CLA-2 RR:CR:GC 958620 HMC
Port Director of Customs
JFK Airport
Bldg #77
Jamaica, NY 11430
RE: Protest 1001-95-107082; Medium Format Camera Lenses;
Subheading 9006.59.90; General Explanatory Note (III) to Chapter
90; Explanatory Note 90.02; Other Objective Lenses; Other
Cameras.
Dear Port Director:
This is our decision on Protest 1001-95-107082, filed
against your classification of lenses for medium format camera
bodies. The entries under protest were liquidated on June 30,
1995, and this protest timely filed on August 17, 1995.
Consideration was given to arguments and supplemental submissions
presented by counsel for protestant during a meeting held at
Customs Headquarters on April 27, 1998. Consideration was also
given to supplemental submissions, dated May 27, 1998, and June
5, 1998.
FACTS:
The merchandise under protest consists of various
interchangeable Mamiya-Sekor lenses for Mamiya medium format SLR
camera bodies. The medium format camera bodies are designed to
utilize a 60 millimeter film. These cameras and lenses are
generally sold to professional photographers and the more expert
amateur photographers. These cameras permit the use of a larger
negative that allows for greater clarity, less graininess and
sharper definition in final prints.
Information provided shows that the camera bodies and lenses
were imported in the same shipment but invoiced and packaged
separately. Invoices show that the lenses include the Mamiya-Sekor C 45mm f/2.8 N, 55mm F/2.8 N, 80 mm F/2.8 N, 150mm F/3.5 N,
210mm F/4 N, Mamiya Macro C 80mm F/4 N, Mamiya A 150mm F/2.8,
Mamiya-Sekor Z 110mm F/2.8 W, 150mm F/3.5 W, 180mm F/4.5 W-N,
100-200mm Zoom, Mamiya G 50mm F/4 L, 75mm F/3.5 L, and the Mamiya
KL 180mm F/4.5 L-A.
The lenses were entered as other cameras under subheading
9006.59.90 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
(HTSUS). The protestant claims to rely on pre-entry
classification ruling (PC) 859964, dated March 14, 1991, which,
according to the protestant, supports the classification of the
lenses as entered. However, the entries were liquidated under
subheading 9002.11.90, HTSUS, as objective lenses for cameras.
The provisions, in effect at the time of the entries under
protest, are as follows:
9002 Lenses, prisms, mirrors and other optical
elements, of any material, mounted, being
parts of or fittings for instruments or
apparatus, other than such elements of glass
not optically worked; parts and accessories
thereof:
Objective lenses and parts and
accessories thereof:
9002.11 For cameras, projectors or
photographic enlargers or reducers:
9002.11.90 Other...5.7% (1995)
* * * *
9006 Photographic (other than cinematographic)
cameras; photographic flashlight apparatus
and flashbulbs other than discharge lamps of
heading 8539; parts and accessories thereof:
Other cameras:
9006.59 Other:
Other than fixed focus:
9006.59.90 Valued over $10
each...2.4% (1995)
ISSUE:
Whether the lenses are classifiable as other cameras under
subheading 9006.59.90, HTSUS, or as objective lenses for cameras
under subheading 9002.11.90, HTSUS.
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Merchandise is classifiable under the HTSUS in accordance
with the General Rules of Interpretation (GRIs). GRI 1 states in
part that for legal purposes, classification shall be determined
according to the terms of the headings and any relative section
or chapter notes, and provided the headings or notes do not
require otherwise, according to GRIs 2 through 6.
Chapter 90, Note 2, HTSUS, states, in part, that
Subject to Note 1, parts and accessories for
machines, apparatus, instruments or articles of
this Chapter are to be classified according to the
following rules:
(a) Parts and accessories which are goods included
in any of the headings of this Chapter or of
Chapter 84, 85 or 91 (other than heading No.
84.85, 85.48 or 90.33) are in all cases to be
classified in their respective headings;
(b) Other parts and accessories, if suitable for
use solely or principally with a particular kind
of machine, instrument or apparatus, or with a
number or machines, instruments or apparatus of
the same heading (including a machine, instrument
or apparatus of heading No. 90.10, 90.13 or 90.31)
are to be classified with the machines,
instruments or apparatus of that kind;
(c) All other parts and accessories are to be
classified in heading No. 90.33.
The Harmonized Commodity Description And Coding System
Explanatory Notes (EN's) constitute the official interpretation
of the Harmonized System. While not legally binding on the
contracting parties, and therefore not dispositive, the EN's
provide a commentary on the scope of each heading of the
Harmonized System and are thus useful in ascertaining the
classification of merchandise under the System. Customs believes
the EN's should always be consulted. See T.D. 89-80, 54 Fed.
