CLA-2 OT:RR:TCM: EMAIN H304293 ALS
Port Director U.S. Customs and Border Protection
555 Battery Street
P.O. Box 2450
San Francisco, California 94126
RE: Revocation of HQ 952720 (December 2, 1992); Revocation of NY 884125 (April 19, 1993); Modification of HQ 961998 (May 7, 1999); Modification of HQ H271911 (June 23, 2017); Tariff classification of Digital Blood Pressure Monitors
Dear Sir:
This letter is to inform you that we have reconsidered and revoked or modified the above-referenced rulings. HQ 952720 was in response to a request for internal advice that you submitted at the request of A&D Engineering, Inc. The ruling and this reconsideration addresses the legal tariff classification of Digital Blood Pressure Monitors (also referred to herein as “BPMs”). In the course of our review we found it necessary to also revoke another ruling and modify another ruling, as discussed below.
Pursuant to section 625(c)(1), Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. §1625(c)(1)), as amended by section 623 of Title VI, notice proposing to revoke NY 952720 and NY 884125, and to modify HQ H271911 was published on September 30, 2020, in Volume 54, Number 38 of the Customs Bulletin. One comment was received in response to this notice, which we will address below.
FACTS:
The facts as stated in HQ 952720 are as follows:
The merchandise in question are digital blood pressure machines, A&D Engineering Inc.'s Medical Division model numbers UA-731, UA-701, and UA-711. The machines which perform like sphygmomanometers, are electronic blood pressure measuring instruments which allow blood pressure readings to be taken without the use of a stethoscope. The machines contain a microphone which picks up the arterial pulsating sound and transforms it into an electrical impulse that controls the operation of the electronic devices in the manometer unit. All three models submitted operate on batteries.
Additionally, we note that the BPMs consist of a sleeve made of fabric and an electrical cord leading from the sleeve to a control unit of plastic housing. The sleeve is meant to fit around the user’s arm and the control unit consists of two buttons for the power and start functions, a switch for various settings, and an LCD display screen that displays the measurements in numbers. Upon initiation of the measuring function, the sleeve inflates to tighten around the user’s arm until measurements are detected, at which point the electrical impulse is sent to the control unit. Once the electrical impulse is sent, the sleeve deflates to loosen enough to be removed from the arm. Based on the available information about these articles, they are intended for self-measurement and home use, not professional medical settings.
In HQ 952720, CBP ruled that the digital blood pressure monitors are classified as sphygmomanometers in subheading 9018.90.50, HTSUS.
ISSUE:
Are the digital blood pressure monitors, as described above, properly classified under subheading 9018.19, HTSUS, which provides for “Instruments and appliances used in medical, surgical, dental or veterinary sciences, including scintigraphic apparatus, other electro-medical apparatus and sight-testing instruments; parts and accessories thereof: Electro-diagnostic apparatus (including apparatus for functional exploratory examination or for checking physiological parameters); parts and accessories thereof: Other”, or under subheading 9018.90, HTSUS, which provides for “Instruments and appliances used in medical, surgical, dental or veterinary sciences, including scintigraphic apparatus, other electro-medical apparatus and sight-testing instruments; parts and accessories thereof: Other instruments and appliances and parts and accessories thereof: Optical instruments and appliances and parts and accessories thereof”?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Classification under the HTSUS is determined in accordance with the General Rules of Interpretation (“GRI”) and, in the absence of special language or context which otherwise requires, by the Additional U.S. Rules of Interpretation (“ARI”). GRI 1 provides that the classification of goods shall be “determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes.” In the event that the goods cannot be classified solely on the basis of GRI 1, and if the headings and legal notes do not otherwise require, GRIs 2 through 6 may be applied in order. GRI 6 provides the following:
For legal purposes, the classification of goods in the subheadings of a heading shall be determined according to the terms of those subheadings and any related subheading notes and, mutatis mutandis, to the above rules, on the understanding that only subheadings at the same level are comparable. For the purposes of this rule, the relative section, chapter and subchapter notes also apply, unless the context otherwise requires.
