Three authorities look at the same sputtering target and see three objects. To a customs officer it is a machine part or a piece of metal, turning on what it is bonded to. To China's export-control list it is a target — a listed form with its own control code, for seven rare-earth elements. To a quality engineer it is a specification with nothing live behind it: every ASTM standard written for sputtering targets has been withdrawn. This guide sets out what a Korean buyer must fix before the first order, with three caveats. We could not verify a single current Korean duty rate for any target-relevant tariff line, so no current rate appears below — the only rates printed are the three a 2022 tribunal decision recites for specific used goods, labelled as such. The classification question is live, not settled; the one authoritative commentary we found stops at a preview we could not read past. And the customs treatment of the spent target you send back — most of what you bought — we could not establish.
Disclaimer: This article is general practical information, not legal, customs or export-control advice, and does not guarantee the classification, duty rate or legal determination for any specific transaction — verify with a licensed customs broker, and control status with the authority itself. Our reading of China's export-control lists is analysis, not legal advice, and rules change.
There Is No "Sputtering Target" Heading
The nomenclature has no line for the object. Chinese customs practice names the dispute: composition theory (成分说) against function-and-use theory (功能用途说) — one makes a copper target copper, the other a machine part.
The function line runs to heading 8486: machines used solely or principally for semiconductor or flat-panel-display manufacture, with parts and accessories. "Solely or principally" is load-bearing — a target feeding a glass-coating, optical, web-coating or decorative PVD line falls back to what it is made of.
We could not verify a heading for aluminium or silicon targets, so print none.
In Korea the question is open in print: an April 2026 trade-press commentary poses the copper-target case squarely, between 제7409호 and 제8486호. We could not retrieve its conclusion, and will not guess — anyone who tells you Korea classifies copper targets under 8486 is stating something we could not confirm. A separate Korean decision classed an ALD graphite susceptor under 8486.90-2040, not the ceramics chapters — no mention of targets, but suggestive.
The US settled its own version long ago. HQ 964845 (2002) held such targets are parts of the machine, not the material it works on — "essential role in the functioning of sputtering machines" — later extended to ITO, chromium, copper, molybdenum and titanium targets. None of that gives Korea a tariff line.
Bonding Changes the Answer, and a Korean Tribunal Has Said So
In 조심2020관0138 (22 February 2022), Korea's Tax Tribunal (조세심판원) ruled on used ITO targets in three forms: bare type (backing removed, shard-like), RT type (bonded to a titanium backing tube), PT type (bonded to a copper backing plate). Customs had assessed all three as industrial ceramic articles.
6909.19 is ceramic articles; 3825.69 is chemical-industry waste; 8486.90-3030 is display-machinery parts. The rates in that table are the ones the 2022 decision recites for those specific used goods — not current, not for a new target, not to be carried into a quotation. We reproduce them because the spread is the point: the same material landed on a waste line bare, a machine-part line bonded.
For bare type, the tribunal found a spent target separated from its backing cannot hold an intact shape, similar to fragmented used ITO an earlier council had treated as 3825 material. For RT and PT it held the assembly is a single article, since the backing is mounted in the equipment and performs functions it needs — magnetic-field formation, cooling, rotation. The decision concerns used targets, not a general rule — the honest statement is not "unbonded targets are waste in Korea," only that the distinction has decided a case, and decided it in a particular direction. A buyer may infer that attaching the backing plate made the object a machine part; a bare blank must argue its way there on other grounds. "Target blank" and "bonded target assembly" should not be assumed to share a tariff line. The importer's own history was used against it — it had declared the tube separately and claimed re-export exemption on it as a reusable packing container, presupposing the tube is not integral machinery. You cannot call the plate packaging on the way in and machinery on the way out.
Fix this via the advance ruling under 관세법 제86조 (품목분류 사전심사), decided by the head of 관세평가분류원, an affiliate of the Korean customs administration (관세청) — English name unconfirmed. Period: 30 days, excluding correction/analysis time, standing until changed under 관세법 제87조. File on the object you will actually import — it may not answer for a bare blank. For a worked example of pre-fixing the classification, see our SiC guide; for when the ruling and the goods do not match, see our YSZ guide.
China's Control List Names Targets — For All Seven Rare Earths
Our YSZ guide flagged a yttrium-zirconium alloy target — the yttrium slice of a larger fact. Announcement No. 18 of 2025 (MOFCOM/Customs, 4 April 2025) controls seven rare earths, each with a dedicated .a.3 target sub-item naming plain and alloy-target variants.
It cites customs codes 3824999922 and 8486909110 against each. Its Note 2 closes a loophole: control includes sheet or plate (片) and tube (管) forms — a rotatable tube target is inside because the list said "targets." It was not part of the November 2025 suspension, still in force mid-2026.
