Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post - USA tariffs that apply to import of ethnographic items.

A. G. Maisey · 30th September 2025, 10:02 PM

Yes Ian, that's what it could come down to, just sit things out until the wind blows another way.

But as can be seen in Lee's post & the Nihonto Message Board discussion, there is certainly a degree of confusion about the present situation. However, if we take a strictly rational position which is in accord with the provisions of the legal framework that dictates what the tariff, if any, should be, it might be possible to dispel some of this confusion.

The item that began the Nihonto discussion is a Japanese sword, it is able to be classified by application of the HTS provisions as either a collectable item of ethnographic interest or as an antique. To determine the correct classification this must be determined in accordance with its primary interest, so it is required to be able to present an argument that supports either a primary interest as an antique, or a primary interest as an ethnographic collectable.

The pivotal question is this:- is this item collectable because it is an antique, or is it collectable because it is of ethnographic interest?

In my opinion, a good barrister could frame a convincing argument for either case. But we cannot have both classifications, the tariff must be decided under only one classification. In this situation we opt for the most favourable classification and comply strictly with all government required actions. I doubt that we would want a lawyer involved.

The value of the item is not relevant in determining the applicable tariff, most especially is it not relevant now, since the $800 threshold has been removed. It may well be that the value of an imported item could generate some impact on the cost of importation, but as far as determination of a classification under the HTS Schedule, that value is not something to be considered.

The only thing that is relevant is how the item should be classified, and there is a framework within which that can be achieved.

In my initial post to this thread I included a link to the Customs & Border Protection ruling that clarifies the way in which the responsible authorities consider matters such as this. Here is that link again:-

https://rulings.cbp.gov/ruling/N346428

This official ruling could be used as a model for preparation of a supporting document for the HTS classification used.

In the case of an item of high value, it might be advisable to use a professional service to deal with a matter such as this, but I believe that where the value of an item is of a comparatively low value, then the required documentation could easily be provided by the seller. We are considering this matter as it presently applies to import into the USA, but in fact, a similar situation has applied in Europe for many years, and can be satisfied by provision of an invoice or warrant statement.

I would welcome any information that can demonstrate that what I have written above is incorrect or inaccurate.

30th September 2025, 10:02 PM	#3
A. G. Maisey Member Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 7,067	Yes Ian, that's what it could come down to, just sit things out until the wind blows another way. But as can be seen in Lee's post & the Nihonto Message Board discussion, there is certainly a degree of confusion about the present situation. However, if we take a strictly rational position which is in accord with the provisions of the legal framework that dictates what the tariff, if any, should be, it might be possible to dispel some of this confusion. The item that began the Nihonto discussion is a Japanese sword, it is able to be classified by application of the HTS provisions as either a collectable item of ethnographic interest or as an antique. To determine the correct classification this must be determined in accordance with its primary interest, so it is required to be able to present an argument that supports either a primary interest as an antique, or a primary interest as an ethnographic collectable. The pivotal question is this:- is this item collectable because it is an antique, or is it collectable because it is of ethnographic interest? In my opinion, a good barrister could frame a convincing argument for either case. But we cannot have both classifications, the tariff must be decided under only one classification. In this situation we opt for the most favourable classification and comply strictly with all government required actions. I doubt that we would want a lawyer involved. The value of the item is not relevant in determining the applicable tariff, most especially is it not relevant now, since the $800 threshold has been removed. It may well be that the value of an imported item could generate some impact on the cost of importation, but as far as determination of a classification under the HTS Schedule, that value is not something to be considered. The only thing that is relevant is how the item should be classified, and there is a framework within which that can be achieved. In my initial post to this thread I included a link to the Customs & Border Protection ruling that clarifies the way in which the responsible authorities consider matters such as this. Here is that link again:- https://rulings.cbp.gov/ruling/N346428 This official ruling could be used as a model for preparation of a supporting document for the HTS classification used. In the case of an item of high value, it might be advisable to use a professional service to deal with a matter such as this, but I believe that where the value of an item is of a comparatively low value, then the required documentation could easily be provided by the seller. We are considering this matter as it presently applies to import into the USA, but in fact, a similar situation has applied in Europe for many years, and can be satisfied by provision of an invoice or warrant statement. I would welcome any information that can demonstrate that what I have written above is incorrect or inaccurate.