CIT Rules in Favor of Importer on Classification of Combo Play Mat-Shopping Cart Cover
The Court of International Trade on Dec. 24 sided with an importer in a dispute over the tariff classification of a combination play mat and shopping cart seat cover (here). Although the Funny Farmer, imported by Infantino, had the characteristics of both products, the properties of a toy gives the article its essential character, said the court.
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.
Infantino markets its Funny Farmer as a “2-in-1 play mat.” The 19 inch by 45 inch is stuffed with polyester fiber batting, with one side colored solid blue and the other “activity side” depicting a farm scene with bright graphics, five removable toys, and one sewn-in toy. The mat has features that allow it to be used in a shopping cart, such as a detachable waist belt, leg flaps, a booster pillow and velcro to secure the seat to the shopping cart. The product’s packaging describes it as both a “perfect mat for tummy time play” and an in-cart mat that “turns any shopping cart into a clean, comfy activity center.”
On importation in 2008, CBP classified the Funny Farmer under HTS subheading 9404.90.20 as an article of “bedding and similar furnishing (for example, mattresses, quilts, eiderdowns, cushions, pouffes and pillows) … stuffed or internally fitted,” dutiable at 6 percent. Infantino protested, claiming the Funny Farmer was instead classifiable as a toy under duty free subheading 9503.00.0080. After its protest was denied, Infantino filed suit at CIT.
Although both the government and Infantino each argued the Funny Farmer is only classifiable under each of their preferred subheadings, the court found that the product had the properties of both. The product qualifies as a quilt or pillow, and is classifiable in heading 9404. But the Funny Farmer is also classifiable as a toy “primarily designed and used for pleasurable diversion.” The product was trademarked as a toy and tested to ensure it meets toy safety standards, and includes several attached cloth toys. Infantino also sells the product in its toy catalogue, and markets the products ability to entertain children on its packaging.
With neither subheading fully describing the Funny Farmer, CIT looked further down the General Rules of Interpretation to decide the product’s classification. Each subheading specifically describes a function of the Funny Farmer – neither more specifically than the either – so classification under GRI 3(a) was out. Moving to GRI 3(c), the court then turned to which subheading better describes the Funny Farmer’s essential character. Without the components meant to convert the Funny Farmer into a shopping cart seat cover, the product would be classified as a toy “play mat,” not a quilt. The product’s advertising and pricing are that of a toy, and the “bulk” of its components, including the detachable toys, are classifiable under heading 9503. As such, the court found the Funny Farmer classifiable as a toy under subheading 9603.00.0080, ruling in favor of Infantino albeit for its own reasons.
(Infantino v. U.S., Slip Op. 14-155, CIT # 11-00497, dated 12/24/14, Judge Goldberg)
(Attorneys: Mandy Edwards of Stein Shostak for plaintiff Infantino, LLC; Beverly Farrell for defendant U.S. government)