The country of origin of lightning cables

N308791 February 4, 2020 CLA-2-85:OT:RR:NC:N2:212 CATEGORY: Country of Origin James Jiang Vietnam Broad Telecommunication Company, Limited Lot CN-10 Van Trung Industrial Park Viet Yen District Bac Giang Province 26000 Vietnam RE: The country of origin of lightning cables Dear Mr. Jiang: In your letter dated January 8, 2020, you requested a tariff classification ruling on behalf of your client, Sakar International, Inc. The items under consideration are described as lightning cables. The subject cable is comprised of a length of insulated cable affixed at one end with a standard male USB connector and a lightning style connector at the other. The cables are designed to connect a variety of mobile devices to host units and charging stations. In your request, you state that the subject cables are assembled in Vietnam using components originating from China and Taiwan. The process begins with bulk, wound, drawn and insulated wire of Chinese origin imported into Vietnam. In Vietnam, the wire conductor is cut to length and the ends are exposed in preparation for the addition of the connectors. A lightning connector of Taiwanese origin and a USB connector of Chinese origin are then added to the prepared ends. The finished cable is then tested and packaged for retail sale. The “country of origin” is defined in 19 CFR 134.1(b), in pertinent part, 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.” 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). Further, in Energizer Battery, Inc. v. United States, 190 F. Supp. 3d 1308 (2016), the Court of International Trade (“CIT”) interpreted the meaning of “substantial transformation” as used in the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (“TAA”) for purposes of government procurement. In Energizer, the court reviewed the “name, character and use” test in determining whether a substantial transformation had occurred in determining the origin of a flashlight, and reviewed various court decisions involving substantial transformation determinations. The court noted, citing Uniroyal, Inc. v. United States, 3 C.I.T. 220, 226, 542 F. Supp. 1026, 1031, aff’d, 702 F.2d 1022 (Fed. Cir. 1983), that when “the post-importation processing consists of assembly, courts have been reluctant to find a change in character, particularly when the imported articles do not undergo a physical change.” Energizer at 1318. In addition, the court noted, “when the end-use was pre-determined at the time of importation, courts have generally not found a change in use.” Energizer at 1319, citing as an example, National Hand Tool Corp. v. United States, 16 C.I.T. 308, 310, aff’d 989 F.2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Furthermore, courts have considered the nature of the assembly, i.e., whether it is a simple assembly or more complex, such that individual parts lose their separate identities and become integral parts of a new article. Regarding the origin of the subject lightning cables, it is the opinion of this office that the Chinese origin insulated conductor cable imparts the essence of the product. The manufacture and assembly processes completed in Vietnam do not substantially transform the unterminated cable into a new and different article of commerce with a name, character, and use distinct from the individual components. Based upon the facts presented with this case, it is the opinion of this office that the origin of the subject lightning cables is China. This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. 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 Luke LePage at luke.lepage@cbp.dhs.gov. Sincerely, Steven A. Mack Director National Commodity Specialist Division