CLA-2; CO:R:C:T 953272 ch
Mr. Parish
Florida Federal Building
Suite 200
2222 Ponce De Leon Boulevard
Coral Gables, Florida 33134-6193
RE: Revocation of HRL 087596; motor vehicle covers;
automobile covers; other made up textile articles v.
motor vehicle accessories; car covers; EN to HTS
Nomenclature indicate that motor vehicle covers are to
be classified as other made up textile articles.
Dear Mr. Parish:
Headquarters Ruling Letter (HRL) 087596, issued to you on
January 31, 1991, concerned the classification of automobile
covers under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
Annotated (HTSUSA). We have had occasion to review this ruling
and find that the classification of said merchandise under
subheading 8708.99.5080, HTSUSA, is in error.
FACTS:
The merchandise at issue are automobile covers manufactured
out of various textile fibers. The covers are to be manufactured
in approximately 700 different shapes. Each shape is designed to
match the form of an individual make of automobile. The covers
possess elastic corners which serve to secure them to the motor
vehicle to which they are specifically designed. The apparent
purpose of the subject merchandise is to protect motor vehicles
from damage caused by harsh weather or other outside forces.
In HRL 087596, we ruled that the automobile covers were
classified under subheading 8708.99.5080, HTSUSA, which provides
for parts and accessories for motor vehicles.
ISSUE:
Are motor vehicle covers properly classified under heading
8708, which provides for parts and accessories for motor
vehicles, or under heading 6307, which provides for other made up
textile articles?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
The Explanatory Notes (EN) to the Harmonized Commodity
Description and Coding System constitute the official
interpretation of the nomenclature at the international level.
While not legally binding, they do represent the considered views
of classification experts of the Harmonized System Committee. It
has therefore been the practice of the Customs Service to follow,
whenever possible, the terms of the EN when interpreting the
HTSUSA.
The EN to heading 6307 state, in pertinent part, that the
heading includes "[l]oose covers for motor-cars." (Emphasis
added). In HRL 087596, we distinguished between "loose" motor
vehicle covers and motor vehicle covers that fit snugly over the
shape of an automobile. We found that the instant covers were
designed to fit tightly to the contours of various motor
vehicles. Hence, we ruled that the merchandise was not
classifiable under heading 6307. Instead, we classified these
items as parts and accessories for motor vehicles.
We have re-examined the above-quoted language in light of
heading 6306, which covers "Tarpaulins, Awnings and Sunblinds;
Tents; Sails for Boats, Sailboards or Landcraft; Camping Goods."
The EN to heading 6306 state, in part, that:
This heading covers a range of textile articles usually
made from strong, close-woven canvas:
(1) Tarpaulins. These are used to protect goods
stored in the open or loaded on ships,
wagons, lorries, etc. against bad
weather...Tarpaulins are generally in the
form of rectangular sheets, hemmed along the
sides, and, and may be fitted with eyelets,
cords, straps, etc. Tarpaulins which are
specially shaped (e.g., for covering
hayricks, decks of small vessels, lorries,
etc.) also fall in this heading provided they
are flat.
Tarpaulins should not be confused with
loose covers for motor-cars, machines, etc.,
made of tarpaulin material to the shape of
these articles, nor with flat protective
sheets of lightweight material made up in a
similar manner to tarpaulins (heading 6307).
(Emphasis added).
Motor vehicle covers serve the same function as tarpaulins; i.e.
they protect automobiles from bad weather. These covers would be
classified as tarpaulins but for the fact that they are not in
the form of flat rectangular sheets. The EN to 6306 specify that
tarpaulins should not be confused with covers for motor vehicles
made to the shape of these articles, which are classifiable in
heading 6307.
We have reached two conclusions based on the language of the
EN to 6306. First, there is no reason to distinguish between
"loose" motor vehicle covers and fitted covers. The EN to 6306
indicate that covers for motor vehicles shaped to the form of a
vehicle are still classifiable in heading 6307. There is no need
to further distinguish between covers that are shaped to the form
of a vehicle, yet are loosely draped over its contours, and
covers that fit tightly to the form of the vehicle. Hence, HRL
087596 was incorrect to the extent it relied on this distinction.
Second, the EN to heading 6306 make it clear that the
authors of the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System
did not intend for motor vehicle covers to be classified as parts
and accessories for motor vehicles. Instead, automobile covers
must be viewed as items related to tarpaulins. Tarpaulins are
flat rectangular covers designed to protect goods in the open,
and are classified independently from the articles they protect.
As motor vehicle covers are not flat, they are not classifiable
as tarpaulins under heading 6306. However, this fact does not
transform these covers into parts and accessories. Rather, they
are to be classified as other made up textile articles not more
specifically described in the Nomenclature under heading 6307.
Accordingly, we conclude that HRL 087596 was in error in holding
that motor vehicle covers are classifiable as parts and
accessories to motor vehicles.
HOLDING:
The subject merchandise is classifiable under subheading
6307.90.9986, HTSUSA, which provides for other made up articles,
other, other, other, other, other. The applicable rate of duty
is 7 percent ad valorem.
This notice to you should be considered a revocation of HRL
087596 under 19 CFR 177.9(d)(1). It is not to be applied
retroactively to HRL 087596 (19 CFR 177.9(d)(2)) and will not,
therefore, affect past transactions for the importation of your
client's merchandise under that ruling. However, for the
purposes of future transactions in merchandise of this type, HRL
087596 will not be valid precedent. We recognize that pending
transactions may be adversely affected by this revocation, in
that current contracts for importations arriving at a port
subsequent to this decision will be classified pursuant to it.
If such a situation arises, your client may, at its discretion,
notify this office and apply for relief from the binding effects
of this decision as may be warranted by the circumstances.
However, please be advised that in some instances involving
import restraints, such relief may require separate approvals
from other government agencies.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director