OT:RR:CTF:VS H351954 RMC
Yeshwin Gunanithi
Epifeast Inc.
1401 21st St., Suite 11835
Sacramento, CA 95811
RE: Country of Origin and UKFTA Eligibility of the Posha Autonomous Cooking Appliance
Dear Mr. Gunanithi:
This is in response to your correspondence of July 25, 2025, in which you ask U.S. Customs
and Border Protection (“CBP”) to address the country of origin of the Posha autonomous cooking
appliance (“Posha”) and its eligibility for preferential tariff treatment under the United States-Korea
Free Trade Agreement (“UKFTA”). Your request, submitted as an electronic ruling request, was
forwarded to this office from the National Commodity Specialist Division for response.
We determined that certain information submitted in connection with this internal advice
request should be treated as confidential. Therefore, pursuant to the requirements of 19 C.F.R.
§177.2(b)(7), the information contained within brackets and all attachments to this internal advice
request, forwarded to our office, will not be released to the public and will be withheld from
published versions of this decision.
FACTS:
You describe Posha as a “private robot chef” or as “an intelligent, countertop autonomous
cooking appliance that automates the preparation of full meals.” You state that it is classified in
subheading 8516.60.40, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”).
To use the device, the user selects a recipe on Posha’s screen or on the companion mobile
application. The recipe will indicate the names and quantities of the ingredients (spices, produce,
meat, etc.) that the user must load into the device. Once the user instructs Posha to begin, the
device will complete the meal autonomously, adding ingredients, stirring as needed, seasoning the
food, and controlling the cooking temperature.
Posha is composed of five main components: (1) a macro dispensing system for solid
ingredients; (2) a micro dispensing system for spices and powders; (3) a software-controlled
induction burner; (4) a motorized stirrer assembly synchronized with recipe logic; and (5) an
integrated camera and LED system for food detection and processing monitoring.
The following bill of materials was provided:
Group Material Quantity Country of Originating Classification Value
Name Origin Status (USD)
(Per
Unit)
Core Electronic Motherboard 1 China or Non 8473.30.11 $[ ]
Assemblies Printed Korea Originating
Circuit or
Board Originating
Assembly
(“PCBA”)
(with System
on Module)
Induction 1 China or Non 8473.30.11 $[ ]
Board PCBA Korea Originating
or
Originating
Power & Induction 1 China Non 7409.11.10 $[ ]
Heating Coil Originating
Components
Ceramic 1 China Non 7020.00.60 $[ ]
Glass Originating
Cooking
Surface
SMPS 1 China Non 8504.40.95 $[ ]
(Switched- Originating
Mode Power
Supply)
Power Entry 1 China Non 8536.69.80 $[ ]
Connector Originating
Mechanical
Subassemblies
Macro Assembly Macro arm 4 China Non 7308.30.10 $[ ]
structure Originating
Servo 4 China Non 8501.10.40 $[ ]
motors Originating
Macro dock 4 China Non 3926.90.99 $[ ]
Originating
Pan 1 China Non 3926.90.99 $[ ]
enclosure Originating
(bottom)
2
Pan 1 China Non 3926.90.99 $[ ]
enclosure Originating
(top)
Macro 1 China Non 8473.30.11 $[ ]
breakout Originating
board
Micro 1 China Non 3926.90.99 $[ ]
drawer base Originating
Carousel 1 China Non 3926.90.99 $[ ]
Originating
Carousel 1 China Non 8501.10.40 $[ ]
Motor Originating
Dispending 1 China Non 8501.10.40 $[ ]
Motor Originating
Sensor 1 China Non 8543.70.45 $[ ]
Originating
Sensor 1 China Non 8473.30.11 $[ ]
Originating
Micro 1 China Non 8473.30.11 $[ ]
Breakout Originating
Board
Stirrer Assembly Stirrer Arm 1 China Non 8509.40.00 $[ ]
Originating
Stirrer Motor 1 China Non 8501.10.40 $[ ]
(BLDC) Originating
Pulleys 2 China Non 8483.50.90 $[ ]
Originating
Belt 1 China Non 4010.39.10 $[ ]
Originating
Magnetic 2 China Non 8536.69.80 $[ ]
Connector Originating
Gear 2 China Non 7308.30.10 $[ ]
Housing Originating
Stirrer 1 China Non 8544.42.90 $[ ]
Harness Originating
Display & Display 1 Taiwan Non 8531.20.00 $[ ]
Vision System Assembly Originating
Camera 1 China Non 8525.89.40 $[ ]
Module Originating
LED Strip 2 China Non 9405.42.82 $[ ]
