Base
9620281998-12-14HeadquartersClassification

Tariff classification of a suitcase for Skyway Luggage;Revocation of Ruling PD 817537

U.S. Customs and Border Protection · CROSS Database · 2 HTS codes referenced

Summary

Tariff classification of a suitcase for Skyway Luggage;Revocation of Ruling PD 817537

Ruling Text

HQ 962028 December 14, 1998 CLA:2 RR:CR:TE 962028 MBG CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO: 4202.12 Mr. Scott D. Noe Tower Group International 821 2nd Avenue, #1400 Seattle, WA 98104-1476 RE: Tariff classification of a suitcase for Skyway Luggage; Revocation of Ruling PD 817537 Dear Mr. Noe: On December 20, 1995, Customs issued PD 817537 to your company on behalf of Skyway Luggage, regarding the tariff classification of a suitcase with an outer surface of embossed plastic. The suitcase was originally classified under subheading 4202.92 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA). Upon review, Customs has determined that the suitcase was erroneously classified under subheading 4202.92. The correct classification for the product should be under subheading 4202.12 of the HTSUSA based on classification as a suitcase "with an outer surface of plastics or of textile material." Pursuant to section 625(c)(1), Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1625(c)(1)), as amended by section 623 of Title VI (Customs Modernization) of the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act, Pub. L. 103-182, 107 Stat. 2057, 2186 (1993), notice of the proposed revocation of PD 817537 was published on November 11, 1998, in the Customs Bulletin, Volume 32, Number 45. FACTS: The item under review is a pullman style suitcase. The sample measures approximately 22" x 14" x 7" in size. The suitcase has an outer surface of embossed non-rigid plastic; it is permanently attached to a unit with plastic wheels and telescopic handle for pulling. The interior is equipped with tie down straps and the cover has a net area with zipper access. The exterior has two compartments with zipper closures. ISSUE: Whether the suitcase is more specifically classifiable as under subheading 4202.12.2050 HTSUSA, rather than in subheading 4202.92.4500, HTSUSA? LAW AND ANALYSIS: Classification of goods under the HTSUSA is governed by the General Rules of Interpretation (GRIs). GRI 1 provides that classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes. Subheading 4202.12 covers "Trunks, suitcases, vanity cases, attache cases, briefcases, school satchels, and similar containers . . . ." (emphasis added). When this product was originally reviewed by Customs an error occurred during classification at the subheading level. Subheading 4202.92, provides for "Travel, sports and similar bags, with an outer surface of sheeting of plastic or of textile materials." Since the suitcase is eo nomine provided for by subheading 4202.12, it is classifiable under that tariff provision. For tariff purposes, a suitcase is not considered to be a travel or similar bag. Accordingly, subheading 4202.92 does not describe the instant merchandise. The samples submitted are being returned to you under separate cover. HOLDING: This ruling revokes PD 817537 and classifies the suitcase under subheading 4202.12.2050 HTSUSA, which provides for trunks, suitcases, vanity cases, and similar containers, "with an outer surface of plastics," with duty at the rate of 20 percent ad valorem. In accordance with 19 U.S.C. 1625(c)(1), this ruling will become effective 60 days after its publication in the Customs Bulletin. Publication of rulings or decisions pursuant to 19 U.S.C. 1625(c)(1) does not constitute a change of practice or position in accordance with section 177.10(c)(1), Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.10(c)(1)). Sincerely, John Durant, Director Commercial Rulings Division

Ruling History

Revokes817537

Related Rulings for HTS 4202.12

Other CBP classification decisions referencing the same tariff code.

Federal Register (2)

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

Court of International Trade & Federal Circuit (5)

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