Classification of a woven nylon fabric box awning forrecreational vehicles

HQ 953399 March 24, 1993 CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 953399 jlj CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO.: 6306.12.0000 Mr. Wolfgang Vogt, President Equinox Sunshine Products Ltd. 15463 20th Avenue Surrey, British Columbia Canada V4A 2A4 RE: Classification of a woven nylon fabric box awning for recreational vehicles Dear Mr. Vogt: On November 24, 2992, and January 18, 1993, you requested a tariff classification for a "Box Awning for Recreational Vehicles." You submitted a brochure, three photographs and samples of the proposed awning fabric along with your request. FACTS: You state that the box awning for recreational vehicles is made of three components: (1) extruded aluminum box and cover plate made in Canada; (2) carbon and fiber rods for support of the fabric, made in the United States; and (3) fabric made of woven coated nylon, made in the United States. The swatches of woven nylon fabric submitted are representative of the fabric to be used in the manufacture of the awnings. As represented in the photographs, the nylon fabric is enclosed in a seven foot long aluminum box. When the nylon fabric is extended, it provides protection from sun and rain over an area approximately nine feet eight inches by six feet. The nylon fabric is supported by carbon fiber rods. You state that the awning's principal use will be with smaller motorhomes and/or tent trailers and vans. ISSUE: What is the tariff classification of the box awning under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated? LAW AND ANALYSIS: Classification of merchandise under the HTSUSA is in accordance with the General Rules of Interpretation (GRIs), taken in order. GRI 1 provides that classification shall be according to the terms of the headings and any relevant section or chapter notes. The awning is provided for eo nomine under the provision for awnings of synthetic fibers, in subheading 6306.12.0000, HTSUSA. It is classified under GRI 1, HTSUSA. Merchandise under subheading 6306.12.000, HTSUSA, is eligible for a lower duty rate under the United States/Canada Free Trade Agreement (CFTA) if it is a product of Canada and if it meets conditions of General Note 3 (c) (vii), HTSUSA. In order to qualify for CFTA duty rate, General Note 3 (c) (vii) (B) (2) states that merchandise which is not wholly Canadian must be ...transformed in Canada ...so as to be subject (I) to a change in tariff classification as described in the rules of subdivision (c) (vii) (R) of this note, or (II) to such other requirements subdivision (c) (vii) (R) of this note may provide when no change in tariff classification occurs, and they meet the other conditions set out in subdivisions (c) (vii) (F), (G), (H), (I) (J) and (R) of this note. The nylon fabric, imported into Canada and manufactured into the textile portion of the awning there, does not qualify the box awning as an article originating in Canada under the CFTA. Subdivision (c) (vii) (R) (11) (pp) provides in relevant part that ...change to any heading of Chapter 63 from any heading outside that chapter other than headings...of Chapter 54 and 55, provided that goods are both cut and sewn in the territory of Canada... will qualify an article for CFTA treatment. Since the article is made from fabric of Chapter 54, neither subdivision (c) (vii) (R) nor (c) (vii) (F) would apply. Subdivision (c) (vii) (G) deals only with unassembled parts. Subdivision (c) (vii) (I) prohibits the application of subdivision (c) (vii) (H) to any item in Chapters 61 through 63. Subdivision (c) (vii) (J) deals only with products subject to subdivision (c) (vii) (H). The article fails to satisfy the requirements that would allow CFTA treatment, therefore it is not considered a good originating in Canada and is not eligible for duty reductions under the CFTA. HOLDING: The instant awning is classified in subheading 6306.12.0000, HTSUSA, dutiable at the rate of 10 percent ad valorem. This product is not subject to the quota restraint levels negotiated and administered by the Committee for the Implementation of Textile Agreements. Sincerely, John Durant, Director Commercial Rulings Division