OT:RR:CTF:EMAIN H327730 MFT
T. Augustine Lo
Dorsey & Whitney, LLP
701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 6100
Seattle, WA 98104-7043
Re: Request for reconsideration of NY N327400; Tariff classification of a teleprompter base from China
Dear Mr. Lo:
This letter is in response to your request filed on behalf of your client Ikan International, LLC, for the reconsideration of New York Ruling Letter (NY) N327400, issued on August 22, 2022, in which U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) classified a certain teleprompter base from China under subheading 7616.99.51 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS) as "other articles of aluminum." You request that CBP modify NY N327400 with respect to the instant teleprompter base and reclassify it under subheading 8543.90.88, HTSUS, as a "part" of an electrical machine, having an individual function, not specified or included elsewhere in Chapter 85, HTSUS. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm our conclusion in NY N327400 that the instant merchandise is correctly classified under subheading 7616.99.51, HTSUS.
FACTS:
The merchandise under consideration is a teleprompter base, Model PT4200, used in professional digital photography and videography. NY N327400 describes the teleprompter base as follows:
The PT4200 Teleprompter Base is described as a complete, unassembled base for a teleprompter. Each imported base is composed of an aluminum frame, base, frame holder, camera mount, polyester hood, carbon fiber rods, steel screws, and hex tools. The aluminum components are made from type 6061 aluminum alloy sheets that have undergone computer numerical control ("CNC") machining. The aluminum components make up the most significant portion of the Teleprompter Base. [. . .]
The Teleprompter Base under consideration is an unassembled composite article that consists of an aluminum frame, base, frame holder, camera mount, polyester hood, carbon fiber rods, steel screws and hex tools to fasten the screws into the base. The aluminum, steel, and polyester components are classified in different headings. The metal in the Teleprompter Base predominates by bulk and weight, and thus provides the essential character of the Teleprompter Base.
The subject teleprompter base connects to a user-provided tripod to support a teleprompter monitor, beamsplitter glass, hood and shroud, and user-provided video camera. The hood and shroud cover the front of the camera lens, creating a darkened enclosure. The darkened enclosure prevents light from interfering with the text from the teleprompter monitor, which you will add after importation. The beamsplitter glass, also added after importation, mounts within the hood and shroud enclosure at a 45-degree angle relative to the video camera lens. The beamsplitter glass reflects text displayed from the teleprompter monitor, and it allows the camera lens to receive light from the subject. You provided an illustration to demonstrate the teleprompter base connected to the remaining teleprompter components.
You argue that the subject teleprompter base is a "part." Referring to the base as a "Mechanical Structure," you claim the following:
"The Mechanical Structure is also critical to the teleprompter device, because it forms the enclosure; attaches the Beamsplitter and Monitor; and mounts the entire device to the front of the video camera lens. Without the Mechanical Structure, there would be no way to position the Beamsplitter in front of the video camera at the correct 45-degree angle; to create a darkened space for the displayed text to become visible to the person being filmed while preventing unwanted reflection of the text in the direction of the camera lens; and to mount the Monitor that displays the text. There would also be no way to mount the finished device in front of the camera for the device to function, or to attach it to the camera tripod to allow the user to rotate both the camera and teleprompter device simultaneously in the direction of the person being filmed."
In N327400, we disagreed with your assertion that the subject teleprompter base constitutes a "part." We held that the even though the base "is used in conjunction with the teleprompter and appears to be made only for that use, the teleprompter can still function as intended without it," and thus was not an "integral" part of the teleprompter.
ISSUE:
Whether the subject teleprompter base from China is classified under heading 7616, HTSUS, as "other articles of aluminum," or under heading 8543, HTSUS, as a "part" to "electrical machines and apparatus, having individual functions, not specified or included elsewhere" in Chapter 85, HTSUS.
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Classification under the HTSUS is in accordance with the General Rules of Interpretation (GRIs). GRI 1 provides that the classification of goods will be determined according to the terms of the headings of the tariff schedule 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, the remaining GRIs 2 through 6 will then be applied in order.
GRI 3 provides, in relevant part, as follows:
When by application of Rule 2 (b) or for any other reason, goods are prima facie, classifiable under two or more headings, classification shall be effected as follows:
* * *
(b) Mixtures, composite goods consisting of different materials or made up of different components, and goods put up in sets for retail sale, which cannot be classified by reference to 3 (a), shall be classified as if they consisted of the material or component which gives them their essential character, insofar as this criterion is applicable....
The HTSUS headings and subheadings under consideration are as follows:
7616 Other articles of aluminum
* * * * *
8543 Electrical machines and apparatus, having individual functions, not specified or included elsewhere in this chapter; parts thereof.
