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 > 1998 HQ Rulings > HQ 560811 - HQ 561018 > HQ 560846

Previous Ruling Next Ruling
HQ 560846





May 1, 1998

MAR-02 RR:CR:SM 560846 RSD

CATEGORY: MARKING

Mr. Aaron M. Gothelf
Senior Consultant
Expeditors Consultant Services, LLC
999 Third Avenue
Suite 4401
Seattle, Washington 98104

RE: Country of origin marking for imported squeegees and rollers that will be combined with a mop head and handle in the United States to make a mop; substantial transformation; assembly; 19 CFR134.35(a)

Dear Mr. Gothelf:

This is in response to your letter dated December 5, 1997, on behalf, Ekco Cleaning, Inc., (Ekco) formerly known as Kellogg Brush Manufacturing Co., requesting a ruling concerning the country of origin marking for two imported components, squeegees and rollers, used in the assembly of finished mops. Accompanying the letter were samples of these components. The National Commodity Specialist Division forwarded your letter to our office for the issuance of a ruling. This ruling letter will only concern the marking issues raised in your ruling request. The General Classification Branch will issue a separate ruling letter regarding the classification issues raised in your letter. In a letter dated April 6, 1998, you advise that the Kellogg Brush Manufacturing Company has officially changed its name to Ekco Cleaning, Inc., and a copy of the Articles of Amendment submitted by Ekco Group, Inc. to the Commonwealth of Massachusetts accompanied your letter.

FACTS:

Ekco is a manufacturer and seller of brooms, brushes, and mops, which is now located in Hamilton, Ohio. Ekco has created two new mop products. The first product is a mop with a squeegee ("squeegee mop"). The second product is a mop with a roller ("roller mop"). Both products are adaptations of standard mops.

The squeegee attachment to the mop is designed to enhance the mop by moving water away from freshly mopped areas, which speeds the drying of the mopped area and helps prevent streaks. The squeegee component consists of a santoprene elastomer squeegee manufactured in China. Santoprene is a thermoplastic elastomer product. After the squeegees are imported into the United States, they are transported to Ekco's factory, where they are placed over the two holes in the sponge plate backing of the mop heads. The sponges and squeegees are snapped together with the mop heads. The assembled heads are then screwed onto metal handles. According to your submission, refills will only be available for the sponge. Replacement squeegees will not be available. The mop head and handle are of U.S. origin.

The roller mop consists of a U.S. origin sponge mop head attached to a handle and incorporates a large lint roller component. The roller enhances the mop by removing lint and other such material prior to the actual mopping. It improves the mopping process by eliminating material that would otherwise remain on the floor after mopping. The lint roller component consists of a roller cylinder, two caps, and a polypropylene molded bracket. The roller component is manufactured in China. At its factory, Ekco snaps the roller and the bracket together into pre-drilled holes on the mop head. The assembled head is then fitted with a metal handle. Like the squeegee mops, refills will only be available for the sponge. Replacements for the rollers and the brackets will not be available.

ISSUES:

What are the country of origin marking requirements for the finished mops made in part from imported squeegees and rollers as described above?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

The marking statute, section 304, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. ?1304), provides that, unless excepted, every article of foreign origin (or its container) imported into the U.S. shall be marked in a conspicuous place as legibly, indelibly, and permanently as the nature of the article (or its 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. Congressional intent in enacting 19 U.S.C. 1304 was "that the ultimate purchaser should be able to know by an inspection of the marking on the imported goods the country of which the good is the product. The evident purpose is to mark the goods so that at the time of purchase the ultimate purchaser may, by knowing where the goods were produced, be able to buy or refuse to buy them, if such marking should influence his will." United States v. Friedlaender & Co. 27 C.C. P. A. 297 at 302; C.A.D. 104 (1940).

