CLA-2 OT:RR:CTF:CPMM H265674 NCD
Pat Fumagalli
President and CEO
Bestway USA, Inc.
3249 E. Harbour Drive
Phoenix, AZ 85043
RE: Revocation of NY N249247, dated February 10, 2014, and NY K88969, dated September 10, 2004; tariff classification of plastic airbeds
Dear Mr. Fumagalli:
This is in reference to New York Ruling Letter (NY) N249247, issued to Bestway USA, Inc. (“Bestway”) on February 10, 2014, involving classification of the Bestway Comfort Quest Premium Air Bed/Queen under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). NY N249247 was issued by U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) in response to Bestway’s letter, dated January 10, 2014, requesting classification of the subject airbed under the HTSUS (“ruling request”). We have reviewed NY N249247, determined that it is incorrect, and, for the reasons set forth below, are revoking that ruling.
We have also reviewed NY K88969, dated September 10, 2004, which similarly involves classification of a plastic “airbed” under the HTSUS. As with NY N249247, we have determined that NY K88969 is incorrect and, for the reasons set forth below, are revoking that ruling.
Pursuant to section 625(c)(1), Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. §1625(c)(1)), as amended by section 623 of Title VI, notice of the proposed action was published in the Customs Bulletin, Vol. 51, No. 29, on July 19, 2017. Five comments opposing the instant action were received in response to the notice and are addressed below.
FACTS:
Both NY N249247 and NY K88969 involve products designated “airbeds.” In NY N249247, CBP described the product at issue as follows:
SKU number 67404 is described as the Bestway Comfort Quest Premium Air Bed/Queen. The Air Bed is an inflatable queen size bed which can be used for sleeping accommodations for the home or when traveling away, and is designed to be placed on the floor. The Air Bed measures 80 inches in length by 64 inches in width by 19 inches in height when inflated. The Air Bed is made of Polyvinyl chloride (PVC) with flocking material on top, has a built-in pillow and features two inflatable chambers of which the lower chamber serves as a box-spring while the upper chamber serves as a mattress. The Air Bed is supported by internal I-Beam construction which provides for the bed’s sturdiness. Complementing the Air bed is a heavy duty repair patch and a travel bag. This item has a built-in 110-120V electric air pump for ease of inflating.
A bill of materials enclosed with Bestway’s ruling request indicates that the product is made up almost entirely of polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and the plasticizer diisononyl phthalate (DINP), and contains small amounts of rayon on its uppermost surface. Our research indicates that its internal I-beams are similarly made up of PVC. See U.S. Patent App. No. 14/566,075 (filed Dec. 10, 2014); U.S. Patent App. No. 11/789,211 (filed Apr. 23, 2007).
In NY K88969, the product at issue is described as follows:
The merchandise to be imported is a Portable Air Bed, Style No. 248486. The item measures 80"L x 60"W x 22"H when inflated and features dual chamber construction. The upper chamber serves as a mattress with adjustable firmness. The lower chamber doubles as a box spring platform that provides extra firmness and support for a traditional bed. The item is composed of 100% plastic vinyl with a flocked, waterproof nylon top. Included are a fast fill pump and a duffel bag with shoulder strap for transport.
In both NY N249247 and NY K88969, the subject airbeds were classified in heading 9403, HTSUS. They were specifically classified in subheading 9403.70.80, HTSUS, which provides for “Other furniture and parts thereof: Furniture of plastics: Other.”
ISSUE:
Whether the subject plastic airbeds are classified as “other articles of plastics” in heading 3926, HTSUS, or as “other furniture” in heading 9403, HTSUS?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Merchandise imported into the United States is classified under the HTSUS. Tariff classification is governed by the principles set forth in the General Rules of Interpretation (GRIs) and, in the absence of special language or context which requires otherwise, by the Additional U.S. Rules of Interpretation. The GRIs and the Additional U.S. Rules of Interpretation are part of the HTSUS and are to be considered statutory provisions of law for all purposes.
GRI 1 requires that classification be determined first according to the terms of the headings of the tariff schedule and any relative section or chapter notes and, unless otherwise required, according to the remaining GRIs taken in their appropriate order. GRI 3(b) provides, in relevant part, that “composite goods consisting of different materials or made up of different components, and goods put up in sets for retail sale…shall be classified as if they consisted of the material or component which gives them their essential character, insofar as this criterion is applicable.”
The 2017 HTSUS provisions under consideration are as follows:
3926 Other articles of plastics and articles of other materials of headings 3901 to 3914:
3926.90 Other:
3926.90.75 Pneumatic mattresses and other inflatable articles, not elsewhere specified or included
9403 Other furniture and parts thereof:
9403.70 Furniture of plastics:
9403.70.80 Other
At the outset, as noted in our proposed decision letter and the above-mentioned comments, both headings under consideration are subject to exclusionary notes referencing products of the chapter in which the other heading falls. Chapter 39, Note 2(x), HTSUS (hereinafter “Note 2(x)” for ease of reference), provides as follows:
This chapter does not cover:
* * *
Articles of chapter 94 (for example, furniture, lamps and lighting fittings, illuminated signs, prefabricated buildings)…
Chapter 94, Note 1(a), HTSUS (hereinafter “Note 1(a)” for ease of reference), provides as follows:
This Chapter does not cover:
Pneumatic or water mattresses, pillows or cushions, of Chapter 39, 40 or 63…
An approach to reconciling exclusionary notes of varying specificity was recently set forth by the Court of International Trade (C.I.T.) in Rubies Costume Co. v. United States, No. 13-00407, slip. op. at 10-13 (CIT Oct. 31, 2017). That case involved application of Notes 1(l) to Chapter 42 and 1(t) to Section XI, which broadly exclude “[a]rticles of chapter 95” from Chapters 42, 61, and 62, respectively, and Note 1 to Chapter 95, which precludes classification of, specifically, “fancy dress, of textiles, of chapter 61 or 62” and “[s]ports bags or other containers of heading 4202, 4203, or 4204” in Chapter 95. Id. Because the notes appertaining to Chapters 42, 62, and 63 set forth broad, chapter-wide exclusions, whereas Note 1 to Chapter 95 sets forth a narrow, specific exclusion with respect to articles of Chapters 61 and 62, the latter was determined to “provide exceptions to the general rule of classification” under Chapter 95. Id. at 13. In other words, the C.I.T. held, the statutory scheme “expressly resolve[s] this conflict in favor of classification in chapter 95 unless the article falls into one of Chapter 95’s exclusionary notes.” Id. (citing Michael Simon Design, Inc. v. United States, 501 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2007)). As such, the proper approach to classifying the merchandise at issue was to initially determine whether it fell within the narrow subset of articles enumerated in Note 1 to Chapter 95, in which case it was excluded from Chapter 95, and to subsequently ascertain the correct classification among the remaining provisions at issue. See id. (“[T]he Santa Suit components are covered by the exclusions to Chapter 95; thus, the court need not and does not reach the issue of whether they constitute festive articles.”).
Like in Rubies, the exclusionary notes at issue in the instant matter are not equal in specificity. While Note 1(a) applies to a narrow subset of goods – pneumatic or water mattresses, pillows or cushions” – Note 2(x) applies sweepingly to “[a]rticles of Chapter 94.” Therefore, in accordance with the approach set forth by the C.I.T. in Rubies, Note 1(a) “provides an exception” to “the general rule of classification” under Chapter 94. Should the instant merchandise fall within the scope of Note 1(a), it is precluded from classification in Chapter 94. That being the case, we must initially determine whether the products qualify both as “pneumatic mattresses” and as articles “of Chapter 39” pursuant to the note.
As to the former, the term “pneumatic mattress” does not appear in either of the headings at issue. Nevertheless, it merits treatment as a tariff term by virtue of its inclusion in a legal note. See BenQ Am. Corp. v. United States, 646 F.3d 1371, 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (“According to the HTSUS’s preface, the legal text of the HTSUS includes all provisions enacted by Congress, including Section and Chapter Notes.”). It must therefore be understood in accordance with its ordinary meaning as imparted by, inter alia, dictionary definitions. See Tyco Fire Prods. v. United States, 841 F.3d 1353, 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (relying on dictionary definitions to determine the meaning of language appearing in Note 1(c) to Chapter 84); see also Rubie's Costume Co. v. United States, 337 F.3d 1350, 1356-57 (Fed. Cir. 2003) (holding that consultation of dictionary definitions to ascertain the scope of exclusionary notes is appropriate). In response to several of the comments, we have undertaken an expansive review of dictionary definitions pertaining to “pneumatic,” “mattress,” “air mattress,” and “airbed,” the latter two of which, while not statutory terms, nevertheless help inform our understanding of “pneumatic mattress.”
Definitions of “pneumatic” and “mattress” conjunctively indicate that a “pneumatic mattress” is a sack, case, or pad which, when filled with compressed air, provides a surface upon which one can sleep. See American Heritage College Dictionary 29, 855, 1073 (4th ed. 2004) (defining “pneumatic” as “filled with air, esp. compressed air” and defining “mattress” in part as “an airtight inflatable pad used as or on a bed”); Definition Pneumatic, Merriam-Webster.com, https://www.merriam-webster.com/?dictionary/pneumatic (last visited Oct. 6, 2017) (defining “pneumatic” as “adapted for holding or inflated with compressed air”); Definition Mattress, Merriam-Webster.com, https://www.merriam-webster.com/?dictionary/?mattress (last visited Oct. 6, 2017) (defining “mattress” primarily as “a fabric case filled with resilient material” and secondarily as “an inflatable airtight sack for use as a mattress”); Definition Mattress, Oxforddictionaries.com, https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/mattress (last visited Oct. 6, 2017) (defining mattress as “a fabric case…used for sleeping on”); Definition Pneumatic, Oxforddictionaries.com, https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/?definition/pneumatic (last visited Oct. 6, 2017) (defining “pneumatic” as “containing or operated by air or gas under pressure”). Various dictionaries set forth nearly-identical definitions of “airbed” as an inflatable case which, when filled with air, provides a surface on which one can lie and sleep. See Definition Airbed, Merriam-Webster.com https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/air%20bed (last visited Oct. 8, 2017) (defining “air bed” as “a soft plastic case that can be filled with air and used as a bed”); Definition, Airbed, Dictionary.Cambridge.org, http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/?dictionary/english/airbed (last visited Oct. 8, 2017) (defining “airbed” as “a large, rectangular rubber or plastic bag that you fill with air so that you can lie on it in water or use it as a bed”).
Other definitions directly equate “airbeds” with air-filled mattresses and indicate that the terms are used interchangeably. See Definition Airbed, Oxforddictionaries.com, https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/airbed (last visited Oct. 8, 2017) (defining “airbed” as “an inflatable mattress”); Definition Air Bed, Macmillandictionary.com, http://www.macmillandictionary.com/?us/?dictionary/?american/?air-bed (last visited Oct. 8, 2017) (defining “air bed” as “a mattress…that you fill with air to make a type of temporary bed”); Definition Air Bed, Dictionary.com, http://www.dictionary.com/?browse/air-bed?s=t see also (last visited Oct. 8, 2017) (defining “air bed” as “a bed made by inflating a mattress like bag”); Definition Air Mattress, Collinsdictionary.com, https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/?dictionary/?english/air-mattress (last visited Oct. 6, 2017) (defining “air mattress” in part as “another name for air bed”). In sum, therefore, the dictionary definitions consulted indicate that cases or sacks used for reclining or sleeping upon inflation with compressed air fall within the ambit of “pneumatic mattress,” irrespective of whether they are referred to as “air mattresses” or “air beds.”
Both products at issue are plastic sacks or cases into which air can be injected and retained. To the extent they are inflatable, they indisputably qualify as “pneumatic.” Moreover, when inflated, they provide a surface upon which users can recline, sleep, and generally relax. Therefore, as inflatable cases used to induce or facilitate sleep, they fall squarely within the definition of “pneumatic mattresses,” irrespective of whether they are described in NY N249247 and NY K88969 as “airbeds.” In opposing this determination, various commenters contend that the subject articles cannot be characterized simply as empty sacks given their complex constructions, relatively high durability, and comparatively high price points. However, none of these factors are determinative of whether a given article can be defined as a “pneumatic mattress.” As to commenters’ specific contention that the products’ internal “beams” and dual-chamber construction render them more than “simple, empty blow-up sacks,” there is nothing to suggest that sacks or cases cannot incorporate internal structures. Nor is there anything to indicate that the products at issue are, in essence, anything other than encasements for air. In fact, the inclusion of a single built-in air pump with the Bestway Comfort Quest Premium Air Bed/Queen indicates that the product’s chambers cannot be separately inflated, and are therefore constitutive of a single large case.
