MAR-2-05 CO:R:C:V 735225 ER
Joel K. Simon, Esq.
Serko & Simon
One World Trade Center
Suite 2271
New York, NY 10048
RE: Country of Origin Marking requirements for imported gold
jewelry; legibility; conspicuousness; die-sinking;
indelible; hang tags; 19 CFR 134.41; 19 CFR 134.44; C.S.D.
79-47 (August 7, 1978); C.S.D. 79-379 (April 9, 1979);
Clarification of HQ 734481 (August 19, 1992).
Dear Mr. Simon:
This is in response to your letter dated June 21, 1993, on
behalf of your client, M. Fabrikant & Sons, Inc., in which you
request a ruling regarding the country of origin marking
requirements for gold jewelry.
FACTS:
M. Fabrikant & Sons. is a company that imports and sells
gold jewelry from Italy. You state that the company has a long-
standing practice of marking the jewelry with country of origin
by die-sinking, "Italy", on each article.
On the four samples submitted -- bracelets made of 14 karat
gold in widths ranging from 2 to 5 mm -- markings appear on flat
links which connect the bracelet chain to the clasp. The word
"Italy" is die-sunk once on each of the two links which are
attached to either side of the clasp. (The markings measure
approximately 1/16" by 1/8".) The karat and Fabrikant trademark
are die-sunk on the other side of one of the flat links. The
samples are representative of the sizes of the jewelry imported.
The company will also be importing necklaces of similar width.
ISSUE:
Does the country of origin marking on the sample gold
bracelets, as described above, satisfy the marking requirements
set forth in Section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C.
1304), 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 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. 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 goods are 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 C.A.D. 104 (1940).
Part 134, Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part 134), implements
the country of origin marking requirements and exceptions of 19
U.S.C. 1304. As provided in section 134.41(b), Customs
Regulations (19 CFR 134.41(b)), the ultimate purchaser in the
U.S. must be able to find the marking easily and read it without
strain. That section further provides that the degree of
permanence should be at least sufficient to insure that in any
reasonably foreseeable circumstance the marking will remain on
the article until it reaches the ultimate purchaser unless it is
deliberately removed.
19 CFR section 134.1(d), Customs Regulations (19 CFR
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. If an imported article is to be sold at
retail in its imported form, the purchaser at retail is the
ultimate purchaser.
As a general practice, marking requirements are best
satisfied by a type of marking which is worked into the article
at the time of manufacture. For example, in the Customs
Regulations it is suggested that the country of origin on metal
articles be die-sunk, molded-in or etched. See, 19 CFR
134.41(a). With respect to the marking requirements for jewelry
we have stated:
In those instances where the nature of the jewelry
permits, e.g. when the clasp on a necklace or bracelet
has a surface area large enough to permanently mark the
country of origin, the article should be indelibly
marked by die-sinking, engraving or stamping on the
clasp or some other conspicuous location.
Alternatively, a metal or plastic tag indelibly marked
with the country of origin may be permanently attached
to the article. HQ 729615 (January 21, 1988).
Indelible marking, however, is not the only means by which
jewelry may be marked with origin. Customs normally permits any
reasonable method of marking that will remain on the article
during handling and until it reaches the ultimate purchaser.
This includes the use of paper stickers or pressure sensitive
labels and string tags. See HQ 734310 (December 2, 1991). If
paper stickers or pressure sensitive labels are used, section
134.44, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 134.44), provides that they
must be affixed in a conspicuous place and in a secure enough
manner so that unless deliberately removed, they will remain on
the article while it is in storage or on display and until
received by the ultimate purchaser.
In those instances where, due to the size or nature of the
article, die-sinking (or other means of indelible marking) is
illegible or too small to be read without a magnifying glass, the
country of origin should also be indicated in some other manner,
such as by use of a string tag or an adhesive label securely
affixed to the article. A string tag or adhesive label is
permitted as the only means of marking articles which are too
small to be indelibly marked and do not permit the permanent
attachment of a metal or plastic tag ( e.g. a small earring). HQ
729615 (January 21, 1988). This requirement is in no way
intended to mandate or express a preference for the use of string
tags, labels, etc. on those articles which are capable of being
marked in a legible manner by die-sinking, etching, engraving, or
by some other indelible means.
In HQ 734481 (August 19, 1992), Customs ruled that certain
jewelry marked by means of engraving the origin on the endcaps of
the jewelry near the clasp did not satisfy the requirements of 19
U.S.C. 1304. The importer, accordingly, was instructed to mark
the chains by some other method, such as by affixing hang tags.
In reaching this conclusion, Customs looked to C.S.D.s 79-47
(August 7, 1978) and 79-379 (April 9, 1979) where Customs
required corrective marking (string tags) on gold jewelry because
the existing indelible marking failed to meet the standard of
legibility and/or conspicuousness. The result in all three of
these decisions would have been different had the indelible
markings been sufficiently legible and conspicuous. Hang tags
were required only because the quality of the indelible marking
was deficient.
Customs finds that marking the subject gold jewelry by die-
sinking the word "Italy" once on each of the two links attached
to either side of the clasp, is an acceptable means of
individually marking the imported articles. The clasp, or the
links on either side of the clasp, are conspicuous locations.
Upon inspection of the marking on the links, Customs is also
satisfied that it is perfectly legible. Even though the length
of the marking (1/8") and the dimension of the individual letters
making up the marking (1/16") are small, the quality of the
marking in well-defined lettering is such that it can be read
without difficulty. Therefore, because the marking is clear and
legible and appears in a conspicuous location, the facts in this
case are distinguishable from those in C.S.D.s 79-47 and 79-379
and HQ 734481 where the legibility and/or conspicuousness of the
markings was inadequate.
HOLDING:
Die-sinking the country of origin of gold jewelry on the
links attached to the jewelry clasp is an acceptable means of
marking so long as the quality of the marking is such that it can
be easily read. The indelible marking on the sample bracelets
submitted satisfies the requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director