Base
8738321992-05-14New YorkClassification

The tariff classification of an LCD digital clock componentfrom China.

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

Cross-Source Intelligence

Primary HTS Code

9105.91.40

Compare All →

Federal Register

1 doc

Related notices & rules

Court Cases

3 cases

CIT & Federal Circuit

Ruling Age

34 years

Data compiled from CBP CROSS Rulings, Federal Register, CourtListener (CIT/CAFC) · As of 2026-06-19 · Updates real-time

Summary

The tariff classification of an LCD digital clock componentfrom China.

Ruling Text

NY 873832 May 14, 1992 CLA-2-91:S:N:N3G:344 873832 CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO.: 9105.91.40 Mr. William J. Maloney Rode & Qualey 295 Madison Avenue New York, N. Y. 10017 RE: The tariff classification of an LCD digital clock component from China. Dear Mr. Maloney: This classification decision under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS) is being issued in accordance with the provisions of Section 177 of the Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. 177). DATE OF INQUIRY : April 24, 1992 ON BEHALF OF : Fisher & Company, Inc. DESCRIPTION OF MERCHANDISE : Battery operated LCD digital clock component, with battery and without a case, for a home phone center. HTS PROVISION : Other clocks: other: battery or AC powered: with opto-electronic display only. HTS SUBHEADING : 9105.91.40 RATE OF DUTY : 3.9% on the movement and case plus 5.3% on the battery. A copy of this ruling letter should be attached to the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is imported. 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, Jean F. Maguire Area Director New York Seaport 

Related Rulings for HTS 9105.91.40

Other CBP classification decisions referencing the same tariff code.

Federal Register (1)

Trade notices, proposed rules, and final rules related to the tariff codes in this ruling.

Court of International Trade & Federal Circuit (3)

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