VERSION 2 CONTINUED BELOW 1

Section 301 Investigation: China’s Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology 

Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation - Form to Request Exclusion of Product

When submitting a product exclusion request using this form, enter the specified 

information in the following fields and explain the basis and rationale for your statements. 

By completing this form, you certify that the information provided is complete and 

correct to the best of your knowledge.

1. Indicate whether the comment contains business confidential information (BCI), is a public 

document, or is a public version of a BCI document.

Public Version of BCI

2. Please provide a complete and detailed description of the particular product of concern:

The product of concern is an imaging unit comprising: a plastic housing containing toner (marking substance), 

a secure microcontroller (authentication chip), a cylindrical hollow aluminum organic photoconductor (OPC) 

drum, a magnetic charge roller, a developer roller, a waste hopper, wiper blade and a small quantity of internal 

rotating parts to turn the OPC and move the toner towards the developer roller. The imaging unit is 312.6mm 

long, 168.9mm wide, and 85.1mm high. It weighs 1675 grams. The secure microcontroller (authentication 

chip) is mounted on the exterior of the imaging unit, and consists of a rectangular PCB assembly 17mm long 

and 33.5mm wide with 4 gold-colored electrical contacts for connecting to the machine with which it will be 

used. These characteristics are all clearly visible, making this product exclusion easily administrable by CBP.

3. 10-digit HTSUS item number* for product you wish to address in this product exclusion 

request: *Use numerical characters only with no special characters (example: 1023456789). For help 

in finding the HTSUS item number associated with your product, see https://hts.usitc.gov/

8443992050

4. Requestor Information

Requestor Name (Last, First): Binder, Andy

Organization Name: HP Inc.

Note: Representatives submitting on behalf of an organization must enter information below.

Requestor Representative: Covington & Burling LLP

5. Requestor’s relationship to the product: Importer

6. Does this submission in regulations.gov include additional attachments?

YES

7. Please indicate whether any additional attachment contains business confidential 

information (BCI), is a public document, or is a public version of a BCI document.

Public Document
VERSION 2 CONTINUED BELOW 2

8. Is this product, or a comparable product, available from sources in the United States? (If 

you indicate “NO”, you must provide support for your assertion in Box 12).

NO

9. Is this product, or a comparable product, available from sources in third countries? (If you 

indicate “NO”, you must provide support for your assertion in Box 12).

NO

10. Please provide the value and quantity (with units) of the Chinese-origin product of concern 

that you purchased for each calendar year specified. Limit this figure to the products 

purchased by your firm (or by members of your trade association) alone. Please provide 

estimates if precise figures are unavailable.

Value units: USD Quantity units: Number of units

2017 Value: [III,III] 2017 Quantity: [I,III]

2016 Value: [III,III] 2016 Quantity: [I,III]

2015 Value: [III,III] 2015 Quantity: [I,III]

11. Is the Chinese-origin product of concern sold as a final product or an input used in the 

production of a final product or products?

FINAL PRODUCT

a) For imports sold as final products, please provide:

% of your total gross sales in 2017 that the Chinese-origin product accounted for.

** The percentage of 2017 gross sales represented by the product's sales is not available; 

prior to an acquisition that closed in late 2017, the product was sold by a non-HP entity.

b) For imports of inputs used in the production of final products, please provide:

% of the total cost of producing the final product(s) the Chinese-origin input

accounts for.

% of your total gross sales in 2017 that sales of the final product(s) incorporating the 

input accounted for.

N/A**
VERSION 2 END 3

12. Please provide information in support your request, taking account of the instructions 

provided in Section B of the Federal Register notice. If you responded “NO” to Questions 8 

or 9, you must provide support for your assertion in the box below. (Note: text entered 

below can extend beyond the apparent size of this box).

As described more fully in the attachment, HP believes an exclusion of the product of concern is appropriate and 

necessary because: a) the product is available only in China; b) the product is not strategically important to Made 

in China 2025 or other Chinese industrial policies; and c) imposition of additional duties would cause significant 

economic harm. 
1

September 27, 2018

PUBLIC DOCUMENT

Hon. Robert E. Lighthizer

United States Trade Representative

600 17th St. NW

Washington, DC 20508

Re: Requests for Exclusion of Particular Products from the Determination of Action 

Pursuant to Section 301: China’s Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology 

Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation, Docket No. USTR-2018-0025 

Dear Ambassador Lighthizer:

HP Inc. (“HP”) respectfully requests that the imaging unit described herein be excluded 

from the additional 25 percent ad valorem tariff announced by the June 20, 2018, determination 

of action pursuant to Section 301: China’s Acts, Policies and Practices Related to Technology 

Transfer, Intellectual Property (“IP”), and Innovation.1

The relevant imaging unit is a consumable used in certain legacy-technology, businessgrade printers. The imaging unit is compatible with popular A-4 single-function, monochrome 

printers, among others. Countless small- and medium-sized businesses have relied on this 

imaging unit for years, and many will continue to do so for the foreseeable future rather than 

upgrade to newer printer units. Consistent with customer’s demands for both quality and value, 

the imaging unit is assembled on efficient, long-running production lines in China that have been 

optimized for the unique supplier ecosystem in China.

