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 > 1992 NY Rulings > NY 0842759 - NY 0852829 > NY 0850159

Previous Ruling Next Ruling



NY 850159


March 15, 1990

CLA-2-49:S:N1:234 850159

CATEGORY: CLASSIFICATION

TARIFF NO.: 4911.99.8000

Mr. Thomas J. Heslin
The Heslin Corp.
275 Paulding Street
Fairfield, CT 06430

RE: The tariff classification of printed plastic labels from Ireland.

Dear Mr. Heslin:

In your letter dated February 28, 1990, you requested a tariff classification ruling.

A sample, said to be similar to the product which you expect to import from Ireland, was submitted and will be retained for reference. It is a strip of flexible PVC film, about 6 1/2 cm wide by 30 cm long, whose ends are joined together so as to form a continuous band. It is printed with a bar code, pictures and product information pertaining to a certain marmalade, thus making it suitable for use as a label for same.

The sample is not a self-adhesive type of label. Rather, as you indicated in a telephone conversation, it is designed to be affixed to a bottle or jar by means of a heat-sealing process. (You also noted that some of the labels will be imported in rolls instead of individual sleeves like the sample.)

The applicable subheading for the printed PVC labels, whether in rolls or individual sleeves, will be 4911.99.8000, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), which provides for other (than certain enumerated) printed matter. The rate of duty will be 4.9%.

This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Section 177 of the Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. 177).

A copy of this ruling letter should be attached to the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is imported. If the documents have been filed without a copy, this ruling should be brought to the attention of the Customs officer handling the transaction.

Sincerely,

Jean F. Maguire
Area Director

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: