Multifunction machine classification turns on principal purpose; where none exists, residual Heading 84.59 applies.

An imported machine designed for both garment fusing and transfer printing was held classifiable as a multifunction machine rather than as a textile printing machine. Because the evidence showed that neither function was its principal purpose and it was equally efficacious for both uses, Chapter Note 5 of Chapter 84 required classification by reference to the residual heading. The correct classification was therefore Heading 84.59 as a machine having an individual function not elsewhere specified, and not Heading 84.40 as a machine used for printing on textiles.

---

---

Issues: Whether the imported Trident II automatic fusing transfer printing press was classifiable under Heading 84.40 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as a machine used for printing on textiles, or under the residuary Heading 84.59 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as a machine having an individual function not elsewhere specified.

Analysis: The machine literature and the importer's explanation showed that the equipment was designed to perform two distinct functions, namely fusing of garments and transfer printing. On the material before it, the machine was found to be equally efficacious for both purposes, so neither function could be treated as its principal purpose. Chapter Note 5 of Chapter 84 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 provides that a machine used for more than one purpose is to be treated, for classification, as if its principal purpose were its sole purpose, and where no one purpose is the principal purpose, the machine is to be classified in Heading 84.59.

Conclusion: The machine was correctly classifiable under Heading 84.59 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and not under Heading 84.40 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

---