While HP imports a wide range of products from China that are now subject to the 

additional duties, the company has considered alternative sourcing options and weighed the 

potential impact of the tariffs in seeking this targeted product exclusion. This requested exclusion 

for this imaging unit is appropriate and necessary under each of the factors identified by the 

Administration. First, components of the imaging unit are sourced only from Chinese suppliers, 

and because demand for this legacy product is declining, it is not economically viable to create 

new manufacturing capacity for this imaging unit outside of China. Second, this imaging unit, 

 1 Notice of Action and Request for Public Comment Concerning Proposed Determination of 

Action Pursuant to Section 301: China’s Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology 

Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation, 83 Fed. Reg. 28,710, 28,711 (June 20, 2018).
2

while employing proprietary technology, is not a high-growth “leading edge” product and 

therefore is not the focus of Made in China 2025 or other Chinese industrial policies. Third, the 

imposition of a 25 percent tariff on this imaging unit threatens severe economic harm to HP’s 

U.S. customers, primarily small- and medium-sized businesses, who rely on HP’s high-quality, 

and dependable imaging units for use in installed printers. Thus, tariffs are disproportionately 

harming U.S. owners of printers that rely on the product, without advancing China’s industrial 

policy goals that are the subject of this investigation. 

I. Description of Product of Concern

The imaging unit comprises a plastic housing containing toner (marking substance), a 

secure microcontroller (authentication chip), a cylindrical hollow aluminum organic 

photoconductor (OPC) drum, a magnetic charge roller, a developer roller, a waste hopper, wiper 

blade and a small quantity of internal rotating parts to turn the OPC and move the toner towards 

the developer roller. The imaging unit is 312.6mm long, 168.9mm wide, and 85.1mm high. It 

weighs 1675 grams. The secure microcontroller (authentication chip) is mounted on the exterior 

of the imaging unit, and consists of a rectangular PCB assembly 17mm long and 33.5mm wide 

with 4 gold-colored electrical contacts for connecting to the machine with which it will be used.

These characteristics are all clearly visible, making this product exclusion easily administrable 

by CBP. The imaging unit enters the United States under HTSUS subheading 8443.99.20.50. 

II. About HP Inc.

Since its founding in Palo Alto, California in 1939, HP has been a worldwide leader in 

developing technology products and solutions for consumers and businesses. For more than 70 

years, HP has offered a wide range of products to suit a variety of needs—from test and 

measurement equipment used in the design and production of Walt Disney’s first movies to 

computing systems that power the world’s largest enterprises. HP has a long history of notable 

firsts from introducing the world’s first handheld scientific calculator, to the first thermal inkjet 

printer, to the first desktop and portable computers. 

HP has demonstrated and maintained leadership in the print industry through significant 

investments in innovation and technology development. Supporting its technology innovation, 

HP invests hundreds of millions of dollars in research and development on imaging and printing, 

a significant portion of which is in HP’s print-related facilities in California, Idaho, Oregon, and 

Washington. These facilities alone support thousands of high-paying U.S. jobs. While key 

imaging and printing R&D is carried out in the United States, HP works with manufacturing 

partners and suppliers throughout the world—including in China—to maximize the efficiency of 

our supply chain and maintain our competitive edge.

III. Rationale for Exclusion Request

This exclusion request is one of 4 applications for a discrete set of imaging units for 

which HP believes an exclusion from the proposed tariffs is appropriate and necessary for HP 

and our customers.
3

A. The Product of Concern Is Available Only in China

Used in certain legacy products, this specific imaging unit cannot economically be 

resourced outside of China. The imaging unit is a custom-designed, consumable used in a subset 

of well-established printers. Certain specialized inputs for the imaging unit are currently sourced 

only from China. Moreover, the imaging unit is currently assembled only in China. Over the 

years, China has provided a unique supply chain ecosystem that has enabled the efficient and 

low-cost production of this high-quality imaging unit. Because this product is used in earlier 

generation printers, production volume of this imaging unit is small and declining. As a result, 

there is simply no economic incentive for HP and its suppliers to develop a new supply chain or 

capacity to manufacture these products in the United States or other third countries. While this 

affordable imaging unit is essential to our customers who use it in their legacy printers, 

production of the limited volume of imaging units required to service these customers does not 

demonstrate the economics commensurate with such a large-scale sourcing overhaul. Without an 

exclusion from the tariffs, HP’s customers would therefore be left bearing the full cost of this 

continued, unavoidable sourcing from China. 

B. The Product is Not Strategically Important To Made in China 2025 or Other 

Chinese Industrial Policies

This imaging unit is not relevant to China’s Made in China 2025 priorities or other 

industrial policies targeted by the Section 301 tariffs.2 Accordingly, tariffs on this imaging unit 

would play no strategic role in the U.S. government’s response to these policies. 

First, the export of this imaging unit to the United States, or to any other country for that 

matter, does not significantly contribute to the long-term economic strength of the Chinese 

technology sector, such that Chinese policymakers would see any payoff in promoting their 

development. This imaging unit does not comprise a growth market, and over the mid- to longterm, sales will likely decline further as the printers in which this imaging unit is used are 

replaced. Its exportation primarily benefits HP’s customers who rely on the company’s highquality imaging units at stable prices to be used in their existing printers.

Nor does this imaging unit employ any technology with the kind of path-breaking, 

strategic value that China seeks to develop through Made in China 2025 and other policies. To 

be sure, the technology behind this imaging unit is proprietary, and HP will remain diligent in 

enforcing its intellectual property rights against infringers. However, the nature of the technology 

is more aptly deemed “legacy” than “cutting edge.” In the printing space, the Chinese 

government is now training its sights on technology growth segments that are and/or will be 

advanced far beyond the technology utilized in the imaging unit at issue here. 

C. Imposition of Additional Duties Would Result in Severe Economic Harm

As a consumable of business-grade printers, the imaging unit serves mainly U.S. smalland medium-sized businesses, which are now experiencing the direct impact of the tariffs. 

Countless small- and medium-sized businesses in the United States have invested substantially in 

these workhorse printers, which are integral to their day-to-day business activities. The tariff has 

 2 Id.
4

increased operating costs for these businesses, penalizing them for purchases made many years 

ago of a trusted product from a market-leading brand. 

Because this market segment is particularly price sensitive, a tariff would encourage these 

customers to switch to less-expensive, lower-quality imaging units, such as the products made by 

Chinese IP infringers or copycat “knockoffs.”3 Infringing imaging units and knockoffs 

manufactured in China are typically lower in both quality and price, which is a function of the 

fact that these manufacturers do not invest in the R&D needed to bring a product to market. As a 

result, they produce a significantly inferior product and do not provide warranty support to 

printer owners when things go awry. A 25 percent tariff would make it more difficult for HP to 

compete with infringing and knockoff imaging units manufactured in China, inadvertently 

driving the growth of illegitimate products from China, while making these inferior and less 

reliable products more attractive to U.S. small- and medium-sized businesses in the United 

States. This outcome would be a detriment to these businesses and run counter to the 

Administration’s objective of minimizing “consumer impact.”4

The tariff would inflict economic harm on HP in two ways. In the near-term, as explained 

above, the company would lose imaging unit sales to Chinese manufacturers, which would seem 

to run contrary to the goals of this investigation. More critically, over the longer-term, certain 

U.S. customers could opt for another brand when choosing their next printer, based on the 

misperception that HP is intentionally raising prices for replacement imaging units. Most 

customers will not readily understand the impact of the tariffs, and any confusion about sudden 

price changes would likely dilute their confidence in the HP brand. 

IV. Conclusion

For the reasons stated above, HP respectfully requests an exclusion from the Section 301 

tariffs for the imaging unit described herein.

Sincerely,

/s/ Andy Binder

Andy Binder

General Manager, Office Supplies Solutions

HP Inc.

 3 Although HP continues to target infringers aggressively through Section 337 proceedings, 

making infringing products more economically attractive to customers undermines this 

enforcement strategy. See HP Inc., Comments Regarding Proposed Determination of Action 

Pursuant to Section 301, Docket No. USTR-2018-005, May 11, 2018, at 4–5. 

4 Notice of Determination and Request for Public Comment Concerning Proposed Determination 

of Action Pursuant to Section 301: China’s Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology 

Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation, 83 Fed. Reg. 14906, 14907 (Apr. 6, 2018).