The country of origin of a garden cart

N338794 April 5, 2024 OT:RR:NC:N2:206 CATEGORY: Origin Laura Oliver A.N. Deringer 173 West Service RoadChamplain, NY 12919 RE:  The country of origin of a garden cart Dear Ms. Oliver: In your letter dated March 11, 2024, you requested a country of origin ruling on a garden cart, which you filed on behalf of your client, Meridian International Co., Ltd. USA. The article under consideration is a Garden Cart, which is a utility cart used to transport heavy items. It consists of a high-density polyethylene (HDPE) plastic base, polypropylene (PP) plastic wheels, and a steel handle, stator, and wheel frame. You state that the raw HDPE and PP are sourced from Thailand and made into the base and wheels in Thailand. The completed base and wheels are then shipped to China, where they are assembled together with the Chinese steel handle, stator, and wheel frame. The metal handle is attached to the plastic base with screws and the wheels are attached to the bottom of the base to create the finished garden cart. 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." 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) (Uniroyal). Substantial transformation determinations are based on the totality of the evidence. See Headquarters Ruling (HQ) W968434, dated January 17, 2007, citing Ferrostaal Metals Corp. v. United States, 11 CIT 470, 478, 664 F. Supp. 535, 541 (1987). In Uniroyal case, the court held that an upper was not substantially transformed when attached to an outsole to form a shoe and that the upper was "the very essence of the completed shoe." In ruling N337134, dated January 17, 2024, we reviewed a similar scenario and determined that the assembly process in China was not sufficiently complex to render substantial transformation. We also stated in that ruling that the character of the cart is its base and wheels, and because these components were sourced from two different countries, we determined the country of origin for the garden cart to be China, the country of the final assembly. In the instant case, the base and the wheels are both sourced from Thailand. As a result, the country of origin for the Garden Cart is Thailand for marking purposes. The holding set forth above applies only to the specific factual situation and merchandise description as identified in the ruling request. This position is clearly set forth in Title 19, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Section 177.9(b)(1). This section states that a ruling letter is issued on the assumption that all of the information furnished in the ruling letter, whether directly, by reference, or by implication, is accurate and complete in every material respect. In the event that the facts are modified in any way, or if the goods do not conform to these facts at time of importation, you should bring this to the attention of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and submit a request for a new ruling in accordance with 19 CFR 177.2. Additionally, we note that the material facts described in the foregoing ruling may be subject to periodic verification by CBP. This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs and Border Protection 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, please contact National Import Specialist Liana Alvarez at liana.alvarez@cbp.dhs.gov. Sincerely, Steven A. Mack Director National Commodity Specialist Division