United States International Trade Commision Rulings And Harmonized Tariff Schedule
faqs.org  Rulings By Number  Rulings By Category  Tariff Numbers
faqs.org > Rulings and Tariffs Home > Rulings By Number > 1997 HQ Rulings > HQ 560327 - HQ 734474 > HQ 734258

Previous Ruling Next Ruling
HQ 734258

January 7, 1992

MAR-2-05 CO:R:C:V 734258 RSD


Margaret Polito, Esq.
Coudert Brothers
200 Park Avenue
New York, New York 10166

RE: Country of origin of marking requirements for frames for safety glasses with prescription lenses, eyeglasses, substantial transformation, hangtags, stickers; 19 CFR 134.41, 19 CFR 134.44; HQ 729649

Dear Ms. Polito:

This is in response to your letter of July 11, 1991, on behalf of your client, Hudson Optical Corporation, requesting a ruling on the country of origin marking requirements for eyeglass frames used in making safety glasses with prescription lenses. We have also received your additional submissions of October 18, 1991, November 1, 1991, and November 5, 1991.


Hudson Optical Corporation (Hudson) imports safety glasses frames. The frames are sold by Hudson only to independent optical laboratories, who produce prescription lenses for individuals who require safety glasses for their employment. After the prescription lenses are produced to the specifications of a particular individual, the optical laboratories insert them into the frames. The completed safety glasses are purchased by employers for the use of their employees. Although Hudson imports 12 different styles of prescription safety glass frames, you indicate that typically employers restrict the type of frames that employees may choose, due to the nature of the work performed by the employees. In addition, insurance concerns and governmental safety standards require that certain employers only purchase industrial plano safety frames for their employees. In limited circumstances employers set a cap for the amount that they will spend on the safety glasses, and the employees may elect to supplement this amount with his or her own money in order that they receive a particular style of safety glasses.

Hudson has an agreement with the optical laboratories whereby the laboratories are precluded from reselling the frames other than as part of prescription safety glasses, without Hudson's authorization. You state that the justification for this agreement is to ensure that only safety lenses are inserted into the frames in order that the finished product meets all applicable safety standards.

Hudson proposes to indicate the country of origin of these safety glasses frames by affixing a hangtag or an adhesive sticker to the frames. The hangtag/sticker would state the origin of the frames in order to apprise the laboratories of the country of origin of the frames. During the insertion of the prescription lenses, the laboratories would remove the hangtag/sticker from the frames.


Who is the ultimate purchaser of the eyeglass frames used to make the safety glasses?

Can the frames be marked to indicate their country origin by use of hangtags or stickers that will be removed by the laboratories while inserting the prescription lenses?


Section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1304), provides that unless excepted, every article of foreign origin imported into the U.S. shall be marked in a conspicuous place as legibly, indelibly, and permanently as the nature of the article (or its container) will permit, in such a manner as to indicate to the ultimate purchaser in the U.S. the English name of the country of origin of the article. Congressional intent in enacting 19 U.S.C. 1304 was "that the ultimate purchaser should be able to know by an inspection of the marking on the imported goods the country of which the goods is the product. The evident purpose is to mark the goods so that at the time of purchase the ultimate purchaser may, by knowing where the goods were produced, be able to buy or refuse to buy them, if such marking should influence his will." United States v. Friedlaender & Co. 27 C.C.P.A. 297 at 302; C.A.D. 104 (1940).

Part 134, Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part 134), implements the country of origin marking requirements and the exceptions of 19 U.S.C. 1304. Section 134.1(b), Customs Regulations (19 CFR 134.1(b)), defines "country of origin" as the country of manufacture, production or growth of any article of foreign origin entering the U.S. Further work or material added to an article in another country must effect a substantial transformation in order to render such other country the "country of origin" within the meaning of the marking laws and regulations. The case of U.S. v. Gibson-Thomsen Co., Inc., 27 C.C.P.A. 267 (C.A.D. 98) (1940), provides that an article used in manufacture which results in an article having a name, character or use differing from that of the constituent article will be considered substantially transformed and that the manufacturer or processor will be considered the ultimate purchaser of the constituent materials. In such circumstances, the imported article is excepted from marking and only the outermost container is required to be marked (see section 134.35, Customs Regulations).

In HQ 729649, October 27, 1986, Customs found that imported eyeglass frames used in the manufacture of safety glasses were excepted from individual marking under this provision based on the determination that the U.S. manufacturer was the ultimate purchaser of the frames. Customs determined that the assembly of frame parts, temples and fronts, to form a finished frame, and the insertion of the lenses into the frames to make a pair of prescription safety glasses resulted in a substantial transformation. It was noted that safety eyewear was unlike ordinary prescription eyewear in which the consumer makes two separate purchasing decisions, one for the frames and one for the lenses. With regard to safety glasses, the industrial employer is actually purchasing one complete item, safety spectacles, and the assembly of the frame components and adding the lenses substantially transforms the finished frames. Without the safety lenses, the spectacles lack an essential component thereof. We also noted that although the employee will be given a few choices of frames, it is the employer who determines the type of safety spectacles that it requires for its employees.

The same analysis used in HQ 729649 applies to this case. Although the wearer may have some choice in choosing the frames, it is very limited and is controlled largely by the employer, who must follow standards dictated by insurers or government safety agencies. The employer is not making two separate purchasing decisions but is buying one article, the safety glasses. Accordingly, for the reasons set forth in HQ 729649, we find that inserting the prescription lenses into the frames to make safety glasses substantially transforms the frames into a new article of commerce. In accordance with 19 CFR 134.35, the optical laboratories who buy the frames from Hudson and insert the prescription lenses into them are the ultimate purchaser of the frames. Consequently, the frames must be marked in accordance with 19 U.S.C. 1304 to inform the optical laboratories, the ultimate purchasers of the frames, of their country of origin.

Hudson's proposed method of marking the frames by use of hangtags and stickers is acceptable provided that the stickers or hangtags are sufficiently permanent that they will remain on the frames until they reach the ultimate purchaser. See 19 CFR 134.44. In accordance with 19 CFR 134.41, the country of origin marking indicated on the hangtags or stickers must also be conspicuous and legible. Without seeing a sample of the country of origin marking, we are unable to rule on whether the proposed marking of the frames would satisfy the requirements of the marking law.


Provided the safety glasses frames imported by Hudson are used only in the manner set forth above, the optical laboratories who produce safety glasses are the ultimate purchasers of the frames. The imported frames may be marked to indicate their country of origin by hangtags or stickers, as long the hangtags or stickers meet the requirements of being conspicuous, legible, and permanent indicated in 19 CFR 134.41 and 19 CFR 134.44, and the district director at the port of entry is satisfied that such hangtags or stickers will remain on the frames until they reach the optical laboratories.


John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division

Previous Ruling Next Ruling