Products sold together are frequently assumed to share a single HTS classification. In practice, this assumption is one of the most common sources of classification error reviewed in audits.

US tariff classification does not follow commercial packaging logic. It follows legal definitions, interpretive rules, and binding notes that often require items sold together to be classified separately.

This article explains how sets, kits, and bundles are treated under the HTS and why “sold together” rarely means “classified together.”

---

Why Commercial Bundling Does Not Control Classification

HTS classification is governed by the General Rules of Interpretation and the legal notes to sections and chapters. None of these concepts consider how products are marketed, bundled, or priced for sale.

From a legal perspective, the key questions are:

• What are the goods?
• How are they described in the tariff?
• Do the rules allow them to be classified together?

Retail packaging is not determinative.

---

The Legal Framework for Sets, Kits, and Bundles

The concept of classifying multiple items together appears primarily under GRI 3(b). However, GRI 3 only applies if specific conditions are met.

Before reaching GRI 3, classification must first be assessed under GRI 1 and GRI 2.

Skipping that sequence is a common error.

---

When GRI 3(b) Applies to Sets

Under GRI 3(b), goods may be classified together as a set only if all of the following conditions are met:

1. The goods consist of at least two different articles classifiable under different headings
2. The articles are put up together to meet a particular need or carry out a specific activity
3. The articles are packaged in a manner suitable for sale directly to users without repacking

If any of these conditions fail, GRI 3(b) does not apply.

Many commercial bundles fail the second condition.

---

Why Many Bundles Fail the “Specific Activity” Test

Audits often reveal that products sold together are merely grouped for convenience, promotion, or pricing.

Examples include:

• Promotional bundles
• Starter packs without a defined activity
• Assortments with unrelated functions

If the items do not collectively perform a single, clearly defined activity, they are not a set for tariff purposes, even if sold in one box.

---

Examples: Commercial Bundles vs HTS Classification Treatment

Commercial Scenario	Items Included	Common Assumption	Correct HTS Treatment
Tool starter kit sold at retail	Drill, drill bits, safety gloves	One kit, one HTS code	Separate classification if items do not perform a single specific activity together
Promotional electronics bundle	Laptop, mouse, headset	Laptop gives essential character	Often separate classification due to unrelated functions
Home cleaning bundle	Mop, bucket, detergent	Cleaning set under GRI 3(b)	Likely separate classification if items serve distinct purposes
First aid kit	Bandages, scissors, antiseptic wipes	Always a set	May qualify as a set only if packaged to meet a specific medical need
Kitchenware bundle	Pan, spatula, measuring cups	Classified as cookware set	Often fails specific activity test and must be classified separately
Maintenance kit	Lubricant, wrench, gloves	Single maintenance function	Frequently rejected as a set due to independent uses

---

Essential Character Is Often Misapplied

Even when GRI 3(b) applies, classification depends on identifying the item that gives the set its essential character.

Common audit errors include:

• Assuming the most expensive item controls classification
• Defaulting to the largest item by weight or size
• Selecting the item perceived as most important commercially

Essential character is a legal determination, not a pricing exercise. It depends on function, role, and contribution to the activity the set performs.

---

Kits Versus Sets in Classification Practice

The term “kit” has no independent legal meaning in the HTS.

Some kits qualify as sets under GRI 3(b). Many do not.

Auditors routinely reject classifications based on the label “kit” when the underlying analysis does not satisfy the conditions of GRI 3(b).

The name on the packaging does not control the outcome.

---

When Items Must Be Classified Separately

Items sold together must be classified separately when:

• One or more items are excluded by a legal note
• The items perform unrelated functions
• The bundle fails the specific activity requirement
• GRI 3(b) does not apply after proper analysis

In these cases, each item must be classified independently under its own heading.

---

The Role of Legal Notes and Exclusions

Legal notes often override any argument for set classification.

Audits frequently identify failures to apply:

• Section notes excluding certain articles
• Chapter notes restricting parts or accessories
• Notes that require separate classification regardless of packaging

Ignoring legal notes is a recurring audit finding in bundled product reviews.

---

Audit Red Flags Related to Sets and Bundles

Classification programs attract scrutiny when auditors see:

• Broad use of GRI 3(b) without documented analysis
• Identical bundles classified differently over time
• Lack of explanation for essential character determinations
• No review of legal notes

These patterns signal weak control rather than isolated error.

---

The Practical Takeaway

In HTS classification, commercial logic does not override legal structure.

Products sold together are often required to be classified separately because:

• GRI 3(b) applies narrowly
• Essential character must be legally established
• Legal notes frequently override bundling arguments

Treating bundles as a default basis for single classification is one of the fastest ways to create audit exposure.

Strong classification programs document why items are classified together and, just as importantly, why they are not.