Notice No. 61 of 2025 went further, creating a whole category, "Rare earth target materials," reaching outside China: a foreign exporter needs a MOFCOM dual-use permit where Chinese-origin listed rare earths are 0.1% or more of the item's value, with a Declaration of Compliance travelling with the goods. A further announcement suspended it in November 2025, but a suspension is a pause, not a repeal. Dates move, so we track them in our timeline; for which licence clock governs a shipment, see our guide.
For the seven above, "target" is a listed item with its own code — different from gallium, germanium and indium, where the question is whether the target is a listed substance in an unlisted shape.
- Indium. Announcement No. 10 of 2025 controls only indium phosphide, trimethylindium and triethylindium. Neither 靶材 (target) nor indium tin oxide appears in it — the common claim that China's indium controls catch ITO targets is wrong.
- Antimony. No. 33 of 2024 does name targets, but only indium antimonide above stated purity/dislocation-density thresholds — an infrared-detector item, not a mainstream buy.
- Gallium/germanium. No. 23 of 2023 never uses 靶材, but every gallium entry lists forms "including but not limited to," so a gallium oxide target is arguably an unlisted form — IGZO harder still, no mixtures sub-item. No published determination — we will not supply one. State the form, not the element, per three years of gallium and germanium controls.
- Graphite. We did not read the December 2023 announcement in full; treat as unchecked, not clear.
China's tariff has a dedicated line for the bonded assembly, split by control status: 8486.90.9100 (带背板的溅射靶材组件, with backing plate), 8486.90.9110 (两用物项管制的带背板的溅射靶材组件, dual-use controlled), 8486.90.9190 (其他的带背板的溅射靶材组件, other) — 8486909110 is one of the two codes cited above, and the bonded form is the unit, matching Korea's tribunal.
Korea's Own Strategic-Goods Side
Korean strategic-goods control runs on 「전략물자 수출입고시」 (산업통상부고시 제2025-37호, effective 31 December 2025), via 자가판정/사전판정 through YESTRADE and 무역안보관리원, renamed from 전략물자관리원 in August 2024 (KOSTI in English).
We searched 별표 2. 타겟 appears only in the nuclear context (1A228, tritium-production assemblies) — no entry for sputtering targets as such, so "Korea's list controls sputtering targets" is false as stated. More awkward: several entries catch target materials by specification.
Separately, 2B005.e controls sputter deposition equipment by performance; Korea controls the coater, the target riding in only if its own specification catches it (별표 2 PDF, accessed August 2026).
전략물자 controls are export controls — bite on export/re-export, including a spent target sent back. On import there is no Korean import licence for strategic goods; instead the 수입목적확인서 confirms the importer's declared purpose and undertaking not to transship, so your supplier attaches it to their licence application. Issued within 7 days, excluding review time, under 대외무역법 시행령 제47조의2제2항 and 전략물자 수출입고시 제61조제3항.
K-REACH: The Second Limb Is the Problem
Our SiC powder import guide sets the two-duty framing: being an existing substance rules out only the new-substance route, and registration and annual reporting are separate obligations. That carries over; specific to targets is the article exemption.
Korea's automatic exemption, resting on 환경부고시 제2018-234호 「등록 또는 신고 면제대상 화학물질」 (the notice as most recently confirmed to us dates from 2018; whether since amended is a point to re-verify), exempts, in the wording we obtained, substances in a specific solid form performing a defined function that are not released during use. No confirmation filing is required; the importer must hold documentation for inspection.
A target satisfies the first easily — a solid form whose shape determines its function — but arguably fails the second, since sputtering is precisely the release of material during use, the opposite of the pigment-in-a-moulded-part case the exemption seems written for. This is our reading, not a determination — but "it is a solid metal article, so K-REACH does not apply" is not a safe assumption, and belongs with a specialist before the first shipment. Powder differs too: unambiguously a substance, where a bonded target is at least arguably an article. K-REACH now sits with 기후에너지환경부, registration/evaluation at 화학물질안전원.
No Live Standard — So the Contract Is the Standard
Every ASTM standard written specifically for sputtering targets has been withdrawn.
Whatever you want must be written into the contract — nothing else exists to point at.
- Purity. F1709 said "the grade designation is a measure of total metallic impurity content," not suitability by itself. It covered grades 4N, 4N5, 5N, separately requiring trace metals, carbon, oxygen, sulfur, nitrogen, hydrogen analysis — echoed in patent literature ("4N to 6N excluding gas components"). "99.999%" tells you about metals, possibly nothing about gases, which often govern film quality. Specify O/C/N/H limits separately, and the computation basis.
