The country of origin of vanillin.

N321300 September 7, 2021 OT:RR:NC:N:3:140 CATEGORY: Country of Origin Mr. Kevin Drucker Solvay USA Inc 504 Carnegie Center Princeton, New Jersey 08540 RE: The country of origin of vanillin. Dear Mr. Drucker: In your letter dated August 30th, 2021, you requested a country of origin ruling determination on vanillin. The merchandise under consideration is developed through a chemical process and then purified. You provided the following description of the manufacturing process. “Initially, the crude raw material (crude vanillin) is made out of Natural Eugenol using a process unit in China. This material is shipped to France for the last treatment. This final treatment is made out of two main process steps that are run under continuous and batch mode: The raw material is introduced to the process unit as a white powder and then, melted in the specific vessel to be introduced in the first section. This step strips the heavy and light impurities which will be purged out of the process as tars. The crude product coming out of this first step is sent to the second section. The purpose of this main process step is to refine the vanillin from liquid crude grade to a food grade vanillin of higher purity.” You indicate that the vanillin is also dried then sieved and packaged as “Rhovanil US NAT G”. You describe that the natural vanillin made from Eugenol prior to the France modification process is characterized by a strong off-note in gustation as well as in olfaction that could “potentially” not be accepted by customers. It is stated that Solvay has developed its own manufacturing process in its St Fons (Lyon, France) plant, to modify the organoleptic profile, so the final natural vanillin is purer, without any “off-notes”. 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. When considering a product that may be subject to antidumping, countervailing, or other safeguard measures, the substantial transformation analysis is applied to determine the country of origin. See 19 C.F.R. § 102.0; HQ 563205, dated June 28, 2006; see also Belcrest Linens v. United States, 741 F.2d 1368, 1370-71 (Fed. Cir. 1984) (finding that “the term ‘product of’ at the least includes manufactured articles of such country or area” and that substantial transformation “is essentially the test used…in determining whether an article is a manufacture of a given country”). 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).You provided a chart showing the peaks present on a gas chromatograph of the product before and after the purification process which occurred in France. We note that although it does show the chemical substances that were removed during the processing, the essence remained unchanged. It is simply a purer form, but it is still vanillin. You indicate that you believe that the essential character of this material is defined by the final aroma profile, as per its final use in flavor and fragrance products. It is your interpretation that the processes occurring in France “to enhance/modify the aroma profile” to conform to the necessary industry specifications constitutes a substantial transformation, conferring the country of origin to France. We disagree. The chemical substance exported from China already possessed the essence of the vanillin at the time it was exported from China. The processing in France although providing a cleaner and purer product does not effect a substantial change to the chemical substances which provides the basis for the finished product. It is our opinion that the country or origin of the vanillin remains that of 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 Paul Hodgkiss at Paul.Hodgkiss@cbp.dhs.gov. Sincerely, Steven A. Mack Director National Commodity Specialist Division