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 > 1994 HQ Rulings > HQ 0735275 - HQ 0735473 > HQ 0735292

Previous Ruling Next Ruling



HQ 735292


September 21, 1993

MAR 2-05 CO:R:C:V 735292 LR

CATEGORY: MARKING

Mary Jo Muoio, Vice President
Wolf D. Barth Co. Inc.
90 West Street
New York, N.Y. 10006

RE: Country of origin marking of gold jewelry; tags; marking after importation; 19 CFR 134.34

Dear Ms. Muoio:

This is in response to your letter dated July 14, 1993, requesting a ruling on behalf of A Touch of Class, Ltd. regarding the country of origin marking of imported gold jewelry.

FACTS:

A Touch of Class, Ltd. imports fine gold jewelry manufactured in Italy. All items are engraved with the word "ITALY" at the time of importation. Based on previous Customs rulings, the importer believes that the indelible marking on the jewelry may be deficient. The importer intends to attach a hang tag with the country of origin and requests permission to do so after importation but prior to distribution. The procedures following importation are set forth in your submission as follows:
each piece of imported gold jewelry is brought into the importer's facility. There, under extremely tight security and inventory control, each piece is inspected, weighed and tagged prior to distribution. If the jewelry was imported with tags attached, these tags would necessarily be removed. The removal would be necessary to effectively inspect and accurately weigh. As the majority of the jewelry is fine, the additional handling of removing the tags would threaten the quality of the pieces. As the product is purchased and paid for by the gram, and as the values are quite high, the weighing of the product is a very detailed process. Any non- gold materials must be removed in order to determine the accurate costs. Each piece of jewelry is tagged with customer specific information prior to distribution. Each tag contains the statement MADE IN ITALY.

ISSUE:

Whether hang tags with country of origin marking may be affixed by the importer after importation if the jewelry is indelibly marked "MADE IN ITALY" at the time of importation, but perhaps not in a manner which is sufficiently legible and/or conspicuous.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1304), provides that unless excepted, every article of foreign origin imported into the U.S. shall be marked in a conspicuous place as legibly, indelibly, and permanently as the nature of the article (or container) will permit, in such a manner as to indicate to the ultimate purchaser in the U.S. the English name of the country of origin of the article. Part 134, Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part 134), implements the country of origin marking requirements and exceptions of 19 U.S.C. 1304. The ultimate purchaser in the United States must be able to find the marking easily and read it without strain. 19 CFR 134.41(b).

In Headquarters Ruling Letter 734481 (August 19, 1992), Customs ruled that certain jewelry marked by means of engraving the origin of the jewelry near the clasp did not satisfy the requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304 and 19 CFR Part 134. The importer was instructed to mark the chains by some other method which was easy to read, such as hang tags. In reaching this conclusion, Customs looked to C.S.D.s 79-47 (August 7, 1978) and 79-379 (April 9, 1979) where Customs required corrective marking (string tags) on gold jewelry because the existing indelible marking failed to meet the standard of legibility and/or conspicuousness. The result in all three of these decisions would have been different had the indelible markings been sufficiently legible and conspicuous. See HRL 735225, August 17, 1993 (tag marking was not required because the quality of the indelible marking resulted in well-defined lettering that could be read without difficulty).

In this case, no samples were submitted of the jewelry in question. Assuming that the indelible marking is not sufficient by itself to inform the ultimate purchaser of the country of origin, an additional method of marking, such as tags, would be required. In this case, based on the practical problems with affixing the tag prior to importation outlined above, along with the fact that each item is indelibly marked with its country of origin at the time of importation, we have no objection if the country of origin tags are affixed after importation provided the district director at the port of entry is satisfied that tags will be affixed by the importer as described above and approves the use of such procedures. The requirements set forth in 19 CFR 134.34 should be followed.

19 CFR 134.34 provides that an exception under 19 CFR 134.32(d) may be authorized in the discretion of the district director for imported articles which are to be repacked after release from Customs custody under the following conditions:

(1) The containers in which the articles are repacked will indicate the origin of the articles to an ultimate purchaser in the United States.

(2) The importer arranges for supervision of the marking of the containers by Customs officers at the importer's expense or secures such verification, as may be necessary, by certification and the submission of a sample or otherwise, of the marking prior to the liquidation of the entry. (emphasis added).

Although the above provision sets forth the procedures to be followed when unmarked imported articles are to be repacked into marked containers after importation, we believe these procedures are also appropriate in the present situation. The purpose of these procedures is to ensure that articles which are not adequately marked at the time of importation due to practical problems are properly marked after importation. The importer's proposal to affix the country of origin tag after importation falls into this category.

HOLDING:

The importer's proposal to attach hang tags with the country of origin after importation is acceptable if approved by the district director and the procedures set in 19 CFR 134.34 are followed.

Sincerely,

John Durant, Director

Previous Ruling Next Ruling