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 0952149 - HQ 0952675 > HQ 0952558

Previous Ruling Next Ruling


HQ 952558


October 25, 1993

CLA-2 CO:R:C:M 952558 LTO

CATEGORY: CLASSIFICATION

TARIFF NO.: 8712.00.25

Mr. Paul E. Schersand
Lawee, Inc.
3030 Walnut Avenue
Long Beach, CA 90807

RE: Univega hybrid bicycle; HQ 087735; HQ 950319; HQ 951864; 8712.00.25; 8712.00.35

Dear Mr. Schersand:

This is in response to your letter of August 4, 1992, to Customs in New York, requesting the classification of the 1993 Univega hybrid bicycle (model 715CT36) under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Your letter has been referred to this office for a response. We have also reviewed the additional submission of April 19, 1993, as well as, a sample of a tire (which you state is 700c x 41mm) and the bicycle in question.

FACTS:

The subject bicycle is imported with a tire of 3.5 cm width. You state that the frame of this bicycle has been designed to disallow use of a tire of width greater than 4.1 cm. This feature has been achieved by the inclusion of a permanent, welded chainstay bridge in such a position that the tread of a tire larger than 4.1 cm would contact the chainstay bridge, thus immobilizing the rear tire.

ISSUE:

Whether the bicycle is classifiable under subheading 8712.00.25, HTSUS, because both wheels exceed 63.5 cm in diameter, it weighs less than 16.3 kg complete without accessories and is not designed for use with tires having a cross-sectional diameter exceeding 4.13 cm.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

The General Rules of Interpretation (GRI's) to the HTSUS govern the classification of goods in the tariff schedule. GRI 1 states in pertinent part that "for legal purposes, classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes . . . ."

The bicycle in question is classifiable under heading 8712, HTSUS, which provides for "[b]icycles and other cycles . . ., not motorized." However, the following subheadings are at issue:

Bicycles having both wheels exceeding 63.5 cm in diameter:

8712.00.25 If weighing less than 16.3 kg complete without accessories and not designed for use with tires having a cross-sectional diameter exceeding
4.13 cm

8712.00.35 Other

In HQ 087735, dated August 27, 1990, Customs stated that for a bicycle to be classified under subheading 8712.00.25 (then, subheading 8712.00.20), HTSUS, the importer must demonstrate that there are important design features in the bicycle that preclude the use of tires exceeding 4.13 cm. Furthermore, it is not enough to prove that a bicycle was designed with smaller tires in mind. The use of tires exceeding 4.13 cm must be inconsistent with the safe and proper operation of the bicycle.

In HQ 950319, dated December 11, 1991, Customs set forth the procedure for determining whether a bicycle exhibits important design features that preclude the safe and proper use of tires having a cross-sectional diameter exceeding 4.13 cm. In HQ 951864, dated October 23, 1992, this procedure was amended and its first question provides as follows:

1. Does a clearance of greater than 1.6 mm exist between the bicycle tire and fork or any frame member when the wheel assembly is rotated to any position? For example, is the width of the front fork (measured horizontally where the widest part of a tire would be located) greater than 4.45 cm (this represents 4.13 cm plus 1.6 mm on each side of the tire)?

If the answer is "no", then the bicycle is classifiable within subheading 8712.00.25, HTSUS.

The 1993 Univega hybrid bicycle (model 715CT36) was designed with a permanently welded bridge across the chainstay. You claim that this bridge prevents a tire greater than 4.13 cm in width from being used without the immobilization of that tire by contact with the bridge. You conclude that you are "thoroughly convinced that all available evidence anywhere in the marketplace precludes the safe use of tires, larger than 41.3mm, on 1993 Univega 700c hybrid bicycles."

Based on these representations, a clearance of greater than 1.6 mm would not exist between the tire and a frame member, the permanently welded bridge. Therefore, we conclude that the bicycle was not designed for use with tires having a cross- sectional diameter exceeding 4.13 cm, and it is classifiable under subheading 8712.00.25, HTSUS.

HOLDING:

The 1993 Univega hybrid bicycle (model 715CT36) is classifiable under subheading 8712.00.25, HTSUS, which provides for "[b]icycles and other cycles . . ., not motorized . . . bicycles having both wheels exceeding 63.5 cm in diameter . . . [i]f weighing less than 16.3 kg complete without accessories and not designed for use with tires having a cross-sectional diameter exceeding 4.13 cm." The corresponding rate of duty for articles of this subheading is 5.5% ad valorem.

Sincerely,

Harvey B. Fox, Director

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: