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 > 1993 HQ Rulings > HQ 0951877 - HQ 0951985 > HQ 0951973

Previous Ruling Next Ruling


HQ 951973

July 1, 1992

CLA-2 CO:R:C:M 951973 DWS

CATEGORY: CLASSIFICATION

TARIFF NO.: Unknown

Mr. John Goodrich
Fingerhut Corporation
4400 Baker Road A-195
Minnetonka, MN 55343

RE: Revocation of NY 825024; Highway Kit; 8203.20.40; 8206.00.00

Dear Mr. Goodrich:

In NY 825024, dated March 25, 1988, you were advised that the subject highway kit would be classifiable as a set under General Rule of Interpretation (GRI) 3(b) of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). You were also advised that the essential character of the kit was the tool set, and, therefore, the kit would be classifiable under subheading 8203.20.40, HTSUS, as derived from subheading 8206.00.00, HTSUS.

This letter is to notify you of a change in the classification of the subject highway kit as a result of HQ 951943, dated June 26, 1992, a copy of which is enclosed. The "Highway Emergency Kit" ruled upon in HQ 951943 is very similar in composition to the subject highway kit. Based upon the reasoning in HQ 951943, the subject merchandise is not classifiable as a set. All of the articles contained within the kit must be classified separately under their respective headings in the HTSUS. The classification of any of these articles on an individual basis does not seem to present any unusual difficulties. However, if you are unsure of the classification of a particular article, you should use the District Rulings procedure as usual.

Accordingly, we are revoking NY 825024 pursuant to 19 CFR 177.9(d)(1). This revocation will not be applied retroactively to NY 825024 [19 CFR 177.9(d)(2)] and will not, therefore, affect past transactions under that ruling. However, for the purposes of future transactions in merchandise of this type, NY 825024 will not be valid precedent. We recognize that pending transactions may be adversely affected by this revocation, in that current contracts for importations arriving at a port subsequent to this decision will be classified pursuant to it. If such a situation arises, you may apply for relief from the binding effects of this decision as may be warranted by the circumstances.

Sincerely,

John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: