BINDING TARIFF INFORMATION APPLICATION
Filed under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) No. 952/2013 (Union Customs Code)
Application Reference: BTI-GR-2022-003847
Filing Date: November 15, 2022
Applicant: Thalassa Shipping & Logistics Société Anonyme 47 Akti Miaouli, 185 35 Piraeus, Greece EORI No. GR094827361000
Filed with: Piraeus Regional Customs Office Independent Authority for Public Revenue (AADE) 2 Karaoli & Dimitriou Street, 185 31 Piraeus, Greece
Legal Representatives: Alexandros Vournas & Maria-Christina Georgiou Vournas & Theodorakis Dikigiriko Grafeio 22 Academias Street, 106 71 Athens, Greece
Prepared Under the Coordination of: Calderwood & Harkness LLP Avenue Louise 480, 1050 Brussels, Belgium
Right-click to update Table of Contents
SECTION 1: APPLICANT INFORMATION
The applicant in this matter is Thalassa Shipping & Logistics Société Anonyme ("TSL" or the "Applicant"), a Greek société anonyme engaged in the provision of port terminal services, container handling, and maritime logistics across major Greek commercial ports. TSL is established and registered under the laws of the Hellenic Republic, with its principal registered office located at the Port of Piraeus. TSL holds valid long-term concession agreements for the operation of container terminal facilities at the ports of Piraeus, Thessaloniki, and Volos.
The full identification details of the Applicant and its authorized legal representatives are set forth in the table below:
The Applicant confirms that it is established in the customs territory of the European Union, that it holds a valid and active EORI number, and that it is duly authorized under Greek law to file this application for Binding Tariff Information pursuant to Article 33 of Regulation (EU) No. 952/2013.
The power of attorney referenced above, attached as Annex A, has been duly executed by Mr. Nikos Papadimitriou, Chief Executive Officer and authorized representative of TSL, and has been notarized in accordance with Greek law. The power of attorney grants Messrs. Vournas and Georgiou full authority to submit this application, to respond to any requests for information or clarification from AADE, and to represent TSL in any proceedings arising out of or connected with this application, including the pending administrative proceedings referenced in Section 7 below.
SECTION 2: TYPE OF APPLICATION
2.1 Nature of Application
This application is submitted as a BTI Application in connection with pending administrative proceedings before the Independent Authority for Public Revenue of the Hellenic Republic (Ανεξάρτητη Αρχή Δημοσίων Εσόδων — "AADE").
The Applicant respectfully requests the issuance of a Binding Tariff Information ruling pursuant to Article 33 of Regulation (EU) No. 952/2013 (the "Union Customs Code" or "UCC") with respect to the goods described in Section 3 of this application. The BTI ruling is sought in connection with pending administrative proceedings concerning the tariff classification of the goods, as further described below and in Section 7.
2.2 Reference to Pending Proceedings
The relevant pending administrative proceedings and associated file references are as follows:
The Assessment Notice referenced above reclassified certain goods previously imported by the Applicant and assessed additional customs duties in the amount of €1,478,400.00 (one million four hundred seventy-eight thousand four hundred euros). The Applicant has timely filed an administrative objection to the Assessment Notice, as more fully described in Section 7 of this application. The Applicant submits this BTI application in order to obtain a definitive and binding classification ruling that will serve to inform and support the resolution of the pending administrative proceedings.
SECTION 3: DESCRIPTION OF GOODS
This application concerns two categories of container handling equipment manufactured by Hailong Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. and imported by the Applicant into the customs territory of the European Union through the Port of Piraeus, Greece. Both categories of goods are described in detail below.
3.1 Product 1: Ship-to-Shore (STS) Gantry Crane
Commercial Designation: Hailong QC-65 Super Post-Panamax Ship-to-Shore Container Crane (the "STS Crane" or "QC-65")
Manufacturer: Hailong Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. (海龙重工有限公司)
Manufacturer Address: No. 288 Gangkou Road, Zhenhai District, Ningbo, Zhejiang Province 315200, People's Republic of China
Unified Social Credit Code: 91330211MA2GR8KT5X
Manufacturer Contact: Mr. Wei Junhao, Export Sales Director, Hailong Heavy Industries Co., Ltd.
Function and Mode of Operation: The Hailong QC-65 is a quayside container crane designed and engineered for the loading and unloading of intermodal shipping containers from container vessels at port terminal facilities. The crane lifts containers vertically from the ship's hold or deck using a specialized container spreader mechanism suspended by wire ropes from a trolley that travels along a horizontal boom extending over the vessel. The crane traverses containers horizontally along the boom from the waterside to the landside of the quay. Upon reaching the landside, the crane lowers the container for placement onto terminal transport vehicles, such as automated guided vehicles (AGVs), straddle carriers, or terminal tractors with chassis. The process is reversed for the loading of containers onto vessels. The STS Crane is the primary interface between the vessel and the terminal, and its function is fundamentally that of a crane: it lifts, traverses horizontally, and lowers containerized cargo.
Key Technical Specifications:
• Outreach (waterside): 65 meters (22 containers wide), capable of servicing Ultra Large Container Vessels (ULCVs) of 24,000+ TEU capacity
• Backreach (landside): 20 meters
• Lift height above rail: 52 meters
• Lift height below rail (for barge operations): 15 meters
• Safe working load (SWL): 65 metric tons under spreader; 80 metric tons under headblock
• Operating mechanism: Electrically powered hoist and trolley system; the container spreader is suspended from the trolley by wire ropes passing through a headblock; the trolley travels horizontally along the boom on trolley rails; the hoist raises and lowers the spreader and container by means of wire ropes driven by electric hoist motors
• Mounting: Rail-mounted on crane rails embedded in the quay apron; the crane is supported by four legs resting on bogies equipped with steel wheels running on crane rails with a gauge of 30.48 meters; the crane travels longitudinally along the quay on these rails to position itself alongside the vessel
• Automation level: Semi-automated — the crane is operated by a human crane operator located in an elevated operator cabin; the crane is equipped with automated anti-sway and container positioning systems that use sensor inputs to dampen load sway and assist the operator in precise container placement; the hoist and trolley traverse are under direct operator control, while the anti-sway system provides automated correction inputs
• Power supply: 11 kV shore power via a cable reel system
• Structural type: A-frame gantry with box-girder boom, hinged at the waterside for raising to allow vessel passage
Country of Origin: People's Republic of China
Purchase Contract Reference: HHI-TSL-2019-001, dated January 15, 2019, between Hailong Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. (Seller) and Thalassa Shipping & Logistics Société Anonyme (Buyer)
Quantity Previously Imported: 12 units
Declared CIF Customs Value: €38,400,000 total (€3,200,000 per unit)
Ports of Use: The 12 STS Cranes are deployed at TSL's terminal facilities at the ports of Piraeus, Thessaloniki, and Volos, pursuant to long-term concession agreements between TSL and the respective port authorities.
Previous Classification (as declared on Single Administrative Documents): CN 8426 41 00 — "Ships' derricks; cranes, including cable cranes; mobile lifting frames, straddle carriers and works trucks fitted with a crane — Other self-propelled machinery — On tyres"
Applicant's Proposed Classification: CN 8426 19 00 — "Ships' derricks; cranes, including cable cranes; mobile lifting frames, straddle carriers and works trucks fitted with a crane — Overhead travelling cranes, transporter cranes, gantry cranes, bridge cranes, mobile lifting frames and straddle carriers — Other"
3.2 Product 2: Automated Stacking Crane (ASC) System
Commercial Designation: Hailong ASC-40R Automated Stacking Crane (the "ASC" or "ASC-40R")
Manufacturer: Hailong Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. (海龙重工有限公司)
Manufacturer Address: No. 288 Gangkou Road, Zhenhai District, Ningbo, Zhejiang Province 315200, People's Republic of China
Unified Social Credit Code: 91330211MA2GR8KT5X
Function and Mode of Operation: The Hailong ASC-40R is an automated container stacking crane designed and engineered for use in the container yard of a port terminal facility. The ASC picks containers from terminal transport vehicles (such as AGVs or terminal tractors) using a specialized container spreader mechanism suspended by wire ropes from a trolley traveling along a horizontal gantry crossbeam. The crane lifts the container vertically, traverses it horizontally along the crossbeam to the designated storage position within a yard block, and lowers the container into the stack. For outbound operations, the process is reversed: the ASC retrieves a container from its storage position in the stack, traverses it horizontally, and lowers it onto a waiting transport vehicle for delivery to the quayside STS crane or to a road/rail interface. The fundamental physical function of the ASC is identical to that of other gantry cranes: it lifts loads vertically by means of wire ropes, traverses them horizontally, and lowers them. The distinguishing characteristic of the ASC is that this crane function is performed without a human operator on board; the crane is instead controlled by a central terminal operating system.
Key Technical Specifications:
• Stacking capacity: 6 containers high, 10 rows wide, variable block length (typically 40–60 bays)
• Safe working load (SWL): 40 metric tons under spreader; 50 metric tons under headblock
• Operating mechanism: Electrically powered hoist and trolley system; the container spreader is suspended from the trolley by wire ropes passing through a headblock; the trolley travels horizontally along the gantry crossbeam on trolley rails; the hoist raises and lowers the spreader and container by means of wire ropes driven by electric hoist motors
• Mounting: Rail-mounted on crane rails in the container yard; the gantry structure is supported by legs resting on bogies equipped with steel wheels running on crane rails; the crane travels longitudinally along the yard block on these rails to position itself at the designated bay
• Automation level: Fully automated (unmanned operation); the ASC is operated by the central terminal operating system using Hailong's proprietary HaiControl Suite v4.2 software platform; the system integrates sensor data from LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging), Differential GPS (DGPS), and optical container recognition cameras to determine container position, orient the spreader, and execute lift, traverse, and lowering commands; no human operator is present on the crane during normal operations; a remote operator can assume manual control from a central control room in exception-handling situations
• Power supply: Conductor bar system or cable reel from yard electrical infrastructure
• Structural type: Portal gantry with box-girder crossbeam spanning the full width of the yard block
Country of Origin: People's Republic of China
Purchase Contract Reference: HHI-TSL-2020-003, dated June 10, 2020, between Hailong Heavy Industries Co., Ltd. (Seller) and Thalassa Shipping & Logistics Société Anonyme (Buyer)
Quantity Previously Imported: 8 units
Declared CIF Customs Value: €28,800,000 total (€3,600,000 per unit)
Previous Classification (as declared on Single Administrative Documents): CN 8426 41 00 — "Ships' derricks; cranes, including cable cranes; mobile lifting frames, straddle carriers and works trucks fitted with a crane — Other self-propelled machinery — On tyres"
Applicant's Proposed Classification: CN 8426 19 00 — "Ships' derricks; cranes, including cable cranes; mobile lifting frames, straddle carriers and works trucks fitted with a crane — Overhead travelling cranes, transporter cranes, gantry cranes, bridge cranes, mobile lifting frames and straddle carriers — Other"
3.3 Subheading Correction Note
The Applicant expressly acknowledges that its previous customs declarations, as filed on the Single Administrative Documents ("SADs") accompanying the importation of the goods described above, classified both the STS Cranes (Product 1) and the ASC Systems (Product 2) under CN subheading 8426 41 00 ("Other self-propelled machinery — On tyres").
The Applicant recognizes and submits that this subheading classification was incorrect at the time of filing, albeit within the correct heading (8426). The subheading 8426 41 00 applies specifically to self-propelled lifting machinery mounted on tyres — for example, rubber-tyred gantry cranes (RTGs) and mobile harbour cranes running on pneumatic rubber tyres. Neither the STS Cranes nor the ASC Systems are mounted on tyres. Both products are rail-mounted on steel wheels running on crane rails: the STS Cranes on quay crane rails embedded in the quay apron, and the ASC Systems on yard crane rails in the container yard. The products are therefore not properly classifiable under subheading 8426 41 00.
The Applicant submits that the correct subheading for both products is CN 8426 19 00 ("Other overhead travelling cranes, transporter cranes, gantry cranes, bridge cranes, mobile lifting frames and straddle carriers — Other"), which is the residual subheading within the first-level subdivision of heading 8426 covering overhead travelling cranes, gantry cranes, and similar equipment not specifically provided for in a more specific subheading.
The Applicant notes that this subheading correction — from CN 8426 41 00 to CN 8426 19 00 — has no duty impact whatsoever. All subheadings within heading 8426 of the Combined Nomenclature carry a 0% MFN (Most Favoured Nation) duty rate under the Common Customs Tariff. The reclassification from one subheading to another within heading 8426 therefore does not give rise to any additional customs duty liability, nor does it alter the Applicant's customs debt in any respect.
The Applicant further notes that the 18 Rubber-Tyred Gantry (RTG) cranes imported under Purchase Contract HHI-TSL-2019-002 are not at issue in this application. These RTG cranes were imported with a total declared CIF customs value of €25,200,000 (18 units × €1,400,000 per unit) and were classified under CN 8426 41 00. AADE does not dispute the classification of the RTG cranes, and the Applicant confirms that CN 8426 41 00 is the correct subheading for those particular units, which are indeed rubber-tyre-mounted self-propelled cranes. The RTG cranes are accordingly excluded from the scope of this BTI application.
3.4 Note on Customs Entries
All equipment that is the subject of this application was imported into the customs territory of the European Union through the Port of Piraeus, Greece, over a period spanning approximately March 2019 to January 2022. The goods were entered for free circulation and customs declarations were lodged in the standard manner by TSL's authorized customs broker.
Customs entries for all equipment were filed by Peloros Customs Agency S.A., an authorized customs brokerage firm acting on behalf of TSL, with the following details:
• EORI Number: GR801234567000
• Licensed Customs Broker: Stavros Liapis, License No. GR-CB-1287
• Address: 31 Akti Poseidonos, 185 31 Piraeus, Greece
Across the full scope of TSL's equipment procurement programme, a total of 47 units of container handling equipment were imported under four purchase contracts with Hailong Heavy Industries Co., Ltd., with a total declared CIF customs value of €98,000,000. The breakdown of the imported equipment is as follows:
Only the 12 STS Gantry Cranes (Contract HHI-TSL-2019-001) and the 8 ASC Systems (Contract HHI-TSL-2020-003) are at issue in this BTI application, representing 20 units with a combined declared CIF customs value of €67,200,000.
SECTION 4: CLASSIFICATION PROPOSED BY APPLICANT
The Applicant respectfully submits that the correct tariff classification of both products described in Section 3 above is as follows:
The Applicant's proposed classification under CN 8426 19 00 places both products within heading 8426 of the Combined Nomenclature, which covers "Ships' derricks; cranes, including cable cranes; mobile lifting frames, straddle carriers and works trucks fitted with a crane." This is the heading that specifically describes cranes and related lifting machinery. Both products are gantry cranes — machines that lift loads vertically by means of wire ropes and a spreader mechanism suspended from a trolley on a horizontal boom or crossbeam supported by a gantry structure — and are therefore properly classified within this heading. The specific subheading 8426 19 00 is the appropriate subheading because both products are rail-mounted gantry cranes that do not fall within the more specific subheadings for tyre-mounted (8426 41 00) or other self-propelled (8426 49 00) machinery.
