H285606 H2 Ruling Active

Coastwise Transportation; 46 U.S.C. § 55103; 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b).

Issued April 24, 2017 by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Tariff classification

HTS codes: 2017, 1916

Headings: 2017, 1916

Product description

The voyage in question involves the transportation of the subject individual aboard the non-coastwise-qualified M/V ZAANDAM (“the vessel”). The individual will embark the vessel in Honolulu, Hawaii on or about May 2, 2017 and will disembark in Seattle, Washington on or about May, 12, 2017. The individual is the spouse of the Project Manager of the vessel.

CBP rationale

Generally, the coastwise laws prohibit the transportation of passengers or merchandise between points in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws in any vessel other than a vessel built in, documented under the laws of, and owned by citizens of the United States. Such a vessel, after it has obtained a coastwise endorsement from the U.S. Coast Guard, is said to be “coastwise qualified.” The coastwise laws generally apply to points in the territorial sea, which is defined as the belt, three nautical miles wide, seaward of the territorial sea baseline, and to points located in internal waters, landward of the territorial sea baseline. The coastwise law applicable to the carriage of passengers is found in 46 U.S.C. § 55103 which provides: (a) In General. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter or chapter 121 of this title, a vessel may not transport passengers between ports or places in the United States to which the coastwise laws apply, either directly or via a foreign port, unless the vessel- (1) is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in coastwise trade; and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement under chapter 121 or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement. (b) Penalty. The penalty for violating subsection (a) is $300 for each passenger transported and landed. Section 4.50 (b) of the Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) Regulations provide: A passenger within the meaning of this part is any person carried on a vessel who is not connected with the operation of the vessel, her navigation, ownership, or business. In the present case, you state that the individual is the spouse of the Project Manager of the vessel. It is CBP’s longstanding position that the spouse and children of officers of a vessel are not passengers for purposes of the passenger coastwise statute. See General Letter No. 117 (May 20, 1916) from the Bureau of Navigation. However, under the facts of this case, the Project Manager is not an officer of the vessel for purposes of the passenger coastwise statute and as such, the previously referenced CBP ruling letters do not apply. Accordingly, the coastwise transportation of the individual in question would indeed be in violation of 46 U.S.C. § 55103.

Full text

U.S. Department of Homeland Security Washington, DC 20229 U.S. Customs and Border Protection HQ H285606 April 24, 2017 VES-3- 02 OT:RR:BSTC:CCR HQ H2845606 JER CATEGORY: Carriers Irmi Munoz Holland America Line 450 Third Avenue West Seattle, WA 98119 RE: Coastwise Transportation; 46 U.S.C. § 55103; 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b). Dear Ms. Munoz: This is in response to your correspondence of April 24, 2017, in which you inquire about the coastwise transportation of the one individual mentioned therein aboard the M/V ZAANDAM. Our decision follows. FACTS The voyage in question involves the transportation of the subject individual aboard the non-coastwise-qualified M/V ZAANDAM (“the vessel”). The individual will embark the vessel in Honolulu, Hawaii on or about May 2, 2017 and will disembark in Seattle, Washington on or about May, 12, 2017. The individual is the spouse of the Project Manager of the vessel. ISSUE Whether the individual described in the FACTS section is a “passenger” within the meaning of 46 U.S.C. § 55103 and 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b). LAW and ANALYSIS Generally, the coastwise laws prohibit the transportation of passengers or merchandise between points in the United States embraced within the coastwise laws in any vessel other than a vessel built in, documented under the laws of, and owned by citizens of the United States. Such a vessel, after it has obtained a coastwise endorsement from the U.S. Coast Guard, is said to be “coastwise qualified.” The coastwise laws generally apply to points in the territorial sea, which is defined as the belt, three nautical miles wide, seaward of the territorial sea baseline, and to points located in internal waters, landward of the territorial sea baseline. The coastwise law applicable to the carriage of passengers is found in 46 U.S.C. § 55103 which provides: (a) In General. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter or chapter 121 of this title, a vessel may not transport passengers between ports or places in the United States to which the coastwise laws apply, either directly or via a foreign port, unless the vessel- (1) is wholly owned by citizens of the United States for purposes of engaging in coastwise trade; and (2) has been issued a certificate of documentation with a coastwise endorsement under chapter 121 or is exempt from documentation but would otherwise be eligible for such a certificate and endorsement. (b) Penalty. The penalty for violating subsection (a) is $300 for each passenger transported and landed. Section 4.50 (b) of the Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”) Regulations provide: A passenger within the meaning of this part is any person carried on a vessel who is not connected with the operation of the vessel, her navigation, ownership, or business. In the present case, you state that the individual is the spouse of the Project Manager of the vessel. It is CBP’s longstanding position that the spouse and children of officers of a vessel are not passengers for purposes of the passenger coastwise statute. See General Letter No. 117 (May 20, 1916) from the Bureau of Navigation. However, under the facts of this case, the Project Manager is not an officer of the vessel for purposes of the passenger coastwise statute and as such, the previously referenced CBP ruling letters do not apply. Accordingly, the coastwise transportation of the individual in question would indeed be in violation of 46 U.S.C. § 55103. HOLDING The individual described in the FACTS section above is a “passenger” within the meaning of 46 U.S.C. § 55103 and 19 C.F.R. § 4.50(b). Therefore, the coastwise transportation of such individual would be in violation of 46 U.S.C. § 55103. Sincerely, Lisa L. Burley Chief/Supervisory Attorney-Advisor Cargo Security, Carriers and Restricted Merchandise Branch Office of Trade, Regulations and Rulings

View original on CBP CROSS →

More rulings on the same tariff codes

N361217 May 22, 2026

The country of origin of refined ahiflower oil

N356618 December 19, 2025

The eligibility of AUVI-Q’s Electronic Prompt System for preferential tariff treatment under the Nairobi Protocol from Thailand

N351241 August 4, 2025

The eligibility under the Nairobi Protocol of a blood pressure monitor

N349958 July 16, 2025

Eligibility of molecular sieves for duty-free tariff treatment under the Nairobi Protocol; 9817.00.96; specially designed or adapted for the handicapped; parts

H329790 June 16, 2025

Temporary Importation under Bond (TIB); exportation; satellites launched into orbit.

H331108 June 11, 2025

HTSUS ear Mr. Shoichet D his is in response to your request of March 15, 2023, on behalf of your client, [ T ] (the “requestor”). In your letter, you request a ruling pursuant to 19 CFR Part 177 concerning the valuation of watches and watch components imported by your client. Your client has asked that certain information submitted in connection with this internal advice request be treated as confidential. Inasmuch as this request conforms to the requirements of 19 C.F.R. § 177.2(b)(7), your client’s request for confidentiality is approved. The information contained within brackets as well as all documents forwarded to our office will not be released to the public and will be withheld from the published version of this decision. FACTS The following information is based on your March 15, 2023, ruling request and follow-up information provided to this office on October 2, 2023, November 14, 2023, and July 12, 2024. The requestor is an importer and distributor of watches containing both S

H326779 April 15, 2025

Application for Further Review of Protest No. 2704-19-106346; United Foods; Tariff- Rate Quota

H296075 March 6, 2025

Internal Advice Request; Dutiability of E-Tailing Franchise Fees; Related Parties; Test Values; Circumstances of the Sale

H301145 January 10, 2025

Internal Advice; Dutiability of Post-Importation Fees Paid; Proceeds; Section 402(b)(1)(E)

H296834 November 25, 2024

Protest No. 4601-17-103148; Fulfill Your Packages, Inc.

Searching CBP rulings the smart way

TariffLens semantically searches all 200,000+ CBP rulings, surfaces the ones that actually match your product, and builds defensible classifications backed by ruling citations.

Book a demo →