HQ 086526: Luma VM-500 video module under TSUS

Native CBP ruling rendition. Applicability is fact-specific; modification/revocation relationships and original publisher date are retained. Publisher sentinel year0001 means unknown date, not a historical legal adoption.

                            HQ 086526


                          June 28, 1990


CLA-2 CO:R:C:G  086526 MBR

CATEGORY:  Classification

TARIFF NO.:  684.58

Ms. Kathleen M. Murphy
Katten Muchin & Zavis
525 West Monroe Street, Suite 1600
Chicago, Illinois 60606-3693

RE:  Luma VM-500 video module under TSUS

Dear Ms. Murphy:

  This is in reply to your letter of February 7, 1990, on behalf
of Luma Telecom, Inc., requesting classification of the Luma VM-
500 video module, under the Tariff Schedules of the United States
(TSUS).

FACTS:

  The finished product, known commercially as the "Visitel," is
designed to connect to a telephone and act as an enhancement to a
telephonic transmission by providing an image of the caller.  The
Visitel transmits and receives freeze frame, black and white
visual images over standard telephone lines.  The Luma VM-500
video module (hereafter "video module") has a molded plastic
housing that is 7 1/2" by 7 1/2" by 8."  The housing contains; a
monochrome cathode ray tube with a 4 1/2" black and white display
screen, a video camera and a video control board.  The visual
image is encoded and transmitted as audio data.  This process is
similar to the manner by which computer data is transmitted,
using a modem, over telephone lines.  During the transmission of
the visual image, the user can neither transmit nor receive voice
communication until the visual image transmission has been
completed.  The last three images transmitted are preserved in
memory for future retrieval and viewing.  Once imported, the
video module must be fitted with a metal chassis, a systems
board, wired, tested and packaged.

ISSUE:

  What is the classification of the Luma VM-500 video module
under the Tariff Schedules of the United States (TSUS)?

LAW AND ANALYSIS

 The TSUS provides for; "[e]lectrical telegraph (including
printing and typewriting) and telephone apparatus and
instruments, and parts thereof."  The term "apparatus" has been
defined by the Court of International Trade as a combination of
articles and materials which are intended, adapted and necessary
for the accomplishment of some purpose. The Deseret Co., v.
United States, ___CIT___, Slip. Op. 86-93 (1983).  The video
module is a combination of articles and materials which are
intended, adapted and necessary for transmitting a freeze frame
image in conjunction with telephonic communication.  The video
module is used only in conjunction with the telephone.  It is an
enhancement to the telephonic conversation. Therefore, it is
Customs position that the video module is telephonic apparatus
classifiable under this heading.

  You argue that the video module should be classified similarly
to facsimile machines.  In HQ 081424, October 31, 1988, Customs
ruled that facsimile machines, even when combined with
telephones, were classifiable under 684.66, TSUS, which provides
for electrical telegraph apparatus and instruments: other:
terminal apparatus.  However, this ruling also stated that when
telephones are combined with facsimile machines, "the telephone
serves a function which is incidental and subordinate to that of
the facsimile machine....The telephone can be viewed as an added
feature which improves the capability of the facsimile machine in
an auxiliary manner." (HQ 081424, page 3).

  In the instant case, the facts are reversed.  Here, the video
module serves a function which is incidental and subordinate to
that of the telephone.  The video module is only used in
conjunction with the telephone communication to enhance the call
by transmitting a 4 1/2", black and white, freeze frame image of
the caller.  The video module need not be used for the telephonic
communication, and in fact, can only be used if the other party
also has a video module as well.  Thus, whereas the facsimile
machine's subordinate use telephone was classifiable under the
provision for facsimile machines, here, the subordinate use video
module is classifiable under the provision for telephone sets and
other terminal equipment.

  Webster's New World Dictionary, Third College Edition, page
1381, in pertinent part, defines "terminal" as: "1) of, at, or
forming the end, extremity, or terminus of something."  The video
module is of, at, or forming the end, extremity, or terminus of
the telephone line, coextensively with the telephone set.
Therefore, the video module is terminal equipment as are
telephone sets.

  You argue that the video module is classifiable under 688.41,
TSUS.  However, this heading provides for electrical articles and
electrical parts of articles, not specifically provided for.  The
video module is specifically provided for under 684.58 and thus,
cannot be classified under 688.41, TSUS.

 You argue that the video module is not a complete article as
imported because it is later fitted with a chassis, a systems
board, wired, tested and packaged.  However, General Interpretive
Rule 10(h) states: "unless the context requires otherwise, a
tariff description for an article covers such article, whether
assembled or not assembled, and whether finished or not finished.
It is Customs position that the video module, as imported,
constitutes an unfinished video module.

  Therefore, it is Customs position that the video module is
properly classifiable under 684.58, TSUS, which provides for;
"[t]elephone sets and other terminal equipment and parts
thereof."

HOLDING:

  The video module is properly classifiable under 684.58, TSUS,
which provides for "[t]elephone sets and other terminal
equipment and parts thereof."  The rate of duty is 8.5% ad
valorem.

                              Sincerely,




                              John Durant, Director
                              Commercial Rulings Division