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 > 2001 HQ Rulings > HQ 470154 - HQ 561623 > HQ 561593

Previous Ruling Next Ruling
HQ 561593

---

December 20, 2000

MAR-2 RR:CR:SM 561593 KSG

CATEGORY: MARKING

Harold I. Loring, Esq.
Grunfeld, Desiderio, Lebowitz & Silverman LLP 245 Park Avenue
33rd Floor
New York, NY 10167-3397

RE: Country of origin marking of containers for photocopying machines, computer printers, multipurpose printers and accessories;

Dear Mr. Loring:

This is in response to your letter dated December 7, 1999, requesting a binding ruling on behalf of Kyocera Mita America, Inc., regarding the country of origin marking of disposable boxes used to import photocopying machines, computer printers, multipurpose printers and accessories. At the request of counsel, a meeting was held on June 1, 2000, at Headquarters on this matter. Supplemental information submitted in letters dated June 27, 2000, and July 27, 2000, were considered as part of the record in this case.

FACTS:

Kyocera Mita America, Inc. (“Mita”) imports photocopying machines, computer printers, multipurpose printers, and certain accessories (paper feed units, document feeders, auto stackers, duplex units, finishers, internal output trays, job separators, mail boxes, output feeders, roll units, and sorters).

A given machine will be produced in only one country. You state that each foreign article is individually marked to indicate its country of origin, generally by means of a metal plate permanently affixed to the back of the machine which legibly and conspicuously indicates origin.

A customer purchases the machines through a dealer. You state that the purchaser would be able to view the product either at the dealer show-room, at one of five regional offices located in the U.S., or on its own premises if the customer leases a machine. The dealer’s general practice is to “display all of the Mita products that they carry.” However, the entire
product line is displayed at the five regional offices in New Jersey, Texas, Georgia, Illinois and California.

Once a machine is purchased, it is delivered and installed on the customer’s premises by the dealer. You state that the shipping cartons for the machines are removed by the dealer prior to installation, either on the dealer’s premises, in the delivery truck, or in some instances, at the purchaser’s premises during installation.

Dealers also provide potential purchasers the option of a trial use of the machines. Each product is dealer installed, including replacement parts. The machines may be leased through a dealer or an independent leasing company. Some leases have an option to buy. The leasing company retains title to the machines.

You argue that the sealed shipping cartons for the machines and accessories listed above should be excepted from country of origin marking because the ultimate purchasers will usually not see the cartons prior to purchase.

ISSUE:

Whether the shipping cartons for the individually-marked imported products described above must also be marked with the country of origin of their contents.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

Section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1304), as amended, 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 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 of 19 U.S.C. 1304.

Section 134.24(d)(2), Customs Regulations (19 CFR 134.24(d)(2), states that:

Disposable containers or holders of imported merchandise, which are sold without normally being opened by the ultimate purchaser shall be marked to indicate the country of origin of their contents.

You argue that if the ultimate purchaser is unlikely to see or examine the container, either before or after the purchase is made, the container is not required to be marked. Counsel cites as authority for this proposition a 1935 Treasury Decision, T.D. 47826, dated July 22, 1935, which held that bags of linseed and flaxseed that were emptied in the “importing vessel upon arrival” were excepted from marking. You also cites a Headquarters Ruling, HRL 559525, dated April 21, 1997, which involved porcelain figurines that were either 4 inches high or 7 1/4 inches high and sold in unsealed containers. Customs stated that if the ultimate purchaser is able and likely to view the article itself, even if the article is placed inside a container, there is no requirement that the container must also be marked with the country of origin.

You emphasize that a purchaser is unlikely to purchase one of the involved Mita machines (e.g., printers and photocopiers) without carefully examining it (as with the purchase of an automobile) at the dealer’s showroom. You maintain that during this examination, the purchaser can see the country of origin on the machine.

Based on the information you have provided and our experience in these matters, we agree that it is very likely that a purchaser of an article such as a photocopying machine or computer printer will examine the article itself prior to purchase at the dealer’s showroom. Under these circumstances, we find that it is acceptable to mark only the machine with its country of origin and not the shipping carton in which it is imported and delivered to the purchaser’s premises. We note in this regard that Customs has held that, in most instances, imported articles that are sold in stores as display models must be marked with their country of origin. See C.S.D. 90-81 and HRL 734499, dated June 19, 1992. Our finding in regard to the Mita machines assumes that the country of origin on the machines is legible and conspicuous as required by the statute.

In your letter of June 27, 2000, you requested that this ruling not be limited to the specific models listed but rather, apply to a class of Mita products with specific characteristics. Pursuant to 19 CFR 177.1, binding rulings are limited to prospective transactions that are “specifically described.” Accordingly, we limit this ruling to the Mita machines specifically enumerated in Exhibit A of your June 27, 2000, letter.

With respect to the various accessory items, we have insufficient information concerning the manner in which these items are marketed and sold as well as how they are marked with their country of origin to determine whether the cartons in which they are packaged must be marked with the items’ country of origin. For example, we are not satisfied from the information presented that all the accessories sold by the various dealers are, in fact, available for examination as display samples in the showrooms by consumers prior to making their purchasing decision. If certain accessories are not sold by means of display samples, we have no information concerning whether consumers have an opportunity or are likely to open the cartons to examine these articles prior to purchase. For these reasons, we decline to rule on the accessories.

HOLDING:

Based on the facts presented, we find that the shipping cartons for the imported photocopying machines, computer printers, and multipurpose printers need not be marked with the machines’ country of origin, assuming that the machines themselves are properly individually marked with their country of origin and they are displayed at the dealer’s showrooms.

However, for the reasons discussed above, we decline to rule on whether the shipping cartons for the accessories (paper feed units, document feeders, auto stackers, duplex units, finishers, internal output trays, job separators, mail boxes, output feeders, roll units, and sorters) must be marked with the country of origin of the accessories.

A copy of this ruling letter should be attached to the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is 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