Base
0856331989-10-18HeadquartersClassification

Modification of NY 834153, copy machine toner

U.S. Customs and Border Protection · CROSS Database · 1 HTS code referenced

Cross-Source Intelligence

Primary HTS Code

3707.90.30

Compare All →

Court Cases

7 cases

CIT & Federal Circuit

Ruling Age

36 years

2 related rulings

Data compiled from CBP CROSS Rulings, CourtListener (CIT/CAFC) · As of 2026-06-22 · Updates real-time

Summary

Modification of NY 834153, copy machine toner

Ruling Text

HQ 085633 October 18, 1989 CLA-2 CO:R:C:G 085633 SS CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO.: 3707.90.30 Mr. Michael Veny Vice President Abe M. Knipper, Inc. 80 Sheridan Blvd. Inwood, New York 11696 RE: Modification of NY 834153, copy machine toner Dear Mr. Veny: In a ruling letter (NY 834153), dated December 27, 1988, our New York office provided you with the tariff classification for "Monroe Toners and Developers for use in "Monroe Copying Machines", under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). We have reconsidered our position on toners and developers for use in copy machines, and have determined that toners and developers are properly classifiable under heading 3707.90.30, HTSUS, which provides for other chemical preparations for photographic uses. A copy of our ruling of September 29, 1989 (HQRL 084572) stating our present position on the classification of toners for use in copy machines is enclosed for your reference. Also enclosed for your reference is a copy of Section 179.9, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.9), including the recent amendment to this regulation, which pertains to the effect of ruling letters, modification or revocation. NYRL 834153 is modified accordingly. Sincerely, John Durant, Director Commerical Rulings Division Enclosure 6 cc: A.D., N.Y. Seaport 1 cc: Legal Reference SS library 085202

Ruling History

Modifies834153

Related Rulings for HTS 3707.90.30

Other CBP classification decisions referencing the same tariff code.

Court of International Trade & Federal Circuit (5)

CIT and CAFC court opinions related to the tariff classifications in this ruling.