The country of origin of a cutting chisel

N346289 March 12, 2025 OT:RR:NC:N1:118 CATEGORY: Origin Thomas Stuehle Betek GmbH & Co. KG Sulgener Str. 21-23Aichhalden 78733Germany RE:  The country of origin of a cutting chisel Dear Mr. Stuehle: In your letter dated February 26, 2025, you requested a country of origin determination on a cutting chisel for purposes of Section 301 duties.  Pictures and descriptions of the manufacturing process were included in your submission. The merchandise under consideration is identified as a cutting pick or chisel.  The imported tool incorporates two parts: a cold forged steel body and a carbide tip.  The chisel is used in underground coal mines on large continuous miner machines.  It is the part of the machine that penetrates and cuts pieces of coal out of rock.  Multiple chisels are used on one miner machine. In operation, each chisel is mounted into individual holders that are welded onto the drum of the continuous miner machine. You have stated that neither the steel body nor the carbide tip are reusable, and that once worn out they will be used as scrap. The manufacturing process for the chisel begins in China, where the steel body is cold forged.  It is then sent to Germany, where the body is further machined.  This includes machining a hole in the top of the body in order to accommodate the carbide tip.  The base of the body is also further machined to specifications, and it is sandblasted and washed.  Production of the carbide tip is done entirely in Germany, with raw materials that are put through specialized mixing and milling processes.  Once mixed and milled, the carbide tip is pressed into a specific shape, sintered and sandblasted.  The carbide tip is subsequently permanently soldered into the hole of the steel body, and the chisel is fully formed.  The chisel is then heated up and cooled with oil, to increase the strength of the steel body.  Finally, the finished chisel is sandblasted, washed and packaged for shipment. When determining the country of origin for purposes of applying current trade remedies under Section 301, the substantial transformation analysis is applicable. See, e.g., Headquarters Ruling Letter H301619, dated November 6, 2018. The test for determining whether a substantial transformation will occur is whether an article emerges from a process with a new name, character, or use different from that possessed by the article prior to processing. See Texas Instruments Inc. v. United States, 681 F.2d 778 (C.C.P.A. 1982). This determination is based on the totality of the evidence. See National Hand Tool Corp. v. United States, 16 C.I.T. 308 (1992), aff’d, 989 F.2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 1993). Our office notes that in the case of the chisel, the tool is comprised of two components, i.e., a steel body and a carbide tip.  The steel body, while cold forged in China, undergoes significant machining in Germany.  A hole is drilled into the top to accommodate the carbide tip.  The base of the body is machined to exact specifications in order to fit into the holder on the continuous miner machine.  The carbide tip is fully formed from raw materials in Germany through a specialized mixing and milling process.  Additionally, the steel body and carbide tip are permanently brazed together in Germany.  Considering the totality of the circumstances, it is our view that the steel body and raw materials used to form the carbide tip undergo a substantial transformation in Germany.  Accordingly, the country of origin for the finished chisel is Germany. 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 Anthony Grossi at anthony.e.grossi@cbp.dhs.gov. Sincerely, Steven A. Mack Director National Commodity Specialist Division