Assembly Originating
Fluid Handling Pumps 2 China Non 8413.50.00 $[ ]
System Pumps (Oil/Water) Originating
Pipes / 6 China Non 3917.29.00 $[ ]
Tubing Originating
(rubber)
3
Flow Meter 2 China Non 9026.10.40 $[ ]
Originating
Structural & Base Frame 1 China Non 7308.30.10 $[ ]
Enclosure (metal) Originating
Components
Metal Top 1 China Non 7308.30.10 $[ ]
Cover Originating
Rubber Feet 4 China Non 4016.93.10 $[ ]
Originating
Rollers 4 China Non 8482.10.10 $[ ]
Originating
Plastic Front Cover 1 China Non 3926.90.99 $[ ]
Enclosure Parts Originating
Rear Cover 1 China Non 3926.90.99 $[ ]
Originating
Left Cover 1 China Non 3926.90.99 $[ ]
Originating
Right Cover 1 China Non 3926.90.99 $[ ]
Originating
Cable 1 China Non 8544.42.90 $[ ]
Originating
Usables Fasteners 60 China Non 7318.15.20 $[ ]
Originating
Zip Ties 20 China Non 3926.90.99 $[ ]
Originating
Adhesive 1 China Non 3919.10.20 $[ ]
Tape Originating
Retail 1 China Non 4819.10.00 $[ ]
Packaging Originating
Accessories Cooking Pan 1 China Non 7323.93.00 $[ ]
Originating
Spatulas 3 China Non 8215.91.90 $[ ]
Originating
Containers 4 China Non 3923.90.00 $[ ]
Originating
AC Power 1 China Non 8544.42.90 $[ ]
Cord Originating
Spice Pods 12 China Non 3926.90.99 $[ ]
Originating
Manual 1 China Non 4901.99.00 $[ ]
Originating
Three production scenarios are presented in the ruling request. In all three scenarios, one of
the five main components (the integrated camera and LED system) is assembled in Taiwan. Then,
depending on the scenario, the remaining production and assembly will occur between China and
Korea.
4
In the first scenario (“Scenario A”), the motherboard PCBA and induction board PCBA are
made in China through surface mount technology (“SMT”). Each of the remaining subassemblies is
then assembled in China, which generally involves fastening components, wiring connectors, and
performing visual inspections. The subassemblies are then fitted together, before Indian-origin
firmware is loaded onto the device. The device then undergoes final testing in Korea before being
placed in a box for shipment from Korea to the United States.
In the second scenario (“Scenario B”), as in Scenario A, the motherboard PCBA and
induction board PCBA are made in China through SMT. However, assembly of the stirrer
assembly, macro dispensing system, and micro dispensing system occurs in Korea with the same
processing (fastening components, wiring connectors, and performing visual inspections). The
remaining production steps, including fitting the subassemblies together, loading the Indian-origin
software, testing, and packaging, occur in China. The goods are then sent directly from China to the
United States.
In the third scenario (“Scenario C”), the motherboard PCBA and induction board PCBA are
made in Korea through SMT. All remaining production steps as described for the previous
production scenarios then occur in China, and the goods are shipped directly from China to the
United States.
In your ruling request, you ask us to determine the country of origin of Posha and its
eligibility for preferential tariff treatment under the UKFTA.
ISSUES:
I. What is the country of origin of Posha when imported into the United States?
II. Whether Posha is eligible for preferential tariff treatment under the UKFTA when it is
imported into the United States.
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
I. Country of Origin
Section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1304), provides that unless
excepted, every article of foreign origin imported into the United States 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 United States, the
English name of the country of origin of the article. Congressional intent in enacting 19 U.S.C. 1304
was “that the ultimate purchaser should be able to know by an inspection of the marking on the
imported goods the country of which the goods is the product. The evident purpose is to mark the
goods so that at the time of purchase the ultimate purchaser may, by knowing where the goods were
produced, be able to buy or refuse to buy them, if such marking should influence his will.” See
United States v. Friedlaender & Co., 27 C.C.P.A. 297, 302 (1940).