AADE's Contending Classification: The Applicant notes that AADE, under Assessment Notice AADE/ADAN/2022/0073 dated August 12, 2022, contends that both the STS Gantry Cranes and the ASC Systems should be reclassified from heading 8426 to CN subheading 8428 90 90 ("Other lifting, handling, loading, or unloading machinery — Other"), which is the residual subheading of heading 8428 and carries an MFN duty rate of 2.2%.
The financial impact of AADE's proposed reclassification is as follows:
• Total declared CIF customs value of affected goods: €67,200,000
• Duty rate under AADE's proposed classification (CN 8428 90 90): 2.2%
• Additional duty assessed by AADE: €67,200,000 × 2.2% = €1,478,400.00
The Applicant submits that AADE's reclassification is incorrect for the reasons summarized in Section 5 below and set forth in detail in Annex C (Legal Argument Annex). The Applicant respectfully requests that this BTI ruling confirm the classification of both products under CN 8426 19 00 at a 0% MFN duty rate.
SECTION 5: REASONS FOR PROPOSED CLASSIFICATION
5.1 Applicable Legal Framework
The classification of goods imported into the customs territory of the European Union is governed by the following legal instruments, all of which are relevant to this application:
(a) Regulation (EU) No. 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code (the "UCC"), in particular Articles 33 and 34, which establish the procedure for the issuance of Binding Tariff Information decisions and the legal effects thereof;
(b) Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, as amended by subsequent implementing regulations adopting the annual versions of the Combined Nomenclature (the regulation applicable to the goods at issue being Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1832 of 12 October 2021, establishing the Combined Nomenclature applicable from 1 January 2022);
(c) The General Interpretive Rules ("GIRs") of the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System (the "Harmonized System" or "HS"), as established by the International Convention on the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System of 14 June 1983. The GIRs are incorporated into the Combined Nomenclature by virtue of Article 1(2) of Regulation 2658/87, and are binding rules for the classification of goods;
(d) The Section Notes and Chapter Notes of the Combined Nomenclature, in particular Section XVI Notes and Chapter 84 Notes, which have legal force and take precedence in matters of classification within their scope;
(e) The Explanatory Notes to the Harmonized System, published by the World Customs Organization ("WCO"), which, while not legally binding, constitute an important aid to the interpretation of the scope of the various headings and are widely relied upon by customs authorities and courts throughout the European Union;
(f) The Explanatory Notes to the Combined Nomenclature, published by the European Commission, which supplement the WCO Explanatory Notes and provide additional guidance on the classification of goods under the CN; and
(g) The settled case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union ("CJEU") on matters of tariff classification, which provides binding interpretive guidance on the application of the GIRs, the heading texts, and the section and chapter notes.
5.2 Relevant Heading Texts
For the convenience of the reviewing authority, the relevant heading and subheading texts are set forth below:
Heading 8426. "Ships' derricks; cranes, including cable cranes; mobile lifting frames, straddle carriers and works trucks fitted with a crane."
The relevant subheadings within heading 8426 are as follows:
• CN 8426 11 00 — Overhead travelling cranes on fixed support — bridge cranes
• CN 8426 12 00 — Mobile lifting frames on tyres and straddle carriers
• CN 8426 19 00 — Overhead travelling cranes, transporter cranes, gantry cranes, bridge cranes, mobile lifting frames and straddle carriers — "Other"
• CN 8426 20 00 — Tower cranes
• CN 8426 30 00 — Portal or pedestal jib cranes
• CN 8426 41 00 — Other self-propelled machinery — "On tyres"
• CN 8426 49 00 — Other self-propelled machinery — "Other"
• CN 8426 91 10 / 8426 91 90 — Other machinery designed for mounting on road vehicles — various
• CN 8426 99 00 — Other
All subheadings within heading 8426 carry a 0% MFN duty rate under the Common Customs Tariff.
Heading 8428. "Other lifting, handling, loading or unloading machinery (for example, lifts, escalators, conveyors, teleferics)."
The relevant subheading within heading 8428 is:
• CN 8428 90 90 — Other — "Other" (residual subheading)
• MFN duty rate: 2.2%
It is immediately apparent from the heading texts themselves that heading 8426 specifically names "cranes" as one of the categories of goods it covers, while heading 8428 is a residual heading for "other" lifting, handling, loading, or unloading machinery — that is, machinery not more specifically described in the preceding headings of Chapter 84. The parenthetical examples given in heading 8428 — lifts, escalators, conveyors, and teleferics — are illustrative of the types of handling machinery covered by that heading, and none of these examples bears any resemblance to a crane.
5.3 Summary of Classification Arguments
The Applicant's detailed legal arguments in support of the proposed classification are set forth in Annex C (Legal Argument Annex), prepared jointly by Calderwood & Harkness LLP and Vournas & Theodorakis Dikigiriko Grafeio. The following is a summary of the key points of the Applicant's classification analysis. The reviewing authority is respectfully referred to Annex C for the complete analysis, including full citations to the Explanatory Notes, WCO classification opinions, and CJEU jurisprudence.