The commenters also contend that the products at issue cannot be considered “pneumatic mattresses” insofar as they are designated “airbeds” in commerce. However, as stated above, numerous lexicographic sources indicate that the terms are semantically identical. Moreover, our review of various retail channels indicates that the two terms are even used interchangeably in commerce, despite the commenters’ contentions to the contrary. In fact, Bestway Comfort Quest Airbeds, as well as other Bestway products, are intermittently referred to as “air mattresses” by retailers. See Target, Bestway Comfort Quest Air Mattress, https://www.target.com/p/bestway-comfort-quest-restaira-premium-inflatable-air-mattress-double-high-queen-white/-/A-15720058 (last visited Oct. 6, 2017), and Walmart, Bestway 80x60x17-Inch Inflatable Raised Air Mattress With Built-In Pump | 67552, https://www.walmart.com/ip/Bestway-80x60x17-Inch-Inflatable-Raised-Air-Mattress-With-Built-In-Pump-67552/46074355 (last visited Oct. 6, 2017) (both characterizing Bestway Comfort Quest products as “air mattresses”).
Other products resembling those at issue in both NY N249247 and NY K88969, insofar as they include lower foundational chambers replete with internal beams or coils, are similarly referred to or categorized as “air mattresses” by retailers and consumers alike. See Ace Hardware, Intex Raised Downy Queen Air Mattress, http://?www.acehardware.com/product/index.jsp?productId=32442406&cp=2568443.2568448.2626064.41523876 (last visited Oct. 6, 2017); Target, AeroBed® One-Touch Comfort™ Air Mattress - Double High Twin (Gray), https://www.target.com/p/aerobed-174-one-touch-comfort-153-air-mattress-double-high-twin-gray/-/A-49144242#lnk=?sametab (last visited Oct. 6, 2017); Amazon, Home & Kitchen: Bedding: Air Mattresses & Accessories: Air Mattresses, supra; Furniture.com, Definition of Air Bed, https://www.furniture.com/?mattress/guide/glossary/air-bed (last visited Oct. 8, 2017) (Air beds, also called air mattresses, are inflatable mattresses…”); and The Sleep Judge, Best Air Mattress Reviews: Buyers Guide, https://www.thesleepjudge.com/best-air-mattress/ (last visited Oct. 8, 2017). As such, while we recognize that the Bestway Comfort Quest Premium Air Bed/Queen and substantially similar products are referred to frequently, albeit non-universally, as “airbeds” in commerce, we are not convinced that this is a sufficient basis to delineate them from “air mattresses” and, by extension, “pneumatic mattresses.” That said, we also recognize that the interchangeability of “beds” and “mattresses” is limited to inflatable items, and that mattresses filled with solid material remain lexicographically and commercially distinct from “beds.”
Having determined that the articles are “pneumatic mattresses” within the meaning of Note 1(a), we next consider whether they are articles “of Chapter 39” for purposes of the note. To this end, heading 3926, HTSUS, applies to “other” articles of plastic. EN 39.26 states, with respect to heading 3926, that “[t]his heading covers articles, not elsewhere specified or included, of plastics.” According to NY K88969, the structure of the product at issue in that ruling is comprised 100% of plastic vinyl. Similarly, in the case of NY N249247, the bill of materials and patents pertaining to the subject product and its internal I-beam collectively indicate that plastic, in the form of PVC and DINP, accounts for the near entirety of the product’s constituent materials. A review of diagrams included in that bill of materials, as well as the above-cited retail product descriptions pertaining to the Bestway Comfort Quest Premium Air Bed/Queen and substantially similar goods, indicates that the plastic comprises the overwhelming majority of the products’ masses and surface areas. We therefore conclude that the products are prima facie classifiable in heading 3926 as “articles of plastic.”
We do note that both products incorporate minor non-plastic components and are accompanied by non-plastic accessories. Specifically, the products incorporate top layers of textile flocking and, in the case of NY N249247, an air pump of unknown material(s), and they also include separate carrying bags, a separate repair patch in the case of NY N249247, and a separate air pump in the case of NY K88969. However, even if the articles could be considered “sets” or “composite goods” on account of these non-plastic materials, it is their plastic constituents which clearly impart the articles’ essential character pursuant to GRI 3(b). Again, plastic comprises the entirety of the articles’ structures and the near-entirety of their whole compositions. See EN(VIII) to GRI 3(b) (“Essential character…may, for example, be determined by the nature of the material or component, its bulk, quantity, weight or value, or by the role of a constituent material in relation to the use of the goods.”); see also Home Depot USA, Inc. v. United States, 491 F.3d 1334, 1337 (Fed. Cir. 2007) (“Many factors should be considered when determining the essential character…?specifically including but not limited to those factors enumerated in Explanatory Note (VIII) to GRI 3(b).”). Moreover, plastic is clearly the most important constituent with respect to the articles’ use, in that the airbeds could not function as surfaces for reclining, relaxing, and sleeping but for the presence of the plastic. See Pomeroy Collection, Ltd. v. United States, 893 F. Supp. 2d 1269, 1287 (Ct. Int’l Trade 2013) (“The function of each article as a whole is to hold and display an object or objects; and the glass vessel is the component that gives the article its ability to serve that function…Thus, the essential character of the Floor Articles is imparted by the glass vessels.”). By any measure, therefore, the subject articles are “articles of plastic” within the meaning of heading 3926, HTSUS. By extension, they are products of Chapter 39 for purposes of Note 1(a).