Part 134 of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) Regulations (19 CFR 134)
implements the country of origin marking requirements and exceptions of 19 U.S.C. 1304. Section
134.1(b), CBP Regulations (19 CFR 134.1(b)), defines “country of origin” as the country of
5
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
the marking laws and regulations. A substantial transformation occurs when, as a result of
manufacturing process, a new and different article emerges, having a distinct name, character or use,
which is different from that originally possessed by the article or material before being subjected to
the manufacturing process. See United States v. Gibson-Thomsen Co., Inc., 27 C.C.P.A. 267 (C.A.D. 98)
(1940).
In order to determine whether a substantial transformation occurs when components of
various origins are assembled into completed products, CBP considers the totality of the
circumstances and makes such determinations on a case-by-case basis. The country of origin of the
item’s components, extent of the processing that occurs within a country, and whether such
processing renders a product with a new name, character, and use are primary considerations in such
cases. Additionally, factors such as the resources expended on product design and development, the
extent and nature of post-assembly inspection and testing procedures, and worker skill required
during the actual manufacturing process will be considered when determining whether a substantial
transformation has occurred. No one factor is determinative.
Assembly operations that are minimal or simple, as opposed to complex or meaningful, will
generally not result in a substantial transformation. Factors which may be relevant in this evaluation
may include the nature of the operation (including the number of components assembled), the
number of different operations involved, and whether a significant period of time, skill, detail, and
quality control are necessary for the assembly operation. If the manufacturing or combining process
is a minor one which leaves the identity of the article intact, a substantial transformation has not
occurred. Uniroyal, Inc. v. United States (“Uniroyal”), 3 CIT 220, 542 F. Supp. 1026 (1982), aff’d 702 F.
2d 1022 (Fed. Cir. 1983).
In Headquarters Ruling (“HQ”) H304677, dated April 21, 2023, CBP held that the assembly
of Chinese-origin subassemblies into printers in Mexico did not result in a substantial
transformation. In that case, various components were assembled in China to create subassemblies
(or “printer transports”) that, at the time they were exported to Mexico, could not print, scan, copy,
or carry out the other functions of a printer. In Mexico, PCBAs were produced using SMT, and
firmware that was “architected and designed in the United States” was loaded onto them. Final
assembly was then carried out in Mexico, which involved connecting cables to the PCBA and other
components, installing toner cartridges, and packaging for shipment to the United States.
In analyzing this scenario, we emphasized that “the component (or components) which
impart the character of a product will be a significant factor in determining the country of origin of a
product.” However, in H304677, no single component acted as the only fundamental functioning
component of the printer. While the PCBA and firmware allowed the operator panel to perform its
function, the other subassemblies were critical in feeding paper and accomplishing the goal of
printing. Therefore, the fact that the PCBA was produced in Mexico was not dispositive. Instead,
because “all of the mechanical printing functions [were] imparted by the Chinese printer transports,”
we held that the country of origin of the product was China.
Consistent with H304677, in HQ H328859, dated June 10, 2024, we held that printers
assembled in Japan did not undergo a substantial transformation. Although the PCBA was
6
manufactured in Japan, approximately 97 percent of all components were produced in China. Aside
from the production of the PCBA assembly, the Japanese processing consisted of simple steps such
as mounting, attaching, fitting, and screwing the imported components together. Moreover, while
the PCBA and Japanese-origin firmware enabled the thermal printers to communicate with external
devices and process the images to be printed, other components and assemblies were also critical in
enabling the printer to form text or images and apply heat to the paper to create text or images.
Accordingly, we found that the mechanical printing function of the good were imparted by the
Chinese-origin components, and the country of origin was therefore China.
In H311447, we determined the country of origin of a “smart oven” produced in Vietnam
using raw materials mostly sourced from China. In Vietnam, the plastic parts of the oven were
formed using injection molding, and the shaped metal components were produced via stamping.
Additionally, the PCBA was made using SMT and loaded with software sourced from China. Based
upon “the extent of the assembly process in Vietnam, including the creation of various components
of the oven,” we concluded that a substantial transformation had occurred. In doing so, we
emphasized that “CBP has consistently held that the download of software or firmware is not a
substantial transformation” and that “the origin of the software which is downloaded onto the oven
in Vietnam does not affect the origin of the oven.”
