumption. These subheadings provide for Brooms, brushes (including brushes constituting parts of machines, appliances or vehicles), hand-operated mechanical floor sweepers. . . Brooms and brushes, consisting of twigs or other vegetable materials bound together, with or without handles: Other brooms wholly or in part of broom corn: Valued not over 96 cents each. Brooms classified under subheading 9603.10.40, HTSUSA, are dutiable at 8 percent ad valorem, while brooms classified under subheading 9603.10.50, HTSUSA, are dutiable at 32 cents each. If valued over 96 cents, the proper classification is subheading 9603.10.60, HTSUSA, which provides for Brooms, brushes (including brushes constituting parts of machines, appliances or vehicles), hand-operated mechanical floor sweepers. . . Brooms and brushes, consisting of twigs or other vegetable materials bound together, with or without handles: Other brooms, wholly or in part of broom corn: Valued over 96 cents, and dutiable at 32 percent ad valorem.

Sincerely,

John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: