CLA-2-57:OT:RR:NC:N3:349
Ms. Kari Aiduk
Mohawk Global Logistics
123 Air Cargo Rd North Syracuse, NY 13212
RE: The tariff classification of carpet from Ireland
Dear Ms. Aiduk:
In your letter dated February 3, 2023, you requested a tariff classification ruling on behalf of your client, Botany Weaving. A sample swatch of the carpet was provided to this office and will be returned as requested.
The submitted sample, P/N 398WW3349, is a square piece of loop pile carpet with a design created by four different colored yarns woven in the Wilton style. The loop pile is made from 100 percent nylon yarns; the warp yarns are composed of 40 percent polyester, 20 percent viscose and 40 percent glass fibers; and the weft yarns are composed of 100 percent polypropylene. The carpet will be imported into the United States in rolls with a width measuring 200 centimeters wide and is not considered to be ‘made up.’ You state the carpet meets all compliance standards to be used in civil aircraft and is solely dedicated for civil aircraft use.
In your letter you suggest that P/N 398WW3349 is classified under subheading 8807.30.0030, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), which provides for “Parts of goods of heading 8801, 8802 or 8806: Other parts of airplanes, helicopters or unmanned aircraft: For use in civil aircraft: Other.” We disagree. The courts have considered the nature of “parts” under the HTSUS and two distinct tests have resulted. See Bauerhin Technologies Limited Partnership, & John V. Carr & Son, Inc. v. United States, 110 F.3d 774, 779 (Fed. Cir. 1997). The first, articulated in United States v. Willoughby Camera Stores, 21 C.C.P.A. 322 (1933), 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.” Bauerhin, 110 F.3d at 778 (quoting Willoughby Camera, 21 C.C.P.A., at 324). The second, set forth in United States v. Pompeo, 43 C.C.P.A. 9 (1955), 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. Pompeo, 43 C.C.P.A., at 14. Under either line of cases, an imported item is not a part if it is “a separate and distinct commercial entity.” ABB, Inc. v. United States, 28 Ct. Int’l Trade 1444, 1452-53 (2004); Bauerhin, 100 F. 3d, at 1452-32. The carpet under consideration is not an integral part without which the aircraft cannot function. In addition, it will be imported into the United States in rolls and will be further worked to be installed into the aircraft. Furthermore, carpeting is a separate and distinct commercial entity. As a result, classification of the carpet in heading 8807, HTSUS, regardless of how specifically it is made for aircraft, is precluded.
The applicable subheading for the item# 398WW3349 will be 5702.32.1000, HTSUS, which provides carpets and other textile floor coverings, woven, not tufted or flocked, whether or not made up, including "Kelem", "Schumacks", "Karamanie" and similar handwoven rugs: Other, of pile construction, not made up: Of man-made textile materials: Wilton (including brussels) and velvet (including tapestry) floor coverings and floor coverings of like character or description . The rate of duty will be 8 percent ad valorem.
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.
This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs and Border Protection Regulations (19 C.F.R. 177).
A copy of the ruling or the control number indicated above should be provided with the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is imported. If you have any questions regarding the ruling, please contact National Import Specialist Kim Wachtel at [email protected].
Sincerely,
Steven A. Mack
Director
National Commodity Specialist Division