The following headings and subheadings of the HTSUS are under consideration in this case:
9018 Instruments and appliances used in medical, surgical, dental or veterinary sciences, including scintigraphic apparatus, other electro-medical apparatus and sight-testing instruments; parts and accessories thereof:
Electro-diagnostic apparatus (including apparatus for functional exploratory examination or for checking physiological parameters); parts and accessories thereof:
9018.19 Other:
Other:
9018.19.95 Other...
* * *
9018.90 Other instruments and appliances and parts and accessories thereof:
Other:
9018.90.50 Sphygmomanometers, tensimeters and oscillometers; all the foregoing and parts and accessories thereof...
The Explanatory Notes (ENs) to the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System represent the official interpretation of the tariff at the international level. While neither legally binding nor dispositive, the ENs provide a commentary on the scope of each heading of the HTSUS and are generally indicative of the proper interpretation of these headings. See T.D. 89-80, 54 Fed. Reg. 35127, 35128 (August 23, 1989). The Explanatory Notes to heading 9018 states the following:
This heading covers a very wide range of instruments and appliances which, in the vast majority of cases, are used only in professional practice (e.g., by doctors, surgeons, dentists, veterinary surgeons, midwives), either to make a diagnosis, to prevent or treat an illness or to operate, etc. Instruments and appliances for anatomical or autoptic work, dissection, etc., are also included, as are, under certain conditions, instruments and appliances for dental laboratories (see Part (II) below). The instruments of the heading may be made of any material (including precious metals).
There is no dispute that the subject BPMs are medical instruments of heading 9018, HTSUS. The threshold question here is whether or not they are other electro-diagnostic apparatus of subheading 9018.19, HTSUS.
As described above, the BPMs measure the blood pressure of the user and uses that measurement to create an electrical pulse that is transmitted to an electronic device, in these cases a control unit with an LCD screen that displays the measurement in numbers. The measurement of blood pressure is a type of diagnosis. It is clear from the description of the BPMs that they utilize electrical components in the performance of the diagnosis. Given such, we conclude that the subject BPMs are in fact electrical diagnostic medical instruments of subheading 9018.19, HTSUS. Our ruling in HQ 952720 is incorrect.
As noted above, we received one comment in response to the notice of the proposed revocation. The commenter contends that because the word “sphygmomanometer”, which is referenced in the text of subheading 9018.90.50, HTSUS, is defined in Wikipedia as a "[d]igital instrument [that] uses a cuff that may be placed, according to the instrument, around the upper arm, wrist, or finger, in all cases elevated to the same height as the heart”, the subject BPMs should be classified as such because they meet the definition of a sphygmomanometer. The commenter also argues that the analysis of NY 952720, in which CBP stated “an eo nomine designation of an article, absent legislative intent or other contrary limitations, includes all forms of an article”, should apply in this instance.
Indeed, “[a]n eo nomine designation with no terms of limitation, will ordinarily include all forms of the named article.” Carl Zeiss, Inc. v. United States, 195 F.3d 1375, 1379 (Fed. Cir. 1999) (quoting Hayes-Sammons Chem. Co. v. United States, 55 C.C.P.A. 69, 75 (1968)). However, as stated above and in the proposed ruling the threshold question before us is whether the instant digital blood pressure monitors are prima facie classifiable under the provision for “electro-diagnostic apparatus”, which would result in classification under subheading 9018.19, HTSUS. This is the case because GRI 6, supra, specifies that “only subheadings at the same level are comparable”. Therefore, leaving aside that the definition of “sphygmomanometer” proffered by the commenter is not comprehensive*, comparing subheading 9018.90.50, HTSUS, with the provision for “electro-diagnostic appliances” (two levels of indentation superior) is incorrect.
Given the foregoing, we conclude that A&D Engineering Inc.'s Blood Pressure Monitors, model numbers UA-731, UA-701, and UA-711, are properly classified under subheading 9018.19, HTSUS. Specifically, they are properly classified under subheading 9018.19.95, HTSUS, as other electro-diagnostic apparatus.