In sum, the products are “pneumatic mattresses…of Chapter 39” within the meaning of Note 1(a) to Chapter 94. The products are consequently excluded from heading 9403, HTSUS, by application of the note. Moreover, because they fall within the scope of heading 3926, HTSUS, the only remaining provision under consideration, they are classified there.
As to the above analysis, one commenter contests our treatment of Note 1(a) as sufficiently preclusive of the subject articles’ classification in heading 9403, HTSUS. The commenter contends that “where an article is potentially classifiable in different headings which are mutually exclusive, it is improper to rely on an exclusionary note before applying the rule of relative specificity (GRI 3(a)) between competing headings.” To support this proposition, the commenter cites Sharp Microelec. Tech., Inc. v. United States, 122 F.3d 1446, 1450-51 (Fed. Cir. 1997), and Bauer Nike Hockey, USA, Inc. v. United States, 393 F.3d 1246, 1253 n.6 (Fed. Cir. 2004). However, only the above-discussed Rubies sets forth a germane and appropriate framework for reconciling competing exclusionary notes of varying degrees of specificity. Sharp did not even involve application of mutual exclusionary notes or GRI 3(a). Rather, at issue in that case was solely the chronological interplay of a “not specified elsewhere” heading requirement and a lone pertinent exclusionary note. See Sharp, 122 F.3d at 1450-51. Insofar as the court employed the “rule of relative specificity,” this was solely for the purpose of applying heading text pursuant to GRI 1. See id. At no point did the analysis proceed beyond GRI 1, nor should it have, as was made explicit by the trial court and noted by the C.A.F.C. See id. at 1449 (“The [trial] court also noted ‘in passing’ that the relative specificity analysis it was undertaking was mandated by heading 9013 and General Rules of Interpretation (GRI) 1 of the HTSUS and not by GRI 3(a).”). To the extent the C.A.F.C. did subsequently address this issue in Bauer, it was non-binding dictum. Namely, its discussion of GRI 3(a) followed an initial, conclusive determination that the merchandise at issue there was demonstrably classifiable in only one of the two provisions under consideration. See Bauer, 393 F.3d at 1250-51; see also Pima West. v. United States, 20 C.I.T. 110, 115, 915 F. Supp. 399, 403 (CIT 1996) (determining that where “goods are not classifiable under two or more headings,” any “discussion…of the relative specificity of headings…would be dictum”).
Moreover, applying GRI 3(a) as a means of reconciling Note 1(a) and Note 2(x) would constitute a misapplication of the HTSUS. GRI 1 specifically provides that “classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes” and that, only “provided such headings or notes do not otherwise require,” by reference to the remaining GRIs (emphasis added). See also Faus Group, Inc. v. United States, 581 F.3d 1369, 1372 (Fed. Cir. 2009) (“When determining the correct classification for merchandise, a court first construes the language of the headings in question, in light of any related section or chapter notes…If goods are prima facie classifiable under two or more headings, the court compares the language of the headings and classifies the goods under the heading providing the most specific description” (emphasis added)). Similarly, applying the HTSUS and its attendant GRIs in a manner that nullifies the effect of a legal note, as would be the case if the broader exclusion of Note 2(x) were allowed to swallow the narrow exception of Note 1(a), is impermissible. See Rubies, No. 13-00407, slip op. at 31 (“Note 1(e) excludes a subset of festive articles that also meet certain requirements. Undue emphasis on the festive or make-believe nature of the article would nullify Note 1(e); such an interpretive approach has long been disfavored.”); see also BenQ, 646 F.3d at 1376 (“The Section and Chapter Notes ‘are not optional interpretive rules, but are statutory law.’”).
