CON-9-12
OT:RR:CTF:ER
H240090 MES
Ross Lyle
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
2108 21st Ave. South
P.O. Box 789
Great Falls, MT 59403-0789
RE: Temporary importation under bond of a Truck under 9813.00.50, HTSUS
Dear Mr. Lyle:
This is in response to your request for internal advice, dated September 14, 2012, on behalf of Norman G. Jensen, Inc., (“Jensen”), which we received on March 27, 2013. Your request is regarding whether a truck with a permanently mounted fuel tank may be entered under a temporary importation under bond (TIB).
FACTS:
In your letter, you request internal advice regarding CBP’s denial of Jensen’s request to bring a truck into the United States from Canada under TIB provision, 9813.00.50, HTSUS. You state that applications to use 9813.00.50, HTSUS, to enter vehicles that will transport domestic merchandise point-to-point in the United States are common, and ask for assistance in determining if you are correctly applying the requirements of subheading 9813.00.50 to vehicles that will carry merchandise point-to-point in the United States.
Regarding the truck at issue, you state that the “trailer has a permanently mounted fuel tank and was to be used to transport fuel from point-to-point in the United States.” Jensen describes the truck as a “pick-up truck and trailer containing equipment and a fuel tank with no fuel being brought to the job site from Canada.” Regarding the fuel tank, Jensen states that it is for aviation fuel only, and notes that it was imported with other materials in a 16’ trailer and that if the fuel tank is filled, it will be from “USA stores to be used ONLY to support the Hughes 369D helicopter,” which was previously imported under TIB for an exploration project. Regarding the equipment contained in the truck, Jensen states that “the trailer also contains all the equipment necessary for supporting this helicopter during exploration projects.” Moreover, Jensen cites to HQ 223970, dated September 29, 2002, which stated that , “[t]he restrictions on the use in local traffic (sometimes called “point-to-point” traffic) (see 19 CFR 123.14(c)) are not applicable to goods which are entered under Chapter 98, HTSUS, since such articles are not engaged in international traffic but rather are imported.” As such, Jensen asks that CBP grant their request to enter the truck under TIB.
ISSUES:
Whether the truck qualifies for duty-free entry under subheading 9813.00.50, HTSUS.
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Subheading 9813.00.50, HTSUS, provides for the temporary entry of professional equipment, tools of trade, repair components for equipment or tools admitted under this heading and camping equipment, imported by or for nonresidents sojourning temporarily in the United States and for use of such nonresidents. Articles may not be imported for sale or sale on approval and may remain in this country, without the payment of duty, for a period of one year from the date of importation. However, upon application to the district director at the port where the entry is filed, this period may be extended for one or more further periods which, when added to the initial one year, shall not exceed a total of three years. See U.S. Note 1(a) of Subchapter XIII, HTSUS. Under U.S. Note 1(b) of Subchapter XIII, entry shall be made by the nonresident importing the articles or by an organization represented by the nonresident which is established under the laws of a foreign country or has its principal place of business in a foreign country.
CBP has issued rulings regarding the eligibility of vehicles for TIB treatment as professional equipment or tools of the trade under subheading 9813.00.50, HTSUS. In HQ 222651, dated January 7, 1991, we held that mobile paper shredding units (trucks consisting of a truck chassis with a custom dual compartment truck body and a shredder/compactor) qualified under subheading 9813.00.50, HTSUS. In that case, the mobile paper shredders enabled the commercial shredding operations to take place at various locations in the United States. In HQ 223970, dated September 29, 2002, we held that a mobile x-ray unit (a vehicle outfitted with both affixed and portable x-ray equipment) qualified under subheading 9813.00.50, HTSUS. The mobile x-ray unit enabled the x-ray services to be offered at various client facilities in the United States, such as nursing homes, detention centers, and private homes. In each case, it was demonstrated that the vehicles contained equipment which was necessary to the performance of the work to be done.
In the case at hand, Jensen describes the truck as a “pick-up truck and trailer containing equipment and a fuel tank with no fuel being brought to the job site from Canada.” This fuel tank is for “aviation fuel only, was imported with other materials in a 16’ trailer and if filled, will be from USA stores to be used ONLY to support the Hughes 369D helicopter, previously imported under TIB and doing an exploration project.” Regarding the equipment, it is stated that “the trailer also contains all the equipment necessary for supporting this helicopter during exploration projects.” However, this is the extent of the description of the role and nature of the equipment contained in the trailer. In the rulings cited above, both the mobile x-ray vehicle and the mobile shredding vehicle had permanent fixtures consisting of the equipment enabling the performance of the work to be done (i.e., the x-raying and the shredding). The relationship between the permanent fixtures on the vehicles and the work being done was crucial to determining that the vehicles qualified for entry under 9813.00.50, HTSUS. Here, there is no elaboration of how the truck at issue is necessary to enable the work to be done, or any description of the equipment. As described, the truck is simply a means of transporting items generally, rather than one that is necessary to the performance of the work to be done. As such, it does not qualify for TIB entry under 9813.00.50, HTSUS.
Finally, Jensen cites to HQ 223970, dated September 29, 2002, which stated that, “[t]he restrictions on the use in local traffic (sometimes called “point-to-point” traffic) (see 19 CFR 123.14(c)) are not applicable to goods which are entered under Chapter 98, HTSUS, since such articles are not engaged in international traffic but rather are imported.” As stated above, the truck at issue does not qualify to be entered under Chapter 98, HTSUS. Therefore, the exception from point-to-point restrictions is not applicable. For information regarding the applicability of point-to-point restrictions, please contact the Cargo Security, Carriers & Immigration Branch, Regulations & Rulings, Office of International Trade.
HOLDING:
The truck does not qualify for duty-free entry under subheading 9813.00.50, HTSUS. This decision is limited to the specific facts set forth herein.
Sincerely,
Myles B. Harmon, Director
Commercial and Trade Facilitation Division