Here, three production scenarios are presented for Posha. Final assembly occurs in either
Korea or China, and the PCBA may be produced in either Korea or China. However, as in
H304677 and H328859, the country of origin of the PCBA will not be dispositive because each of
the five subcomponents is crucial in enabling the product to carry out its function as an autonomous
cooker. Aside from the Taiwanese display assembly, all other materials are of Chinese origin.
While the Indian-origin software plays an important role in the product’s functioning, it is simply
loaded onto to Posha after physical assembly and therefore “does not affect the origin of [the
product].” See HQ H311447. In contrast to the extensive manufacturing involved in making the
smart oven in H311447, here the assembly operations involve fastening components, wiring
connectors, and performing visual inspections. These operations are akin to the simple steps carried
out in H328859, in which assembly was insufficient to result in a substantial transformation. Based
on the totality of the circumstances, we therefore find that the function of the good as a cooking
robot is imparted by the Chinese-origin components. Accordingly, we hold that the country of
origin of Posha is China in all three scenarios.
II. UKFTA
The requirements for eligibility for preferential tariff treatment under the UKFTA are set
forth in General Note (“GN”) 33 of the HTSUS (19 U.S.C. § 1202).
Under the UKFTA, goods are considered originating if they are wholly obtained or
produced entirely in the U.S. or Korea, each nonoriginating material used in the production of the
good undergoes an applicable change in tariff classification, or the goods otherwise satisfy the
regional value content requirements specified in General Note (“GN”) 33(o), HTSUS. See 19 C.F.R.
§ 10.1014. GN 33(c)(iii) further provides that an originating good will not be considered originating,
if the good “undergoes further production or any other operation outside the territory of Korea or
of the United States, other than unloading, reloading or any other process necessary to preserve the
good in good condition or to transport the good to the territory of Korea or of the United States, or
7
does not remain under the control of customs authorities in the territory of a country other than
Korea or the United States.” See also 19 C.F.R. § 10.1025.
Here, in Scenarios B and C, the goods undergo processing in China before shipment from
China directly to the United States. Therefore, regardless of whether the goods previously acquired
originating status, they “will not be considered originating.” GN 33(c)(iii). Accordingly, under
production scenarios B and C, the goods are ineligible for UKFTA preferential tariff treatment.
Turning to Scenario A, in which final production occurs in Korea before shipment to the
United States, the UKFTA rule of origin applicable to goods of 8516.60.40, HTSUS, requires:
(A) A change to subheading 8516.60 from any other heading; or
(B) A change to subheading 8516.60 from subheading 8516.90, whether or not there is also a
change from any other heading, provided that there is a regional value content of not less
than:
(1) 35 percent under the build-up method, or
(2) 45 percent under the build-down method.
See GN 33(o)/85.33.
Here, for Scenario A, you have provided the information necessary to apply the tariff shift
rule in GN 33(o)/85.33. Because no nonoriginating materials of heading 8516 are used in the
production of Posha in Korea, the goods will qualify as originating under this scenario. Provided
that all other requirements are met, Posha will be eligible for preferential tariff treatment under the
UKFTA when produced under Scenario A imported into the United States from Korea.
HOLDING:
Based on the information provided, Posha qualifies as UKFTA originating goods and will be
eligible for UKFTA preferential tariff treatment only under Scenario A, and only provided that all
other applicable requirements are met. Under Scenarios B and C, Posha is nonoriginating under
UKFTA and ineligible for preferential tariff treatment. Under all three production scenarios
presented, the country of origin of Posha under the substantial transformation standard is China.
Please note that 19 C.F.R. § 177.9(b)(1) provides that “[e]ach ruling letter is issued on the
assumption that all of the information furnished in connection with the ruling request and
incorporated in the ruling letter, either directly, by reference, or by implication, is accurate and
complete in every material respect. The application of a ruling letter by a Customs Service field
office to the transaction to which it is purported to relate is subject to the verification of the facts
incorporated in the ruling letter, a comparison of the transaction described therein to the actual
transaction, and the satisfaction of any conditions on which the ruling was based.”
8
A copy of this ruling letter should be attached to the entry documents filed at the time this
merchandise is entered. If the documents have been filed without a copy, this ruling should be
brought to the attention of the CBP officer handling the transaction.
Sincerely,
Monika R. Brenner, Chief
Valuation and Special Programs Branch
9