The country of origin of an insulated electrical cable

N301892 December 11, 2018 MAR-2 OT:RR:NC:N2:209 CATEGORY: MARKING Jade Li Protop International Inc. 10F-8, No.237, Sec., 1 Datong Rd New Taipei City, 22161 Taiwan RE: The country of origin of an insulated electrical cable Dear Ms. Li: This is in response to your letter dated November 21, 2018, requesting a ruling regarding the country of origin and marking requirements for an imported electrical cable. The item concerned is an insulated electrical cable referred to as the Apple Lightning Cable. The Apple Lightning Cable consists of an insulated electrical cable of Chinese-origin and two electrical connectors of Chinese-origin. The Chinese components are shipped to Vietnam. In Vietnam the Chinese-origin electrical cable and the Chinese-origin connectors are assembled together to form the finished Apple Lightning Cable. You question whether or not the finished product can be identified as a product of Vietnam. The marking statute, section 304, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1304), provides that, unless excepted, every article of foreign origin (or its container) imported into the U.S. shall be marked in a conspicuous place as legibly, indelibly and permanently as the nature of the article (or its container) will permit, in such a manner as to indicate to the ultimate purchaser in the U.S. the English name of the country of origin of the article. The “country of origin” is defined in 19 CFR 134.1(b) as “the country of manufacture, production, or growth of any article of foreign origin entering the United States. Further work or material added to an article in another country must effect a substantial transformation in order to render such other country the 'country of origin' within the meaning of this part; however, for a good of a NAFTA country, the NAFTA Marking Rules will determine the country of origin.” For tariff purposes, the courts have held that a substantial transformation occurs when an article emerges from a process with a new name, character or use different from that possessed by the article prior to processing. United States v. Gibson-Thomsen Co., Inc., 27 CCPA 267, C.A.D. 98 (1940); National Hand Tool Corp. v. United States, 16 CIT 308 (1992), aff’d, 989 F. 2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 1993); Anheuser Busch Brewing Association v. The United States, 207 U.S. 556 (1908) and Uniroyal Inc. v. United States, 542 F. Supp. 1026 (1982). However, if the manufacturing or combining process is merely a minor one that leaves the identity of the article intact, a substantial transformation has not occurred. Uniroyal, Inc. v. United States, 3 CIT 220, 542 F. Supp. 1026, 1029 (1982), aff’d, 702 F.2d 1022 (Fed. Cir. 1983). Substantial transformation determinations are based on the totality of the evidence. See Headquarters Ruling (HQ) W968434, date January 17, 2007, citing Ferrostaal Metals Corp. v. United States, 11 CIT 470, 478, 664 F. Supp. 535, 541 (1987). Based upon the facts presented and the pertinent authorities, it is the opinion of this office that the Chinese-origin insulated electrical cable and electrical connectors which are exported to Vietnam and processed into the finished Apple Lightning Cable, are not substantially transformed in Vietnam. The assembly process does not result in a new and different article of commerce with a name, character, and use distinct from the article exported. Therefore, the Apple Lightning Cable is considered a product of China for marking purposes at time of importation into the United States. This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part 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, contact National Import Specialist Steven Pollichino at steven.pollichino@cbp.dhs.gov. Sincerely, Steven A. Mack Director National Commodity Specialist Division