HQ 545304: Transaction value; customs duties and other Federal taxes; 19U.S.C. 1401a(b)(3); antidumping duties included in a c.i.f. duty-paid price; HRL 543963 cited

Native CBP ruling rendition. Applicability is fact-specific; modification/revocation relationships and original publisher date are retained. Publisher sentinel year0001 means unknown date, not a historical legal adoption.

                            HQ 545304

                         January 4, 1994



VAL CO:R:C:V 545304 CRS

CATEGORY:  Valuation

Richard M. Belanger, Esq.
Powell, Goldstein, Frazer & Murphy
Sixth Floor
1001 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 2004

RE:  Transaction value; customs duties and other Federal taxes; 19
U.S.C.  1401a(b)(3); antidumping duties included in a c.i.f. duty-paid price; HRL 543963 cited

Dear Mr. Belanger:

     This is in reply to your letter of April 19, 1993, on behalf
of N.V.W. (USA), concerning the deduction of antidumping duties
from a c.i.f. duty-paid price.  We regret the delay in responding.

FACTS:

     The transaction at issue concerns the importation of flat-rolled steel.  The steel is manufactured by Hoogovens Groep BV, the
Dutch parent company of N.V.W., with the latter acting as a selling
agent and the importer of record in sales between Hoogovens and its
U.S. customers.  Sales are on a c.i.f. duty-paid basis.

     On February 4, 1993, the Department of Commerce issued a
preliminary determination that imports of flat rolled steel from
the Netherlands were, or were likely to be, sold in the U.S. at
less than fair value.  58 Fed. Reg. 7113.  The notice directed
Customs to suspend liquidation of all entries of flat-rolled steel
and require a cash deposit or the posting of a bond in an amount
equal to the estimated preliminary dumping margin for Hoogovens set
forth in the notice.  

     In consequence of this, you state that c.i.f. duty-paid price
for flat-rolled steel charged by Hoogovens to its U.S. customers
after the date of the notice would have to take account of the
amount of the estimated antidumping duties.  Nevertheless, you
maintain that this amount should not be included in the appraised
value of the imported merchandise.

ISSUE:

     The issue presented is whether antidumping duties in a c.i.f.
duty-paid price should be included in the transaction value of
imported merchandise.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

     Merchandise imported into the United States is appraised in
accordance with section 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended
by the Trade Agreements Act of 1979 (TAA; 19 U.S.C.  1401a).  The
preferred method of appraisement is transaction value, defined as
the "price actually paid or payable for imported merchandise when
sold for exportation to the United States," plus five statutorily
enumerated additions.  19 U.S.C.  1401a(b)(1).  For the purposes
of this ruling we have assumed that transaction value is the
appropriate basis of appraisement.

     Section 402(b)(3) of the TAA provides that transaction value
does not include, if identified separately from the price actually
paid or payable:

     (B)  The customs duties and other Federal taxes currently
     payable on the imported merchandise by reason of its
     importation, and any Federal excise tax on, or measured
     by the value of, such merchandise for which vendors in
     the United States are ordinarily liable.

19 U.S.C.  1401a(b)(3)(B).  Customs duties and other Federal taxes
currently payable are also excluded from the appraised value of
merchandise calculated under the deductive value method.  19 U.S.C.
 1401a(d)(3)(A)(iv).  You contend that antidumping duties are
encompassed by the term "customs duties" and therefore should be
excluded from transaction value pursuant to section 402(b)(3).

     In Headquarters Ruling Letter (HRL) 543963 dated September 11,
1987, we stated that countervailing duties would be excluded from
transaction value pursuant to section 402(b)(3) provided they were
identified separately from the price actually paid or payable.  In
that case although the amount of the countervailing duty was not
separately identified on the commercial invoice, the fact that the
consumption entry separately identified the countervailing duty was
deemed to be sufficient.  See also HRL 544722 dated June 4, 1991;
HRL 544596 dated November 23, 1990; and HRL 544552 dated September
20, 1990.

     Similarly, it is our position that antidumping duties
constitute "customs and other Federal taxes" such that they would
not be included in transaction value pursuant to section 402(b)(3),
provided the amount of such duties are identified separately from
the price actually paid or payable for the imported merchandise.

HOLDING:

     Antidumping duties forming part of a c.i.f. duty-paid price,
provided they are identified separately from the price actually
paid or payable, constitute customs duties and other Federal taxes
and should not be included in the transaction value of imported
merchandise determined under section 402(b) of the TAA.

                         Sincerely,





                         John Durant, Director
                         Commercial Rulings Division