Contract analysis

I. BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY A. The Applicant Thalassa Shipping & Logistics Société Anonyme ("TSL") is a Greek société anonyme (Ανώνυμη Εταιρεία, or "A.E.") incorporated and existing under the laws of the Hellenic Republic, registered with the Piraeus Commercial Registry under Registration No. 78214/06/B/09/42 and holding Greek Tax Identification Number (AFM) 094827361. TSL was founded in 2009 and has since g

II. SUMMARY OF TSL'S CLASSIFICATION POSITION TSL submits that both the STS gantry cranes (Hailong Model QC-65) and the ASC systems (Hailong Model ASC-40R) are properly classified under heading 8426 of the Combined Nomenclature, specifically under subheading CN 8426 19 00 ("Other overhead travelling cranes, transporter cranes, gantry cranes, bridge cranes, mobile lifting frames and straddle carriers"). Heading 8426, i

III. ADDITIONAL EXPERT OPINION OF DR. LUKAS BRENNER TSL encloses as Exhibit 1 to this submission a supplemental expert opinion prepared by Dr. Lukas Brenner, Managing Director of Argonaut Trade Consulting GmbH, Friedrichstraße 191, 10117 Berlin, Germany. This opinion supplements and expands upon the initial expert opinion of Dr. Brenner submitted as part of the original BTI application. Dr. Brenner is one of Europe's

IV. SURVEY OF EU MEMBER STATE BTI RULINGS AND CLASSIFICATION PRACTICE TSL encloses as Exhibit 2 to this submission a comprehensive survey of Binding Tariff Information rulings and national classification practices across EU member states regarding the classification of STS gantry cranes and ASC-type automated stacking crane systems. This survey was compiled by Calderwood & Harkness LLP based on publicly available BTI

1. Conflation of function and use. The German ruling confuses the machine's physical function with its operational use. The physical function of the ASC-40R — and of any gantry crane — is the vertical lifting, horizontal traversing, and controlled lowering of loads. This is a crane function, and it is performed by the same mechanical means (wire ropes, trolley, gantry) regardless of whether the crane is controlled by

2. Erroneous principal function analysis. The German authority purported to apply Section XVI, Note 3, which requires composite machines to be classified by reference to their principal function. The authority identified "automated handling and storage" as the principal function. However, "automated handling and storage" is not a physical function of the machine — it is an operational outcome achieved through softwar

3. Artificial automation distinction. The German authority's distinction between operator-controlled RMG cranes (heading 8426) and automated ASC systems (heading 8428) is unsupported by the heading text. Heading 8426 covers "cranes" without any condition or limitation based on the presence or absence of a human operator. The heading does not distinguish between manually operated, semi-automated, and fully automated c

4. Limited scope. The German ruling addressed only ASC systems. It did not consider or address STS gantry cranes. Even if the German approach to ASC classification were correct (which TSL denies), it would have no bearing on the classification of TSL's 12 STS gantry cranes. The STS gantry crane is universally recognized as a crane, and AADE's reclassification of the STS cranes under heading 8428 goes beyond even the

5. Minority position. As demonstrated by the survey enclosed as Exhibit 2, the German ruling represents a minority view among EU member states. No other member state identified in the survey has adopted the approach of reclassifying automated gantry cranes from heading 8426 to heading 8428. The weight of classification practice across the EU supports classification under heading 8426.

V. WCO HARMONIZED SYSTEM COMMITTEE PRECEDENT TSL encloses as Exhibit 3 to this submission a summary of relevant classification opinions, decisions, and discussions of the World Customs Organization's Harmonized System Committee relating to the classification of automated cranes and port handling equipment. This summary was prepared by Calderwood & Harkness LLP with the assistance of Dr. Brenner, drawing on Dr. Brenne

VI. THE AUTOMATION QUESTION — CLASSIFICATION PRINCIPLES The central analytical question presented to DG TAXUD in this consultation is whether full automation transforms a gantry crane, which would otherwise be classified under heading 8426, into "other handling machinery" under heading 8428. TSL submits that it does not, and that the principles of classification under the Harmonized System and the Combined Nomenclatu

VII. ECONOMIC AND COMMERCIAL SIGNIFICANCE While TSL recognizes that classification under the Combined Nomenclature must be determined on the basis of the applicable legal rules and classification principles rather than on the basis of economic considerations alone, TSL respectfully draws DG TAXUD's attention to the significant commercial implications of the classification question at issue, which underscore the urgen

VIII. REQUESTED OUTCOME In light of the foregoing, TSL respectfully requests that DG TAXUD take the following actions:

1. Confirm the classification of STS gantry cranes and ASC systems under heading 8426. TSL requests that DG TAXUD confirm that ship-to-shore (STS) gantry cranes, including the Hailong QC-65, and automated stacking crane (ASC) systems, including the Hailong ASC-40R, are properly classified under heading 8426 of the Combined Nomenclature, specifically under subheading CN 8426 19 00 ("Other overhead travelling cranes, t

2. Provide appropriate guidance to ensure uniform application of this classification across all EU member states' customs authorities. TSL requests that DG TAXUD consider the most appropriate mechanism for ensuring uniform application, which may include: (a) Issuing a classification regulation under Article 57(4) of the Union Customs Code and Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No. 2446/2015 (Delegated Act), establishing a

3. Address and resolve the analytical divergence between the Dutch and German approaches. TSL requests that DG TAXUD specifically address the question of whether the degree of automation is a relevant factor in determining whether machinery falls under heading 8426 or heading 8428 of the Combined Nomenclature, and confirm that automation is not a classification-determinative factor for purposes of distinguishing betw

IX. AVAILABILITY AND COOPERATION TSL, through its undersigned counsel, remains at DG TAXUD's full disposal for any questions, requests for additional documentation, requests for clarification, or invitations for oral submissions that may arise in the course of DG TAXUD's review of this submission and the underlying BTI application. TSL is prepared to make its technical personnel available to provide further details r