HQ 950945: Outdoor Chair; Reconsideration of NY 869145; HQ 089003; 9401.80.40

us-cbp-cross-rulings-hq-950945HQ 950945: Outdoor Chair; Reconsideration of NY 869145; HQ 089003; 9401.80.40Guidance

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 950945
                        February 24, 1992


CLA-2 CO:R:C:M 950945 DWS

CATEGORY: Classification

TARIFF NO.: 9401.79.00

Mr. Robert L. Follick
Gibney, Anthony & Flaherty
665 Fifth Avenue
New York, NY 10022-5305

RE: Outdoor Chair; Reconsideration of NY 869145; HQ 089003;
    9401.80.40

Dear Mr. Follick:

     This is in response to your letter of January 8, 1992, on
behalf of Magellan International, Inc., requesting
reconsideration of NY 869145, dated December 5, 1991, concerning
the tariff classification of outdoor chairs under the Harmonized
Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS).

FACTS:

     The merchandise consists of an outdoor chair having a resin
plastic back and seat component ("seat").  The seat is supported
by two arm and leg components ("legs") which are comprised of a
special metal alloy that is electrostatically powder coated to
seal out the elements.  Three short rods protrude from the metal
legs, into which the plastic seat is inserted.  Three holes on
either side of the seat are present for just this purpose.  Once
the seat is attached to the legs, six sets of nuts and bolts are
added to the leg rods to guarantee structural support.

ISSUE:

     What is the proper classification of the subject outdoor
chair under the HTSUS?

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

     Classification of merchandise under the HTSUS is in
accordance with the General Rules of Interpretation (GRI's),
taken in order.  GRI 1 provides that classification is determined
according to the terms of the headings and any relative chapter
or section notes.


     NY 869145 ruled that the subject chair is classifiable under
subheading 9401.79.00, HTSUS, which provides for: "[o]ther seats,
with metal frames: [o]ther."

     You claim that the chair is classifiable under subheading
9401.80.40, HTSUS, which provides for: "[o]ther seats: [o]f
rubber or plastics: [o]ther."  Your principle argument is that
the frame of the chair is composed of the plastic seat as well
as the metal legs.  We disagree.

     You cite the definition of a frame as "the constructional
system that gives shape or strength", and the definition of a
chair as "any of various devices that hold up or support".  From
these definitions, you surmise that the frame of the subject
chair must encompass the entire chair, not just the metal legs.

     We find that there is a definitive difference between the
term "chair" and the term "frame" with regard to the subject
chair.  After further inspection of the merchandise, we found
that the metal rods protruding from the legs actually provide the
structural support underneath the plastic seat.  Through the use
of nuts and bolts, the legs provide all of the support to the
chair.  The legs are the constructional system that gives
strength to the chair.  The chair is a device that holds up or
supports some sort of mass (i.e, a person, an animal).

     We note HQ 089003, dated July 3, 1991, which ruled upon the
classification of folding chairs under the HTSUS.  The chair was
described as being "made from hollow chrome frames with plastic
backs and seats".  (emphasis supplied).  The chair ruled upon in
that decision was of similar construction to the subject chair,
and we held that it was classifiable under subheading 9401.79.00,
HTSUS.

     Finally, we recognize that the tariff schedule itself
distinguishes a seat from a frame.  Subheading 9401.79.00, HTSUS,
begins with: [o]ther seats, with metal frames." (emphasis
supplied).

HOLDING:

     The subject outdoor chair is classifiable under subheading
9401.79.00, HTSUS, which provides for: "[o]ther seats, with metal
frames: [o]ther."  NY 869145 is affirmed in full.

                           Sincerely,



                           John Durant, Director
                           Commercial Rulings Division

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.