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 NY Rulings > NY D82232 - NY D82300 > NY D82284

Previous Ruling Next Ruling
NY D82284




October 9, 1998

MAR-2 RR:NC:SP:222 D82284

CATEGORY: MARKING

Mr. Charles Heilpern
H & H Shipping Co., Inc.
120 Sylvan Avenue
P.O. Box 1796
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey 07632

RE: COUNTRY OF ORIGIN MARKING OF IMPORTED BELT BUCKLES MADE IN TAIWAN.

Dear Mr. Heilpern:

This is in response to your letter dated September 3, 1998, on behalf of your client Blue Star Webbing Corp., requesting a ruling on whether imported belt buckles are required to be individually marked with the country of origin if it is later to be processed in the U.S. by a U.S. manufacturer. A sample was not submitted with your letter for review.

Your correspondence indicates that the belt buckles will be used in the manufacture of belts in the United States. They are never sold separately to consumers. In this application the buckles will become an integral part of the final product and will lose their identity as separate articles of commerce.

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 C.F.R. Part 134), implements the country of origin marking requirements and exceptions of 19 U.S.C. ?1304. Section 134.41(b), Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. ?134.41(b)), mandates that the ultimate purchaser in the U.S. must be able to find the marking easily and read it without strain. Section 134.1(d), defines the ultimate purchaser as generally the last person in the U.S. who will receive the article in the form in which it was imported. 19 C.F.R. ?134.1(d)(1) states that if an imported article will be used in manufacture, the manufacturer may be the ultimate purchaser if he subjects the imported article to a process which results in a substantial transformation of the article. The case of U.S. v. Gibson-Thomsen Co., Inc., 27 C.C.P.A. 267 (C.A.D. 98) (1940), provides that an article used in manufacture which results in an article having a name, character or use differing from that of the constituent article will be considered substantially transformed and that the manufacturer or processor will be considered the ultimate purchaser of the constituent materials. In such circumstances, the imported article is excepted from marking and only the outermost container is required to be marked. See, 19 C.F.R. ?134.35.

In this case, the imported buckles are substantially transformed as a result of the U.S. processing, and therefore the U.S. manufacturer is the ultimate purchaser of the imported buckles and under 19 C.F.R. ?134.35 only the containers which reach the ultimate purchaser are required to be marked with the country of origin.

This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. Part 177).

A copy of the ruling or the control number indicated above should be provided with the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is imported. If you have any questions regarding the ruling, contact National Import Specialist Alice Masterson at 212-466-5892.

Sincerely,

Robert B. Swierupski
Director,
National Commodity

Previous Ruling Next Ruling