CAFC Rules on "Predominate'" and Plastic-Coated Textiles
In Value Vinyls, Inc. v. U.S., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision by the Court of International Trade that certain plastic-coated material, whose textile component is made entirely of man-made fibers, should be classified under subheading 3921.90.11 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule with a duty rate of 4.2 percent.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
If your job depends on informed compliance, you need International Trade Today. Delivered every business day and available any time online, only International Trade Today helps you stay current on the increasingly complex international trade regulatory environment.
The imported product at issue consisted of a textile polyester fiber layer which is coated on both sides with a layer of plastic material. The resulting product is used in making products such as truck covers, barrier covers, dividers, upholstery, and signs.
The CIT had held that these plastic coated products, which contain only a single textile man-made fiber component, were encompassed under HTS 3921.90.11, which includes products in which the man-made fibers predominate by weight over any other single fiber.
Customs and Border Protection argued that the word predominate requires two or more fiber components, and thus cannot apply to a situation where only one fiber is present. As such, the government argued, these plastic coated products should be classified under subheading 3921.90.19 at 5.3 percent.
In the earlier decision, the CIT explained that it found the language of 3921.90.11 ambiguous, and resorted to the legislative history including the conversion history from the former Tariff Schedule of the United States to the Harmonized Tariff Schedule to resolve the ambiguity. The CIT observed that goods with textiles made wholly of man-made fibers had previously been classified under TSUS 355.81 with a duty rate of 4.2 percent which was the predecessor to 3921.90.11.
The CAFC concluded that the CIT had correctly determined the meaning of predominate based on history of the relevant provisions which showed that a provision dominated by man-made fibers includes textiles made wholly of man-made fibers.
Further, the CAFC noted that the harmonization of the tariff schedule was designed generally to adopt internationally accepted product nomenclature while leaving the HTS provisions substantially intact, without change in the applicable duties.
The CAFC affirmed the decision by the CIT to classify the plastic coated materials imported by Value Vinyls under HTS subheading 3921.90.11 at a duty rate of 4.2 percent.
However, one of the CAFC judges dissented from the majority opinion stating that the core of his disagreement with the majority was their willingness to disregard the plain meaning of predominate, which clearly contemplates a hierarchy of two or more elements or fibers.
(See ITT's Online Archives or 09/26/07 news, 07092640, for BP summary of CIT decision.)
CAFC decision 07-1562 (dated 06/16/09) available athttp://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions/07-1562.pdf