Section 134.35(a), Customs Regulations (19 CFR 134.35(a)), states that the manufacturer or processor in the U.S. who substantially transforms the imported articles into articles having a new name, character or use will be considered the ultimate purchaser of the imported article within the scope of 19 U.S.C. ?1304. In such cases, the article will be excepted from marking, although the outermost container in which the articles are transported to the U.S. processor must be marked with the origin of the articles. A substantial transformation occurs when articles lose
their identity and become new articles having a new name, character, or use. United States v. Gibson-Thomsen Co., 27 C.C.P.A. 267 at 270 (1940); Koru North America v. United States, 12 CIT 1120, 701 F. Supp. 229 (1988).

In determining whether the combining of parts or materials constitutes a substantial transformation, the issue is the extent of operations performed and whether the parts lose their identity and become an integral part of the new article. Belcrest Linens v. United States, 6 CIT 204, 573 F. Supp. 1149 (1983), aff'd, 2 Fed. Cir. 105, 741 F.2d 1368 (1984). However, if the manufacturing process is merely a minor one which leaves the identity of the imported article intact, the consumer or user of the article after the processing will be regarded as the "ultimate purchaser." 19 C.F.R. ?134.1(d)(2). In Uniroyal, Inc., v. U.S., 542 F. Supp. 1026, 3 CIT 220 (CIT 1982), imported shoe uppers, combined with domestic soles in the U.S., were held to be the "essence of the completed shoe" and therefore, not substantially transformed.

In Headquarters Ruling Letter (HRL) 731398, dated October 4, 1989, Customs found that mop heads imported from Germany were not substantially transformed when they were attached to domestic mop handles. Customs determine that the mop head was a separate component from the handle, which could be removed and replaced. Consequently, the mop head was required to be marked with its country of origin. In HRL 732896, dated April 5, 1990, we found that mop handles imported from Italy were required to be marked with their country of origin. We explained that the combining of the imported handles with a domestic hanger tip and a removable and replaceable head made in West Germany only involved minor processing which did not change the name, character or use of the handles as they were imported.

In HRL 733632, dated August 13, 1990, Customs noted that a mop is basically comprised of two components: a mop head and a mop handle. We pointed out that in accordance with our prior rulings, neither of these components is substantially transformed when they are attached to one another and that each piece must be separately marked to indicate its country of origin. However, in the same ruling, we also determined that mop hardware lost its separate identity and became an integral part of the U.S. made wooden handle when it was attached to the handle. As such, the mop manufacturer substantially transformed the hardware into an integral component of a new and different article, i.e. a mop handle. Thus, the mop manufacturer was the ultimate purchaser of the mop hardware. Upon importation, only the containers for the mop hardware had to be marked to show the country of origin of the hardware.

In HRL 733804, dated November 9, 1990, we determined that the attachment of a U.S. origin handle to an imported mop head was a very minor operation. Therefore, we ruled that the assembled mop must be marked to indicate the origin of the mop head.

Applying these previous rulings to facts of this case, we believe that when the squeegees and rollers are combined with the other components in the assembly of the mops, they lose their individual identities and become a part of a new and different product, i.e. a mop. The squeegees and rollers have no purpose other than to be attached as component parts to improve the functioning of the mops. As such, like the hardware in HRL 733632, when the mops are assembled, the squeegees and rollers become integral parts of the assembled mops and are no longer distinct articles. Although these components may enhance the capability of the mop, they are not essential to the basic functioning of the mop. Thus, unlike the mop heads, we believe that the squeegees and rollers are not major components of the mops. In addition, although the assembly appears fairly simple, we note that the squeegee and roller are designed to stay attached to the mop throughout its life and, unlike the mop head, replacements will not be available. Accordingly, the squeegees and rollers are substantially transformed when they are combined with the other components in the assembly of the mops. Therefore, under 19 CFR 134.35(a), Ekco, the mop manufacturer, is the ultimate purchaser of the squeegees and rollers and these parts are excepted from having to be marked with their country of origin. Only the outermost container in which these parts are imported are required to be marked with their country of origin.

HOLDING:

The squeegees and the rollers are substantially transformed when they are attached to the assembled mops. Therefore, the squeezes and rollers are excepted from country of origin marking, and only the outermost containers in which they are imported must be marked with their country of origin.

A copy of this ruling letter should be attached to the entry documents filed at the time the goods are entered. 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,

John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division

Previous Ruling Next Ruling