US Says Target's 'Lamps,' as Stand-Alone Light Sources, Fall Under HTS Chapter 94, Not 85
In a Nov. 8 cross-motion for summary judgment in a consolidated case that first began in 2015, the U.S. asked the Court of International Trade to rule big box store Target’s merchandise -- LED candles, string lights, table lights, nightlights, path lights and lanterns-- as “lamps” under Harmonized Tariff Schedule Chapter 94 instead of “electrical luminescent lights” under Chapter 85 (Target General Merchandise v. United States, CIT Consol. # 15-00069).
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.
Target General Merchandise moved for summary judgment June 20 (see 2406210041). CBP classified its lights under “various subheadings of [Harmonized Tariff Schedule] heading 9405” for different types of lamps; Target said that they should have instead been classified under HTS heading 8543 for electrical luminescent lamps, which carries a 2% duty.
But the two chapters themselves explain how to differentiate between lamps and electrical LED lighting, the government said. Chapter 94, as well as its explanatory notes, “used the term ‘lamp’ to refer to complete lighting units,” whereas Chapter 85 “describes ‘lamps’ known as light bulbs or components of electrical equipment,” it argued.
“The use of the term ‘lamp’ to refer to what is commonly referred to as a light bulb dates back, as least, to Thomas Edison’s patent for his incandescent light bulb, which he called an ‘electric lamp for giving light by incandescence’ -- a device that consisted of a filament of carbon wire sealed in a glass vacuum bulb,” it said, citing the inventor’s 1880 patent.
None of the lights at issue are lightbulbs, it said. All of them, it said, are stand-alone light sources that “emit light via an LED light source” and are “either solar powered, battery powered, and/or powered through an external power source.”
It cited the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit case Gerson v. U.S., in which CAFC held that a “machine” as described by heading 8543, which covers “electrical machines and apparatus,” is a “complex device or machine for a specific use” and that a battery-powered candle can’t be considered one.
That CAFC case also held that heading 8539, which covers “light-emitting diode (LED) lamps,” describes electric light bulbs, it said.
The U.S. said that Target has already conceded its LED candles fall under heading 9405, which covers lamps “not elsewhere specified or included.” But all its other lights fit that heading, too, it said.
Target’s string lights, it said, fall under 9405 because that heading’s explanatory note expressly contains “electric garlands,” which CBP has held to be “an article ... able to be hung or displayed and is composed of a string of light bulbs which are powered by an electrical source either attached by a battery, cord, or plug.”
Table lights and night lights are both “used for the illumination of rooms” and are also explicitly listed in that chapter’s explanatory note, it said, noting also that the table lights were sold in the same department as floor, wall and ceiling lights. And the box store’s path lights and lanterns were “lamps used for exterior lighting.”
All of these are stand-alone light sources, not light bulbs, it said.
It said Target argues that Chapter 85 includes not just light bulbs but “light bulbs in lamp holders connected by wiring and electrical connectors.” But this isn’t true, it said, pointing to previous CAFC and CIT rulings, as well as many customs rulings from 2009 to 2018 cited by Target.
And the government also said that Target’s artificial Christmas trees, also at issue, should be classified under heading 9505 as “festive articles,” calling them “decorative articles intrinsically linked to the Christmas holidays.”