As such, we remain of the view that the subject merchandise is excluded from heading 9403, HTSUS, and is instead classified in heading 3926, HTSUS. This outcome is consistent with CBP’s long-standing treatment of products designated either “airbeds” or “air mattresses” (or, alternatively, “inflatable mattresses”). See HQ 954544, dated August 19, 1993; NY N199311, dated January 24, 2012; NY N105077, dated May 28, 2010; NY J85129, dated June 18, 2003; NY G81090, dated August 28, 2000; NY E84954, dated August 5, 1999; NY D89731, dated March 26, 1999 (all classifying articles referred to as “air mattresses” or “inflatable mattresses” in heading 3926); see also NY N190048, dated November 17, 2011; NY N120304, dated September 10, 2010; NY C83496, dated January 28, 1998; NY C81575, dated November 18, 1997 (all classifying articles referred to as “airbeds” in heading 3926). It is not, despite commenters’ assertions to the contrary, inconsistent with rulings classifying other inflatable furniture items in heading 9403, HTSUS, including inflatable “air cribs,” inflatable “sofa beds,” and an inflatable kid’s bed replete with headboards and siderails. See NY N039360, dated September 25, 2008; NY N036375, dated August 29, 2008; and NY N018156, dated October 15, 2007 (pertaining to “Air Crib”); see also NY L85712, dated June 22, 2005, and NY R01434, dated February 16, 2005 (pertaining to inflatable sofa beds); see also NY K81621, dated December 2003 (pertaining to “Kid’s Inflatable Car Bed”).
Unlike the instant merchandise, the air cribs were made up of separately inflatable components of which most functioned as enclosure mechanisms and only one constituted an actual “pad” for reclining and sleeping, and are thus commercially recognizable as “cribs” rather than “mattresses” or “beds.” See Amazon, The Air Crib, https://www.amazon.com?/??BTVco-AC101-The-Air-Crib/dp/B0013O72J4 (last visited Oct. 8, 2017). Likewise, the inflatable “sofa beds” are in the form of sofas that are convertible to mattresses, and as such, are not lexicographically, commercially, or functionally equivalent to items that function solely as surfaces for reclining and sleeping. See Walmart, Pure Comfort 5-in-1 Sofa Bed, Black, https://www.walmart.com/?ip/?Pure-Comfort-5-in-1-Sofa-Bed-Black/17641106 (last visited Oct. 8, 2017). The inflatable kid’s bed’s inclusion of side rails and a headboard render it more than an inflatable case upon which the user reclines, particularly if these extra components are separately inflatable. That said, we intend to review NY K81621 in further detail to ensure that it is in fact consistent with the proper application of Note 1(a) to Chapter 94.
Lastly, we disagree with one commenter’s assertion that the present action would impose a “sudden,” “unexpected,” and “unwarranted” cost with respect to imports of the subject merchandise and substantially similar products. Our action cannot be considered “unwarranted” in light of our statutory duty to rectify inconsistencies in our rulings so as to keep the trade community clearly and completely informed of its obligations. Nor can it be considered “sudden” or “unexpected” in view of the numerous prior rulings classifying “air mattresses” in heading 3926, HTSUS, and, in particular, 1997 and 1998 rulings classifying products specifically described as “airbeds” in the heading. See NY C83496, supra; NY C81575, supra; NY N190048, supra; NY N120304, supra.
HOLDING:
Under the authority of GRI 1, the subject airbeds are classified in heading 3926, HTSUS, specifically in subheading 3926.90.7500, HTSUSA (Annotated), which provides for: “Other articles of plastics and articles of other materials of headings 3901 to 3914: Pneumatic mattresses and other inflatable articles, not elsewhere specified or included.” The 2017 column one general rate of duty rate is 4.2% ad valorem.
Duty rates are provided for your convenience and are subject to change. The text of the most recent HTSUS and the accompanying duty rates are provided on the internet at www.usitc.gov/tata/hts/.
EFFECT ON OTHER RULINGS:
NY N249247, dated February 10, 2014, and NY K88969, September 10, 2004, are hereby REVOKED in accordance with the above analysis.
Sincerely,
Myles B. Harmon, Director
Commercial and Trade Facilitation Division
CC: Rolando E. Portal
ABC Distributing, LLC
6301 East 10th Avenue
Hialeah, FL 33013