Newly Released CBP HQ Rulings July 24-25
The Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) was updated July 24-25 with the following headquarters rulings (ruling revocations and modifications will be detailed elsewhere in a separate article as they are announced in the Customs Bulletin):
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Communications Daily is required reading for senior executives at top telecom corporations, law firms, lobbying organizations, associations and government agencies (including the FCC). Join them today!
H328196: Ruling request concerning the tariff classification of an ice cream and frozen food and drink maker and dispenser
| Ruling: The ColdSnap is classified under Harmonized Tariff Schedule subheading 8509.40.00, which provides for "Electromechanical domestic appliances, with self-contained electric motor, other than vacuum cleaners of heading 8508; parts thereof: Food grinders, processors and mixers; fruit or vegetable juice extractors.” The column one, general rate of duty is 4.2 percent ad valorem. |
| Issues: What is the proper tariff classification of the subject ice cream, frozen food and drink maker and dispenser under the HTSUS? |
| Items: A pod-based, single-serving, countertop ice cream/frozen food and drink maker and dispenser. The ColdSnap consists of two systems: a refrigeration (quick-freezing) system comprised of traditional refrigeration components (evaporator, condenser, fan and compressor) and a patented mixing system “pod” comprised of an aluminum cylinder with internal helical paddle. The ColdSnap’s quick-freezing system surrounds the pod's exterior. The ColdSnap appliance senses when the foodstuff undergoing preparation within the pod has achieved the correct temperature and consistency by measuring the torque required to rotate the mixing paddle (in approximately 90 -120 seconds). At this point, the appliance causes the pod to open and the mixing paddle rotates to dispense the frozen foodstuff from the pod into a vessel exterior to the device. The ColdSnap cannot be used to store refrigerated or frozen food like a refrigerator or freezer. The ColdSnap automatically shuts off when no longer in use. |
| Reason: As the ColdSnap mixes food and functions in a manner similar to the ice cream and sorbet mixer exemplars set forth in the Explanatory Notes, it is not precluded from classification in HTS heading 8509 on the basis that it weighs more than 20 kg. The exclusion of refrigerators in the EN to 85.09 is also not applicable in this instance. While the ColdSnap does incorporate a refrigerant cooling system, its mixing component is not ancillary to the refrigerating component in that it both mixes and dispenses the food product. The dispensing feature of the ColdSnap is not described by the EN 84.18 exemplars “ice-cream containers” and “ice-cream makers.” The former describes a refrigerating or freezing container to keep ice cream cold. As described above, the ColdSnap dispenses food when it is ready and does not store food. The latter describes an ice cream maker where the internal agitator mixes the food. The ColdSnap’s paddle serves a function beyond that of mere agitation. |
| Ruling Date: July 21, 2023 |
H332364: Coastwise Transportation; Undersea Cable Laying; Dredging; 46 U.S.C. § 55102; 46 U.S.C. § 55109; 19 C.F.R. § 4.80b
| Ruling: The proposed cable laying and burial operations do not constitute dredging within the meaning of the Dredging Statute, 46 U.S.C. § 55109. The proposed cable laying and burial operations do not constitute coastwise trade within the meaning of the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 55102 and 19 C.F.R. § 4.80b(a). |
| Issues: Does the proposed cable laying and burial operations constitute a violation of 46 U.S.C. § 55109? Does the proposed cable lay and burial operations by a non-coastwise-qualified vessel violate the Jones Act, 46 U.S.C. § 55102? |
| Items: A variety of vessels used in a multi-stage cable-laying and dredging project that will take place in the Hudson River. This project involves the installation of two solid state high voltage direct current electric cables in New York State. It will use one trenching support vessel, which will be the Greek-flagged, non-coastwise-qualified, as well as two cable lay vessels, both of which are Greek-flagged, non-coastwise-qualified vessels. |
| Reason: CBP has long held that the use of certain devices to create underwater trenches for the purpose of cable laying does not constitute “dredging.” Likewise, CBP has long held that the sole use of a vessel in laying pipe or cable between two coastwise points is not considered a use in the coastwise trade of the U.S. The direct transportation of the cable between a foreign location and a U.S. point does not constitute coastwise transportation within the meaning of the Jones Act. Lastly, CBP has held that cable pull-in operations do not constitute coastwise trade because they are still part of the cable laying process. |
| Ruling Date: July 25, 2023 |
H332920: Coastwise Transportation; 46 U.S.C. § 55102; 19 CFR § 4.80
| Ruling: Inasmuch as the proposed recovery of rocket booster components described above would occur beyond the U.S. territorial sea, the transportation of rocket booster components by a non-coastwise-qualified vessel would not violate 46 U.S.C. § 55102, because no transportation of merchandise between coastwise points would occur. |
| Items: The use a foreign-flagged, non-coastwise-qualified vessel to recover reusable booster components from a rocket launched into space that have fallen into the ocean as they are floating outside U.S. territorial waters, and transport them directly to Cape Canaveral, Forida, Vandenberg Space Force Base, California, or some other port within the U.S. During recovery operations, the foreign-flagged vessels will be dynamically positioned with no attachment to the seabed. |
| Reason: The rocket boosters will be laden onto the vessels at points on the open ocean beyond the territorial sea. Because these points are beyond the territorial sea, (defined as “the belt, three nautical miles wide, seaward of the territorial sea baseline”), they do not constitute coastwise points. It is CBP’s longstanding position that transportation of merchandise from a point outside of the U.S. territorial sea to a coastwise point, such as a U.S. port, does not constitute coastwise trade. |
| Ruling Date: July 19, 2023 |