Regarding NY 884125 (April 19, 1993), CBP ruled that the “Press Mate BP 8800P” blood pressure monitor is classified under subheading 9018.90.50, HTSUS, citing HQ 952720. Upon review of NY 884125, we find that the Press Mate BP 8800P is similar to the subject articles in that it is a machine meant to measure blood pressure, with a sleeve attached to a control unit via an electrical cord, and the control unit having a display screen and control buttons. As such, given our conclusion above, we conclude that NY 884125 is also incorrect. Incidentally, we note that the Press Mate BP 8800P appears to be intended for professional/commercial use, in contrast to the BPMs discussed above.
Regarding HQ 961998 (May 7, 1999), CBP ruled that the “Dinamap Compact Monitor”, which measured and displayed “a patient’s blood pressure, pulse, body temperature and pulse oximetry (SpO2)”, is classified under subheading 9018.19.55, HTSUS. In doing so, CBP concluded the following:
Since the [Dinamap Compact Monitor] is used in a professional setting to monitor various vital signs, not just blood pressure, it is Customs view that the DCM is not a sphygmomanometer as the instruments classified in HQ 952720 and HQ 082973.
Upon review, we find that the statement “used in a professional setting” is irrelevant to whether or not an article is classifiable under subheading 9018.19. We also find that the relative simplicity of an article, such as the subject articles, to the Dinamap Compact Monitor is irrelevant to whether or not an article is classifiable under subheading 9018.19. Therefore, we conclude that the quoted statement above from HQ 961998 should not be followed henceforth. This conclusion does not otherwise affect our ruling in HQ 961998; the remaining analysis and holding in HQ 961998 remain in effect.
HOLDING:
By application of GRI 1 and 6, A&D Engineering Inc.'s Blood Pressure Monitors, model numbers UA-731, UA-701, and UA-711, are properly classified under subheading 9018.19, HTSUS. Specifically, they are properly classified under subheading 9018.19.95, HTSUS, which provides for “Instruments and appliances used in medical, surgical, dental or veterinary sciences, including scintigraphic apparatus, other electro-medical apparatus and sight-testing instruments; parts and accessories thereof: Electro-diagnostic apparatus (including apparatus for functional exploratory examination or for checking physiological parameters); parts and accessories thereof: Other: Other: Other...” The general column one rate of duty, for merchandise classified in this subheading is Free.
Duty rates are provided for your convenience and subject to change. The text of the most recent HTSUS and the accompanying duty rates are provided on the World Wide Web at www.usitc.gov.
EFFECT ON OTHER RULINGS:
CBP Ruling HQ 952720 (December 2, 1992) is hereby REVOKED.
CBP Ruling NY 884125 (April 19, 1993) is hereby REVOKED.
CBP Ruling HQ 961998 (May 7, 1999) is hereby MODIFIED as discussed in the LAW AND ANALYSIS section above.
In accordance with 19 U.S.C. §1625(c), this ruling will become effective 60 days after publication in the Customs Bulletin.
Pursuant to U.S. Note 20(b) to Subchapter III, Chapter 99, HTSUS, products of China classified under subheading 9018.19.95, HTSUS, unless specifically excluded, are subject to an additional 25 percent ad valorem rate of duty. At the time of importation, an importer must report the Chapter 99 subheading, i.e., 9903.88.01, in addition to subheading 9018.19.95, HTSUS, noted above, for products of China.
The HTSUS is subject to periodic amendment so you should exercise reasonable care in monitoring the status of goods covered by the Note cited above and the applicable Chapter 99 subheading. For background information regarding the trade remedy initiated pursuant to Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, you may refer to the relevant parts of the USTR and CBP websites, which are available at https://ustr.gov/issue-areas/enforcement/section-301-investigations/tariff-actions and https://www.cbp.gov/ trade/remedies/301-certain-products-china respectively.
Sincerely,
Gregory Connor
for Craig T. Clark, Director
Commercial and Trade Facilitation Division