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 > 1995 NY Rulings > NY 801704 - NY 802361 > NY 801870

Previous Ruling Next Ruling
NY 801870




October 4, 1994

CLA-2-28:S:N:N7:236 801870

CATEGORY: CLASSIFICATION

TARIFF NO.: 2839.19.0000; 3402.90.5030

Mr. Teddy Kurtas
601 10th Ave.
Suite 1D
New York NY 10036

RE: The tariff classification of Inkrustop and Inpasin from Czechoslovakia Republic.

Dear Mr. Kurtas:

In your letter received September 9, 1994, you requested a tariff classification ruling.

The prospective imports are as follows:

1) Inkrustop is a cleaner for heating systems. It is composed of sodium hydrogen carbonate, sodium chloride, and water.

2) Inpasin is a pipe coating material consisting of sodium silicate, and water.

The applicable subheading for the Inkrustop will be 3402.90.5030, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), which provides for organic surface-active agents (other than soap); surface-active preparations, washing preparations (including auxiliary washing preparations) and cleaning preparations, whether or not containing soap, other than those of heading 3401(con.):... Other:... Other:... Other:cleaning preparations. The rate of duty will be 3.7 percent ad valorem.

The applicable subheading for the Inpasin will be 2839.19.0000, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), which provides for silicates; commercial alkali metal silicates:... Of sodium:... Other. The rate of duty will be 1.1 percent ad valorem.

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: