The Country-of-Origin of E-bikes from Vietnam
Issued December 20, 2024 by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Tariff classification
Product description
The Country-of-Origin of E-bikes from Vietnam
CBP rationale
substantial transformation analysis is applicable. See, e.g., Headquarters Ruling Letter (“HQ”) H301619, dated November 6, 2018. The test for determining whether a substantial transformation will occur is whether an article emerges from a process with a new name, character, or use different from that possessed by the article prior to processing. See Texas Instruments Inc. v. United States, 681 F.2d 778 (C.C.P.A. 1982). This determination is based on the totality of the evidence. See National Hand Tool Corp. v. United States, 16 C.I.T. 308 (1992), aff’d, 989 F.2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 1993). It has been the opinion of CBP that the frame, which in this case is a product of Vietnam, is the part of a bicycle, or in this case, E-bike, that imparts its “essence”. Based on the information provided, the culmination of production processes performed in China to the Vietnamese frame and fork does not substantially transform the frame. Accordingly, the merchandise will be a product of Vietnam, and the Section 301 measures will not apply.
Full text
N344245 December 20, 2024 OT:RR:NC:N2:201 CATEGORY: Origin Yonatan Kayman Magnum Bikes Inc 629 South State StreetSalt Lake City, UT 84111 RE: The Country-of-Origin of E-bikes from Vietnam Dear Mr. Kayman: In your letter dated November 25, 2024, you requested a Country-of-Origin ruling on an E-bike assembled in China from a Vietnamese frame and Chinese and Vietnamese components. The item under consideration has been identified as the “Magnum Lowrider 2.0”. In your request you state that the E-bike frame has been 100% assembled in Vietnam. You provided a video showing the manufacturing process from straight tubes to finished frame. You state that all components and material in this manufacturing process were sourced in Vietnam. In your request you question whether the frame in question would be considered the “essence” of the vehicle and thus impart the Country-of-Origin of the entire vehicle. You state that, in addition to the frame, the wheel rims, rear carrier, and front fork are also produced in Vietnam. These components make up approximately 35% of the cost of the completed product. The remaining parts that are assembled onto the frame are produced and assembled onto the body or frame of the vehicle in Mainland China. These parts, listed below, make up approximately 65% of the cost of the completed product: Tires Pedals Chain Chain Ring Crank Arm Bottom Bracket Handlebar Grips Saddle with seat post Gears Front and Rear Lights Brake System for front and rear wheels (includes disk and caliper for each wheel) Kickstand 500W Electric Hub Motor (750W maximum) installed in the center of rear wheel Electric Controller Electric Cables Lithium Battery When determining the Country-of -Origin for purposes of applying current trade remedies under Section 301, the substantial transformation analysis is applicable. See, e.g., Headquarters Ruling Letter (“HQ”) H301619, dated November 6, 2018. The test for determining whether a substantial transformation will occur is whether an article emerges from a process with a new name, character, or use different from that possessed by the article prior to processing. See Texas Instruments Inc. v. United States, 681 F.2d 778 (C.C.P.A. 1982). This determination is based on the totality of the evidence. See National Hand Tool Corp. v. United States, 16 C.I.T. 308 (1992), aff’d, 989 F.2d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 1993). It has been the opinion of CBP that the frame, which in this case is a product of Vietnam, is the part of a bicycle, or in this case, E-bike, that imparts its “essence”. Based on the information provided, the culmination of production processes performed in China to the Vietnamese frame and fork does not substantially transform the frame. Accordingly, the merchandise will be a product of Vietnam, and the Section 301 measures will not apply. The holding set forth above applies only to the specific factual situation and merchandise description as identified in the ruling request. This position is clearly set forth in Title 19, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Section 177.9(b)(1). This section states that a ruling letter is issued on the assumption that all of the information furnished in the ruling letter, whether directly, by reference, or by implication, is accurate and complete in every material respect. In the event that the facts are modified in any way, or if the goods do not conform to these facts at time of importation, you should bring this to the attention of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and submit a request for a new ruling in accordance with 19 CFR 177.2. Additionally, we note that the material facts described in the foregoing ruling may be subject to periodic verification by CBP. This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs and Border Protection Regulations (19 C.F.R. 177). A copy of the ruling or the control number indicated above should be provided with the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is imported. If you have any questions regarding the ruling, please contact National Import Specialist Matthew Sullivan at [email protected]. Sincerely, Steven A. Mack Director National Commodity Specialist Division
Ruling history
More rulings on the same tariff codes
The country of origin of ICR 1001
The country of origin marking of three breast pump accessory kits
The country of origin of thermal spray coating machines
The country of origin of a hydraulic breaker
The country of origin of a compressor
The country of origin of three pairs of USB wired headsets
The country of origin of water purifiers
The country of origin of fiber optic terminal boxes
The country of origin of an automotive alternator.
The country of origin of nickel key fob logos
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 →