MAR-2 RR:TC:SM 559370 AT
Mr. Jack F. Raineault
Secretary and Director of Legal Affairs
Guinness Import Company
Six Landmark Square
Stamford, Connecticut 06901-2704
RE: Country of origin marking requirements of malt beverages;
U.S. reference; 19 CFR 134.46
Dear Mr. Raineault:
This is in response to your letter dated August 3, 1995, requesting a ruling concerning the country of origin marking requirements for imported malt beverages from Ireland. Sample labels were submitted with your letter for our review. We regret the delay in responding.
FACTS:
You state that your company imports malt beverages into the U.S. from Ireland. You also state that the bottles in which the beer is imported are marked with two labels. The first label is affixed to the front of the bottle. The words "Brewed in Ireland", "St. James's Gate Dublin" and "Guinness Extra Stout" are printed on the label in black ink. The second label is affixed to the back of the bottle. The words "Imported by Guinness Import Company, Stamford, CT." are printed on the bottom lefthand corner of the label in white lettering.
You claim that Customs at the port of Jacksonville, Florida, has advised you that the country of origin marking on the bottles is not acceptable because there is no reference to the origin of the beverage "Ireland" appearing on the back label next to the words "Stamford, CT." You contend that the U.S. reference "Stamford, CT" which appears on the back label would not mislead or confuse an ultimate purchaser into believing that the beverage is of U.S. origin because the reference clearly states that "Stamford, CT." is the location of the U.S. importer ("Imported by Guinness Import Company") and there is no suggestion or connection made to the country of manufacture in this context. Also, the front label is clearly and conspicuously marked with the actual country of origin of the product--Ireland--by the phrase "Brewed in Ireland". Thus, you assert that the imported beverage products are properly marked with the country of origin and a country of origin marking on the back label next to the "Stamford, CT." reference is not required.
ISSUE:
Does the country of origin marking appearing on the malt beverage bottles as described above satisfy the country of origin marking requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304?
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 is the product. Part 134, Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part 134), implements the country of origin marking requirements and exceptions of 19 U.S.C 1304.
Section 134.46, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 134.46), provides that
In any case in which the words "United States," or
"American," the letters "U.S.A.," any variation of such
words or letters, or the name of any city or locality
in the United States, or the name of any foreign
country or locality other than the country or locality
in which the article was manufactured or produced,
appear on an imported article or its container, there,
shall appear, legibly and permanently, in close
proximity to such words, letters or name, and in at
least a comparable size, the name of the country of
origin preceded by "Made in," "Product of," or other
words of similar meaning. The purpose of the stringent marking requirements of 19 CFR 134.46 is to ensure that an ultimate purchaser is not misled or deceived from a non-origin reference into believing that the country of origin is other than the actual country of origin from reading the non-origin reference. In fact, when applying the stringent marking requirements of 19 CFR 134.46, Customs takes into account the question of whether the presence of words or symbols on an imported article or its container can mislead or deceive the ultimate purchaser as to the actual country of origin of the article.
Consequently, if a non-origin locality reference appears on an imported article or its container, Customs applies the special marking requirements of section 134.46 only if it finds that the reference would mislead or deceive the ultimate purchaser as to the actual country of origin of the imported article. If it is concluded that the non-origin locality reference would not mislead or deceive an ultimate purchaser as to the actual country of origin of the imported article, Customs policy is that the special marking requirements of section 134.46 are not triggered, and the origin marking only needs to satisfy the general marking requirements of permanency, legibility and conspicuousness under 19 U.S.C. 1304 and 19 CFR Part 134. This less stringent requirement is evidenced in numerous Headquarters Customs Rulings. See, HQ 712013 (January 16, 1980) (Customs held that U.S. reference ("Kansas") appearing on various locations on a pair of jeans did not trigger the special marking requirements of 19 CFR 134.46 because such marking was used as a symbol or decoration and would not reasonably be construed as an indication of origin since the actual country of origin was conspicuously and legibly located on the jeans); HQ 723604 (November 3, 1983) ("USA" letters on men's bikini-style swimming trunks did not trigger marking requirements of 19 CFR 134.46 because such marking was used as a symbol or decoration and would not reasonably be construed as indicating the country of origin of the article).
Customs has recognized that but for the existence of this strict regulation, there would be more flexibility in determining whether a marking is misleading, thus triggering the special marking requirements of 19 CFR 134.46. For this reason, Customs published in the Federal Register, 60 Fed. Reg. 57559, 29 Cus Bull 21 (November 29, 1995) a proposal to amend 19 CFR 134.46 to reflect that the special marking requirements of section 134.46 shall only apply if the non-origin reference is likely to mislead or deceive the ultimate purchaser as to the actual country of origin of the article. In this case, we find that the stringent marking requirements of 19 CFR 134.46 are not triggered because an ultimate purchaser would not be misled or deceived into believing that the origin of the malt beverage is the U.S. from reading the U.S. reference "Stamford, CT. appearing on the back label affixed to the bottle. Rather, an ultimate purchaser would recognize that the U.S. reference "Stamford, CT." is where the importer of the product is located and not a statement of origin. This is especially true considering the words "Brewed in Ireland" appear on the front label and these words can be easily seen and read by an ultimate purchaser upon a casual examination of the bottle, and the words "Imported by Guinness Import Company" proceed the U.S. reference "Stamford, CT". Thus, the country of origin marking of the malt beverage bottles, as described above, satisfies the general marking requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304 and 19 CFR Part 134 and is an acceptable country of origin marking for the imported malt beverage.
HOLDING:
The U.S. reference "Stamford, CT." which appears on the back label affixed to bottles containing malt beverage imported from Ireland, as described above, would not mislead or deceive an ultimate purchaser into believing that the imported product is of U.S. origin. Thus, the U.S. reference "Stamford CT." does not trigger the special marking requirements of 19 CFR 134.46 and the country of origin marking "Brewed in Ireland" appearing on the front label of the bottle satisfies the general marking requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304 and 19 CFR Part 134 and is an acceptable country of origin marking for the imported malt beverage.
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
Tariff Classfication
Appeals Division