5.3.1 GIR 1 — Classification by Heading Text
General Interpretive Rule 1 provides that classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes. This is the primary and most fundamental rule of classification, and in the majority of cases, the correct classification of goods can be determined by reference to GIR 1 alone.
Both the STS Gantry Crane and the ASC System are "cranes" within the ordinary and technical meaning of that term as used in heading 8426. The essential defining characteristics of a crane are well established in engineering practice and in customs classification jurisprudence: a crane is a machine that lifts loads vertically by means of wire ropes, chains, or other lifting gear suspended from a jib, boom, or overhead structure (such as a gantry), and that may also traverse loads horizontally. Both products at issue in this application satisfy every element of this definition:
(a) Both products lift loads (shipping containers) vertically by means of wire ropes wound on electrically powered hoist drums;
(b) In both products, the load is engaged by a container spreader mechanism suspended from a trolley by wire ropes passing through a headblock;
(c) In both products, the trolley travels horizontally along a boom (in the case of the STS Crane) or a gantry crossbeam (in the case of the ASC), providing horizontal traverse of the load;
(d) Both products are supported by a gantry structure — a portal frame consisting of vertical legs and a horizontal spanning member — which is the structural configuration that gives the "gantry crane" its name; and
(e) Both products are rail-mounted, traveling longitudinally on steel wheels running on crane rails, which is a standard and common mounting configuration for gantry cranes in port terminals, shipyards, steel mills, and other industrial facilities.
The term "crane" in heading 8426 encompasses machines of all sizes, capacities, and configurations, including ship-to-shore cranes, gantry cranes, overhead travelling cranes, jib cranes, tower cranes, and mobile cranes. The STS Crane and the ASC are both gantry cranes, and they fall squarely within the scope of heading 8426 on the basis of GIR 1.
5.3.2 GIR 3(a) — Most Specific Description
Even if the reviewing authority were to consider the goods prima facie classifiable under both heading 8426 and heading 8428 (which the Applicant does not concede), the correct classification would be determined by reference to GIR 3(a), which provides that the heading which provides the most specific description shall be preferred to headings providing a more general description.
Heading 8426 specifically describes "cranes" and related lifting machinery. It names the goods by their technical category — cranes — and further enumerates specific types of cranes (ships' derricks, cable cranes) and related equipment (mobile lifting frames, straddle carriers).
Heading 8428, by contrast, is a residual heading for "other lifting, handling, loading or unloading machinery." The word "other" in the heading text expressly indicates that heading 8428 is intended to capture machinery that is not more specifically described in the preceding headings. This is the hallmark of a residual or catch-all provision. A crane — which is specifically named in heading 8426 — cannot be classified under heading 8428, because it is not "other" machinery; it is machinery that is specifically provided for.
Under GIR 3(a), the more specific heading (8426, which names "cranes") must prevail over the general heading (8428, which covers "other" handling machinery not elsewhere specified).
5.3.3 Explanatory Notes to Heading 8426
The Explanatory Notes to the Harmonized System for heading 8426 describe the machines covered by this heading as machines that lift loads using "ropes, chains, or other lifting gear suspended from a jib, boom, or overhead structure (gantry)." The Explanatory Notes further specify that heading 8426 covers, inter alia, gantry cranes, overhead travelling cranes, and portal cranes.
Both the STS Crane and the ASC satisfy every element of the Explanatory Notes' description of machines covered by heading 8426. They lift loads using wire ropes and a spreader mechanism suspended from a trolley traveling on a boom or gantry crossbeam — an overhead structure. They are gantry cranes by their structural configuration and by their mode of operation. There is no basis in the Explanatory Notes for excluding these products from heading 8426.
5.3.4 Automation Is Not a Distinguishing Factor
The Harmonized System and the Combined Nomenclature do not distinguish between manual, semi-automated, and fully automated machines within heading 8426. The heading text refers to "cranes" without any qualification as to the means by which the crane is controlled or operated. The subheadings of heading 8426 are organized by structural type and mounting configuration (overhead travelling, tower, portal, self-propelled on tyres, etc.), not by the degree of human intervention or computerized control.
The term "crane" is not conditioned on the presence of a human operator. Classification under the Combined Nomenclature is based on the objective mechanical characteristics of the machine at the time of importation, not on the degree of computerized control or the operational mode in which the machine is deployed. This principle is well established in the case law of the CJEU, which has consistently held that the classification of goods must be determined by reference to their objective characteristics and properties as defined at the time of customs clearance, and not by reference to their intended use or the manner in which they are operated by the importer (see, inter alia, Case C-396/02, DFDS BV, para. 27; Case C-280/97, ROSE Elektrotechnik, para. 13).
A computer-controlled crane remains a crane. The substitution of an automated control system for a human operator does not alter the fundamental physical function of the machine — lifting, traversing, and lowering loads by means of wire ropes on a gantry structure — and therefore does not affect its classification under the Combined Nomenclature. If the framers of the Harmonized System had intended to exclude automated cranes from heading 8426, they would have done so expressly, as is the practice in other parts of the nomenclature where distinctions based on automation or control mode are classification-relevant (see, e.g., heading 8457, which specifically refers to "machining centres" with automated tool-changing capability). No such distinction exists in heading 8426.
5.3.5 Section XVI, Note 3 — Principal Function of Composite Machines
Should the reviewing authority consider the ASC System to be a "composite machine" consisting of a crane component and a software/automation component, Section XVI, Note 3 of the Combined Nomenclature provides that composite machines consisting of two or more machines fitted together to form a whole and other machines designed for the purpose of performing two or more complementary or alternative functions are to be classified as if consisting only of that component or as being a machine which performs the principal function.
The principal function of the ASC is the physical lifting, horizontal traversing, and lowering of shipping containers. This is a crane function. The automated stacking optimization and yard management software functions — including the HaiControl Suite v4.2 platform, the LIDAR and DGPS positioning systems, and the optical container recognition system — are ancillary to, and in service of, this principal physical function. The software does not perform an independent function separate from the crane function; it directs and controls the crane's movements in the same manner as a human operator would, merely substituting algorithmic decision-making for human judgment. The "Intelligence" of the control system does not transform the machine from a crane into a different category of machine any more than the addition of an autopilot transforms an aircraft from heading 8802 into a different category of vehicle.
Accordingly, even under a composite-machine analysis pursuant to Section XVI, Note 3, the ASC is properly classified as a crane within heading 8426.
5.3.6 Consistent EU Practice — Netherlands BTI Ruling
The Applicant's proposed classification is consistent with existing BTI practice in other EU member states. In particular, the Applicant draws the reviewing authority's attention to BTI Ruling NL-BTI-2021-01234, issued by Douane Nederland (Netherlands Customs) on June 14, 2021, which classified substantially similar STS cranes and ASC systems — including fully automated ASC systems with comparable sensor suites and software control platforms — under CN 8426 19 00. A copy of this ruling is attached as Annex E.
The Dutch ruling analyzed the same classification questions at issue in this application — whether port gantry cranes and automated stacking cranes are properly classified as "cranes" under heading 8426 or as "other handling machinery" under heading 8428 — and concluded that the products are cranes within the meaning of heading 8426. The Dutch authority's reasoning is aligned with the Applicant's analysis and is based on the same principles of interpretation: the heading text, the GIRs, and the Explanatory Notes.
While BTI rulings issued by one EU member state are not formally binding on the customs authorities of another member state (except as regards the specific applicant and goods covered by the ruling), they are indicative of prevailing classification practice and constitute a relevant interpretive reference. The Applicant submits that the Dutch ruling reflects the correct application of the Combined Nomenclature and should be followed by AADE.
5.3.7 Rebuttal of AADE's Classification Under Heading 8428
AADE's reclassification of the STS Cranes and ASC Systems under heading 8428 is incorrect and unsupported by the legal framework for the following reasons:
(a) Heading 8428 is a residual heading. It covers "other" lifting, handling, loading, or unloading machinery — that is, machinery not more specifically described in a preceding heading. Both the STS Crane and the ASC are specifically described in heading 8426 as "cranes." They cannot be classified under heading 8428 because they are not "other" machinery; they are cranes, and cranes have their own specific heading.
(b) The parenthetical examples in heading 8428 illustrate fundamentally different machinery. The examples given in heading 8428 — lifts, escalators, conveyors, and teleferics — are all continuous or reciprocating transport systems that move goods or persons along a fixed path. None of these examples involves the lifting of loads by wire ropes from a boom or gantry structure. The products at issue are structurally, functionally, and operationally different from the types of machinery contemplated by heading 8428.
(c) The use of the machines for container loading, unloading, or stacking does not remove them from heading 8426. All port cranes are used for loading, unloading, and handling containers. The fact that the STS Cranes and ASC Systems are used in a container terminal context does not transform them from "cranes" into "handling machinery." The end use of a machine does not override its objective classification as determined by its mechanical characteristics and the heading texts.
(d) AADE's reclassification appears to conflate the machine's physical function with its operational use. The physical function of both products is that of a crane — lifting, traversing, and lowering loads by wire ropes on a gantry structure. Their operational use — quayside container transfer in the case of the STS Crane, and automated container stacking in the case of the ASC — is the application context in which the crane function is deployed. Classification is determined by the machine's objective mechanical function, not by its application context.
5.3.8 Rebuttal of German BTI Ruling DE-BTI-2020-05678
The Applicant is aware of BTI Ruling DE-BTI-2020-05678, issued by the Hauptzollamt Hamburg-Hafen (Germany) on September 3, 2020, which classified a similar automated stacking crane system under CN 8428 90 90. A copy of this ruling, together with the Applicant's detailed rebuttal, is attached as Annex F.
The Applicant respectfully submits that the German ruling is analytically flawed and should not be followed by AADE for the following reasons:
(a) Conflation of physical function and operational use. The German ruling conflates the machine's physical function (the lifting and lowering of containers by wire ropes — a crane function) with its operational use (automated container storage management within a yard block). It characterizes the machine's function as "automated container storage" rather than "crane operation," thereby arriving at the conclusion that the machine is "handling machinery" rather than a "crane." This approach is inconsistent with the settled principle that classification must be based on the objective mechanical characteristics of the machine, not on the operational context or business purpose for which it is deployed.
