19 C.F.R. § 102.13

De Minimis

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, foreign materials that do not undergo the applicable change in tariff classification set out in § 102.20 or satisfy the other applicable requirements of that section when incorporated into a good shall be disregarded in determining the country of origin of the good if the value of those materials is no more than 7 percent of the value of the good or 10 percent of the value of a good of Chapter 22, Harmonized System.

(b) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to a foreign material incorporated in a good provided for in Chapter 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 11, 12, 15, 17, or 20 of the Harmonized System.

(c) Foreign components or materials that do not undergo the applicable change in tariff classification set out in § 102.21 or satisfy the other applicable requirements of that section when incorporated into a textile or apparel product covered by that section shall be disregarded in determining the country of origin of the good if the total weight of those components or materials is not more than 7 percent of the total weight of the good.

[T.D. 96-48, 61 FR 28956, June 6, 1996]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 2000–2001 · leading case: Bestfoods (Formerly Known as Cpc Int'l, Inc.) v. United States, 260 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bestfoods (Formerly Known as Cpc Int'l, Inc.) v. United States, 260 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2001). · cites it 13× “Concluding that 19 C.F.R. § 102.13 (b) is a valid exercise of discretion by the United States Customs Service (“Customs”), we reverse.”

Bestfoods v. United States, 110 F. Supp. 2d 965 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2000). · cites it 6× “facilities is present in de minimis amounts, as defined under 19 C.F.R. § 102.13 (a), it should not be required to mark its finished product as a product of Canada (or other equivalent country of origin marking designation) pursuant to the NATA Marking Rules and the Marking…”

Ciba-Geigy Corp. v. United States, 178 F. Supp. 2d 1336 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001). · cites it 3× “In Bestfoods, the primary issue before the court concerned the operation of Customs regulation 19 C.F.R § 102.13 (2000), promulgated under the federal marking statute, 19 U.”

— 19 C.F.R. § 102.13(b) — 1 case

Ciba-Geigy Corp. v. United States, 178 F. Supp. 2d 1336 (Ct. Intl. Trade 2001). “In Bestfoods, the primary issue before the court concerned the operation of Customs regulation 19 C.F.R § 102.13 (2000), promulgated under the federal marking statute, 19 U.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.