Leaving aside the question of whether the teleprompter system that the instant base support would be properly classified as an apparatus of heading 8543, we will address whether the instant base constitutes a "part" of the complete teleprompter. The courts have considered the nature of "parts" under the HTSUS, resulting in two distinct though not inconsistent tests.[1] The first test, articulated in United States v. Willoughby Camera Stores, requires a determination of whether the imported item is "an integral, constituent, or component part, without which the article to which it is to be joined, could not function as such article."[2] The second test, set forth in United States v. Pompeo, states that an imported item "dedicated solely for use" with another article is a part of that article provided that, "when applied to that use," the article will not function without it.[3] Under either line of cases, an imported item is not a part if it is "a separate and distinct commercial entity."[4]
Simply because an article is "designed and constructed to be used" as support does not necessarily it an "integral, constituent, or component part" of another article.[5] The Court of Customs and Patent Appeals reiterated this point in United States v. Willoughby Camera Stores.[6] At issue before the court was whether a wooden tripod was classifiable as a "part" of certain cameras or as "manufactures of wood."[7] The cameras in the case were "large cameras" that "must, while in use, be rigidly supported and held in a given position, either horizontal or vertical," and the subject "tripods [were] used as such supports."[8]
Notably, the Willoughby court drew parallels to other articles that were designed and constructed to be used with supports: typewriters with typewriter desks; pianos with piano benches; and stationary engines with "rigid supports."[9] But the court found that in each case, the supporting articles were not "integral, constituent, or component parts" of their respective articles, even if the supports were "essential to the proper use" of the articles. The controlling question, the court stated, is "whether the particular articles imported were, or were not, essential to the operation or use of the particular thing of which they were said to be parts, and, in the absence of which the thing in question was not capable of the use for which it was intended."[10] Thus, in dismissing the tripod's role as a purported "part" of cameras, the court found it "evident . . . that[] when a tripod and camera are used together, each 'performs its separate function without loss of any of its essential characteristics.'"[11] "The most that can be said," the court concluded, "is that the two articles - a tripod and a camera - are designed to be used together, one as a support for the other, and that they are chiefly so used."[12]
We similarly hold that the subject teleprompter base is not "an integral, constituent, or component part" of a teleprompter under the Willoughby test. The teleprompter base is not essential to the operation or use of the components that make up a teleprompter (i.e., the teleprompter monitor, beamsplitter glass, hood and shroud, and user-provided video camera), and the teleprompter components can function without the base. Just as the typewriter desk's role was to mount to the typewriter in Willoughby, and just as the "rigid supports" merely attached to and supported the stationary engine in that case, the subject teleprompter base's function is to mount and support the teleprompter's components - a function which, alone, does not transform the base into a "part" under the HTSUS.
You failed to demonstrate how, without the teleprompter base, the teleprompter's components lose their functioning and essential characteristics. The user-provided video camera (by virtue of it being "user-provided") would still function as a video camera without the teleprompter base and retain its characteristics as a video camera. Likewise, the monitor would still be a monitor without the base and could still display text without the base. Although the beamsplitter glass needs to be kept a certain angle to reflect text from the monitor, you do not substantiate why there is "no way" to support the beamsplitter glass without the base or why other articles could not achieve the same outcome. Moreover, the glass does not lose its ability to reflect without the teleprompter base, and the hood and shroud similarly do not lose their essential characteristics or functions, either. Like the typewriter desk, piano bench, and rigid supports in Willoughby, the teleprompter base here may be "essential to the proper use" of its associated articles, but the associated articles retain their functions and essential characteristics without the support. The most that can be said is that the teleprompter base and its associated articles are designed to be used together and are chiefly so used. Because the teleprompter base is not "an integra, constituent, or component part" of the completed teleprompter, it cannot be considered a "part" under the HTSUS.[13]
Given that the subject teleprompter base cannot be classified as a part of heading 8543, HTSUS, by application of GRI 1, we note that it is indeed a composite good consisting of components of different materials. In this respect, we concur with the conclusion in NY N327400 that the aluminum components impart the teleprompter base with its essential character inasmuch as it is apparent that the aluminum components make up the majority of the product's weight and bulk, and also contribute the most to the base's function of supporting the aforementioned teleprompter components. As such, the teleprompter base is properly classified under heading 7616, HTSUS.
HOLDING:
For the foregoing reasons, we hereby affirm NY N327400. The subject teleprompter base is properly classified by application of GRIs 1, 3(b) and 6 under heading 7616, HTSUS, specifically in subheading 7616.99.51, HTSUS, which provides for: "Other articles of aluminum: Other: Other: Other." The general, column one rate of duty is 2.5 percent ad valorem.
Pursuant to U.S. Note 20 to Subchapter III, Chapter 99, HTSUS, products of China classified under subheading 7616.99.51, HTSUS, unless specifically excluded, are subject to the additional 25 percent ad valorem rate of duty. At the time of importation, you must report the Chapter 99 subheading, i.e., 9903.88.03, in addition to subheading 7616.99.51, HTSUS, listed above.
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.
Duty rates are provided for your convenience and are subject to change. The text of the most recent HTSUS and the accompanying duty rates are provided at https://hts.usitc.gov/current.
Sincerely,
Yuliya A. Gulis, Director
Commercial and Trade Facilitation Division
-----------------------
[1] See Bauerhin Tech's Ltd. v. United States, 110 F.3d 774, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1997).
[2] Id. at 778 (quoting United States v. Willoughby Camera Stores, Inc., 21 C.C.P.A. 322, 324 (Fed. Cir. 1933)).
[3] See United States v. Pompeo, 43 C.C.P.A. 9, 14 (1955),
[4] See ABB, Inc. v. United States, 28 C.I.T. 1444, 1452-54 (2004); Bauerhin, 100 F.3d at 779 (distinguishing the "tripod" found in Willoughby, 21 C.C.P.A. at 325).
[5] See Willoughby, 21 C.C.P.A. at 324 (citing Columbia Shipping Co. v. United States, 11 C.C.P.A. 281 (1922); United States v. Kalter Mercantile Co., 11 C.C.P.A. 540 (1922)).
[6] See id.
[7] See id. at 323.
[8] Id. at 323-24.
[9] Id. at 324.
[10] Id. at 326.
[11] Id. at 325.
[12] Id.
[13] Although CBP noted in NY N327400 that the subject teleprompter base "appears to be made only for" use with the teleprompter, an article being dedicated solely for use with another is not sufficient for it to be classified as a "part" under the HTSUS. A purported "part" must satisfy both the Willoughby and Pompeo criteria to constitute a "part." See RKW Klerks, Inc. v. United States, 592 F. Supp. 3d 1349 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2022) (finding that an article failed to constitute a "part" despite satisfying one of the two tests).