Reg. 35127, 35128 (Aug. 23, 1989).
General EN (III) to Chapter 90 states, in part, that the
optical elements of heading 90.01 or 90.02 remain in the headings
cited regardless of the instruments or apparatus to which they
are to be fitted. EN 90.02 states, in part, that [t]he articles
of [heading 9002] are mainly designed to be incorporated with
other parts to form a specific instrument or part of an
instrument. EN 90.02 further states that [s]ubject to the above
conditions, the heading includes: (1) objective lenses,
additional lenses, color filters, viewfinders, etc., for
photographic or cinematographic cameras or for projectors.
Protestant claims that the merchandise is classifiable as
other cameras under subheading 9006.59.90, arguing that there is
an established uniform practice of classifying 60mm camera lenses
as cameras when imported in the same shipment with medium format
60mm camera bodies. In this regard, protestant refers to PC
859964 and to other entries that classified the lenses under
subheading 9006.59.90. In the alternative, protestant argues
that the lenses are classifiable according to GRI 2(a) as
cameras, unassembled.
An established uniform practice would arise when there is
evidence of uniform classification and liquidation of the subject
imports at various ports over an extended period of time. See
Heraeus-Amersil, Inc. v. United States, 9 CIT 412 (1985). We
cannot discern from the pre-entry classification ruling any
evidence, illustrating how the lenses were imported, invoiced or
packaged. We note that this ruling shows that the National
Import Specialist classified most of the lenses under subheading
9002.11.80. Also, protestant has not provided sufficient
information regarding other entries to support the finding of a
uniform and established practice. The protestant's submissions
state that Mamiya imports the lenses through the ports of Newark
Airport and New York Seaport, and has done so since 1987. We did
not see any evidence in these submissions of actual
classification and liquidation of the lenses as cameras.
Nevertheless, we believe, importation of the lenses through just
two ports cannot support a finding of an established uniform
practice of classifying lenses as cameras. The pre-classification ruling and entries therefore do not evidence a
uniform classification and liquidation of the subject lenses as
cameras of heading 9006.
The merchandise under protest are interchangeable Mamiya-Sekor lenses for Mamiya medium format SLR camera bodies. They
were imported in the same shipment with an equal number of camera
bodies, but were invoiced and packaged separately. The lenses
are recognized parts and/or accessories for the camera bodies
since they are necessary for the completion of the camera body
with which they will be used. They do not change the basic
function of the camera body. Since the lenses are specifically
provided for in heading 9002, pursuant to Chapter 90, Note 2(a)
and the EN's, the lenses for the medium format cameras are
classifiable under subheading 9002.11.90, HTSUS.
Accordingly, GRI 2(a) is inapplicable in this instance.
There is no need to perform an "essential character" analysis on
the subject merchandise because the lenses are complete and fully
shaped items recognizable as separate articles from the camera
bodies and specifically provided for in heading 9002.
In addition, we find that the evidence provided shows that
the lenses were packaged and offered for sale separately from
camera bodies to give the ultimate consumer the option to
separately buy a lens best suited to his or her needs. At page 2
of the May 27, 1998 submission, counsel for the protestant states
that the entry under protest contained more camera bodies than
lenses. The submission also states that a specific camera body
and lens will not necessarily be sold together. Therefore,
consistent with Treasury Decision 94-59 and HQ 952865, which
concerned the classification of lenses for 35mm camera bodies, we
are unable to find that the subject lenses and medium format
camera bodies were packaged separately solely for reasons such as
convenience of packing, handling or transport. They are
classifiable separately, as stated above, under subheading
9002.11.90, HTSUS.
HOLDING:
Under the authority of GRI 1 and Chapter 90, Note 2, HTSUS,
the lenses are classified in subheading 9002.11.90, HTSUS, as
objective lenses. The 1995 rate of duty is 5.7%.
This protest should be DENIED. In accordance with Section
3A(11)(b) of Customs Directive 099 3550-065, dated August 4,
1993, Subject: Revised Protest Directive, you should mail this
decision, together with the Customs Form 19, to the protestant no
later than 60 days from the date of this letter. Any
reliquidation of the entry or entries in accordance with the
decision must be accomplished prior to mailing the decision.
Sixty days from the date of the decision, the Office of
Regulations and Rulings will take steps to make the decision
available to Customs personnel via the Customs Rulings Module in
ACS and to the public via the Diskette Subscription Service, the
Freedom of Information Act and other public access channels.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division