(b) Erroneous treatment of automation as a classification-determinative factor. The German ruling treats the degree of automation of the ASC as a factor that distinguishes it from conventional cranes and places it outside heading 8426. As discussed in Section 5.3.4 above, the Combined Nomenclature does not distinguish between manual and automated machines within heading 8426. The degree of computerized control is not a classification-relevant criterion under the GIRs, the heading texts, or the chapter notes.
(c) Inconsistent distinction between operator-controlled and automated cranes. The German ruling acknowledges that operator-controlled rail-mounted gantry cranes (RMGs) — which are mechanically identical to ASC systems but are operated by a human crane operator rather than an automated control system — are properly classified under heading 8426. It then reclassifies the automated version of the same machine to heading 8428, solely on the basis that the human operator has been replaced by a computer. This distinction is textually unsupported: there is no provision in heading 8426, heading 8428, or the relevant chapter or section notes that draws a line between operator-controlled and automated cranes. The German ruling thereby creates an artificial and unsupported distinction that leads to the anomalous result that two mechanically identical machines receive different tariff classifications based solely on the presence or absence of a human operator.
(d) Minority position among EU member states. The German ruling represents a minority position among EU member states. As noted above, the Netherlands has issued a BTI ruling (NL-BTI-2021-01234) classifying substantially similar ASC systems under heading 8426. To the best of the Applicant's knowledge and based on research conducted by Dr. Lukas Brenner of Argonaut Trade Consulting GmbH (see Annex D), the prevailing classification practice among EU member states that have addressed the classification of automated port cranes favors heading 8426 over heading 8428.
The Applicant submits that the German ruling should not be followed and that the classification of both the STS Cranes and the ASC Systems under CN 8426 19 00 is correct as a matter of law.
SECTION 6: SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
The following annexes are attached to this application and form an integral part thereof. The reviewing authority is respectfully requested to consider all annexes in connection with the evaluation of this application.
SECTION 7: CONTEXT OF PENDING ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
7.1 Background on the Post-Clearance Audit
On April 4, 2022, the Independent Authority for Public Revenue (AADE), acting through the Piraeus Regional Customs Office, initiated a post-clearance audit of TSL's customs entries for container handling equipment imported through the Port of Piraeus during the period from March 2019 to January 2022. The audit was conducted under file reference AADE/DTE/2022/PIR-04518 and was led by Chief Customs Auditor Ms. Aikaterini Vlachopoulou.
The audit covered the entirety of TSL's equipment importation programme, encompassing all 47 units of container handling equipment imported under four purchase contracts with Hailong Heavy Industries Co., Ltd., with a total declared CIF customs value of €98,000,000. The scope of the audit included verification of tariff classification, customs valuation, origin determination, and compliance with applicable import licensing and documentation requirements.
The post-clearance audit was completed on August 1, 2022. The audit report identified classification discrepancies with respect to 20 of the 47 imported units — specifically, the 12 STS Gantry Cranes (Contract HHI-TSL-2019-001) and the 8 ASC Systems (Contract HHI-TSL-2020-003). The remaining 18 RTG cranes and 9 spare parts consignments were found to be correctly classified and valued, and no adjustments were proposed with respect to those items.
7.2 The Assessment Notice
On August 12, 2022, AADE issued Assessment Notice AADE/ADAN/2022/0073 (the "Assessment Notice"), reclassifying the 20 units at issue (12 STS Gantry Cranes and 8 ASC Systems) from CN subheading 8426 41 00 (as declared by the Applicant on the SADs) to CN subheading 8428 90 90 ("Other lifting, handling, loading, or unloading machinery — Other"), and assessing additional customs duty in the aggregate amount of €1,478,400.00, calculated as follows:
• Combined declared CIF customs value of the 20 reclassified units: €67,200,000
• Duty rate under CN 8428 90 90 (MFN): 2.2%
• Additional duty assessed: €67,200,000 × 2.2% = €1,478,400.00
The Assessment Notice was accompanied by the audit report, which set forth AADE's reasoning for the reclassification. In summary, AADE took the position that the STS Gantry Cranes and ASC Systems are not "cranes" within the meaning of heading 8426 but rather constitute "other lifting, handling, loading, or unloading machinery" within the meaning of heading 8428, on the grounds that: (i) the machines' primary function is the automated handling and management of containers within a port terminal, rather than the simple lifting of loads; (ii) the ASC Systems, in particular, are integrated automated material handling systems rather than standalone cranes; and (iii) the degree of automation and software integration distinguishes these machines from conventional cranes. The Applicant vigorously disputes all three of these contentions, for the reasons set forth in Section 5 above and in Annex C.
It is noted that AADE does not dispute the classification of the 18 RTG cranes imported under Contract HHI-TSL-2019-002 (CN 8426 41 00, €25,200,000 total, 18 units × €1,400,000/unit). Those cranes are acknowledged by AADE to be correctly classified as "other self-propelled machinery — on tyres" under CN 8426 41 00. This is a significant concession, because the RTG cranes perform essentially the same physical function as the ASC Systems — lifting, traversing, and stacking containers in the container yard using wire ropes and a spreader mechanism on a gantry structure — and differ from the ASC Systems principally in that they are (a) rubber-tyre-mounted rather than rail-mounted, and (b) operator-controlled rather than automated. If AADE accepts that the RTG cranes are "cranes" under heading 8426, it is inconsistent to exclude the mechanically analogous ASC Systems from the same heading solely on the basis of their mounting type and control mode.
7.3 Administrative Objection
On November 30, 2022, TSL, acting through its legal representatives Vournas & Theodorakis Dikigiriko Grafeio, filed a timely administrative objection (ενδικοφανής προσφυγή) to the Assessment Notice before AADE's Directorate of Resolution of Disputes (Διεύθυνση Επίλυσης Διαφορών — DED) in Athens. The administrative objection challenges AADE's reclassification of the subject goods on all grounds described in this application, and requests the annulment of the Assessment Notice and the cancellation of the additional duty assessment.
The administrative objection is currently pending before the DED, and no decision has been issued as of the date of this filing. The filing of this BTI application is intended to complement, and not to substitute for, the pending administrative objection proceedings.
7.4 Purpose of this BTI Application
The Applicant requests the issuance of this BTI ruling in order to establish a definitive and binding classification applicable to the STS Gantry Cranes (Hailong QC-65) and the ASC Systems (Hailong ASC-40R) described in Section 3 above. The ruling is sought in connection with, and will inform the resolution of, the pending administrative proceedings before AADE's DED. A binding classification ruling under Article 33 UCC will provide legal certainty as to the correct tariff classification of the subject goods, which is the central issue in dispute in the pending proceedings.
Furthermore, the Applicant notes that there exist divergent BTI rulings across EU member states with respect to the classification of automated stacking cranes. As described in Sections 5.3.6 and 5.3.8 above, the Netherlands has classified such equipment under heading 8426 (NL-BTI-2021-01234), while Germany has classified similar equipment under heading 8428 (DE-BTI-2020-05678). This divergence in classification practice among member states is precisely the type of situation contemplated by Article 34(10) of the UCC, which provides for consultation with DG TAXUD and, where necessary, the issuance of a classification regulation to ensure uniform application of the Combined Nomenclature across the European Union.
The Applicant respectfully submits that, in the event that the reviewing authority considers that the classification of the subject goods cannot be definitively resolved on the basis of the existing legal framework and interpretive guidance, the matter should be referred to DG TAXUD in accordance with Article 34(10) UCC for the purpose of securing a harmonized classification position across all EU member states. The Applicant's strong preference, however, is for the prompt issuance of a BTI ruling confirming the classification of both products under CN 8426 19 00.
SECTION 8: APPLICANT'S DECLARATION
The undersigned, acting in his capacity as the duly authorized legal representative of Thalassa Shipping & Logistics Société Anonyme pursuant to the power of attorney attached as Annex A to this application, hereby makes the following declaration:
1. The information provided in this application, including all statements of fact, descriptions of goods, technical specifications, and representations as to prior customs entries, is true and complete to the best of the Applicant's knowledge and belief. The Applicant has made all reasonable efforts to ensure the accuracy of the information provided and has not knowingly omitted any material fact or circumstance relevant to the classification of the goods described herein.
2. The Applicant respectfully requests the issuance of a Binding Tariff Information ruling pursuant to Article 33 of Regulation (EU) No. 952/2013, confirming the classification of both the Hailong QC-65 Super Post-Panamax Ship-to-Shore Container Crane (Product 1) and the Hailong ASC-40R Automated Stacking Crane (Product 2) under CN subheading 8426 19 00 at a 0% MFN duty rate under the Common Customs Tariff.
3. The Applicant is aware that, pursuant to Article 33(3) of Regulation (EU) No. 952/2013, a Binding Tariff Information ruling is binding on the customs authorities of all EU member states with respect to the holder of the ruling and only in respect of goods which are identical in every respect to those described in the ruling. The Applicant is further aware of the rights and obligations arising from a BTI ruling, including the validity period, the conditions under which a ruling may be annulled or revoked, and the obligations of the holder to inform the customs authorities of any change in facts or circumstances that may affect the content or validity of the ruling.
4. The Applicant undertakes to cooperate fully with AADE in the processing of this application, to provide any additional information or documentation that may be requested by the reviewing authority, and to make the subject goods available for physical inspection, sampling, or testing if so required.
SIGNED AND SUBMITTED:
By: ________
Name: Alexandros Vournas Capacity: Managing Partner, Vournas & Theodorakis Dikigiriko Grafeio Legal Representative of Thalassa Shipping & Logistics Société Anonyme Athens Bar Registration No.: 18744 Address: 22 Academias Street, 106 71 Athens, Greece Date: November 15, 2022
SECTION 9: ADMINISTRATIVE REFERENCE
The following administrative and professional reference information is provided for the convenience of the reviewing authority and for the purposes of file management and inter-office coordination.
9.1 Coordinating International Counsel
This application was prepared under the coordination of Calderwood & Harkness LLP, an international law firm with offices in:
• Brussels: Avenue Louise 480, 1050 Brussels, Belgium