- Density. Relative density is bulk over theoretical density, by the Archimedes method; patent literature claims 99%+ prevents arcing, but a peer-reviewed ITO study (Nov. 2005, abstract only) reported nodule formation increasing above 99.5%. Specify it because low density causes arcing, flagging the ITO relationship as non-monotonic at the top. No ASTM density standard names targets (B962 names only the method).
- Grain size. Finer, homogeneous grains improve uniformity and deposition rate, reducing micro-arcing. Specify a mean size and a uniformity criterion, by ASTM E112 (patent-cited, second-hand).
- Bonding. Indium's 156.6 °C melting point caps usable power density; elastomer bonds tolerate higher temperatures but must be qualified for the chamber. F1512 could reveal unbonded areas 3 mm and larger, but "accept/reject standards are not specified; these are subject to agreement between target supplier and user" — since withdrawn. If your purchase order does not state a bonded-area percentage, a maximum void size and the inspection method, nothing does. One Japanese bonding house publishes over 95% bonded area with voids under 0.5% of surface — one company's criterion. No flatness/dimensional tolerance verified from a primary source.
A COA should assemble all four items above, plus dimensions/flatness/parallelism against drawing and production lot (not sample-lot) identity. GDMS and ultrasonic testing are the two data sets we specify, named on our other materials page; lot-verification is in our SEM/EDS method.
Most of the Target Never Gets Used
A sputtering target is not mostly consumed. It is mostly returned.
These describe two geometries and must never be juxtaposed as one target; "utilisation rate" is used in opposite senses — sometimes the 30% used, sometimes the 30% ceiling. The consequence: for a planar target, the material cost of a given film quantity is the purchase price of three targets or more, not one — why the spent target's route belongs in the first contract, not an afterthought.
The Return Leg Is Where Our Answers Run Out
We would rather say plainly what we could not establish than give a confident answer that fails at the border.
- Duty drawback: unresolved. The scheme runs on 「수출용 원재료에 대한 관세 등 환급에 관한 특례법」 (no English title given; circulating ones are not government translations). 제3조 covers goods consumed in producing the exported good, excluding indirect consumption such as machinery maintenance. 제9조's window is 2–3 years; 제14조's application deadline is 5 years from export after a 2022 amendment — the 2-year figure still online is superseded. The honest part: a target is closer to tooling than incorporated raw material — consumed, but what leaves Korea is residue, not a product containing it. We found no ruling, guidance or decision on whether a spent target qualifies. Do not plan on it until confirmed in writing.
- Re-export duty exemption: real, with the trap already described. 관세법 제97조 exempts duty on goods re-exported within a set period, extendable for unavoidable reasons; using or transferring the goods otherwise triggers immediate collection plus a penalty up to KRW 5 million. This is the instrument used for backing plates/tubes — the same estoppel trap as above. (관세법 제98조, 재수출감면세, also exists; we could not retrieve its text.)
- Waste regulation: the exposure nobody prices in. 폐기물관리법 defines waste as material no longer needed for a business's activity. Reported Korean Supreme Court authority — 대법원 2010. 9. 30. 선고 2009두6681 — holds discharged material is waste even when supplied as recycling feedstock (via search summaries, not the database — reported, not verbatim). The route out is 순환자원 recognition under 「순환경제사회 전환 촉진법」 제21조 (effective 1 January 2024): the minister may recognise a material as a circular resource where not harmful, economically viable, tradeable, plus decree criteria — applied for, not automatic. Cross-border movement has two tiers: 수출입규제폐기물 (Basel-listed) needs a permit (허가); 수출입관리폐기물 needs only a notification (신고) under 제18조의2, 10-day response, tier set by 환경부고시 제2020-292호. We could not obtain that notice's annex, confirm Korea's list mirrors Basel Annex IX, or find any indium/ITO entry. Only pattern found: one company's practice in the tribunal — import, debond/rebond, normal export, backing handled separately under re-export exemption.
What is defensible: whether the return leg is a routine export or a notified/permitted waste shipment is decided by classification and circular-resource recognition — not by value. Debonding before shipment can move the customs line and the regulatory regime with it. Settle this in the contract before the first order.
What to Do Before the First Order
- Decide what you are importing — bonded assembly or bare blank — and file 품목분류 사전심사 on that object.
- Hold one position on the backing plate across classification, re-export exemption and the return leg, and write it down.
- Get the control determination in writing for rare earths, gallium, germanium, indium or graphite — do not infer it.
- Ask for the exporter's ten-digit declared code and read it.
- Check the material against 별표 2 by specification, not the word "target", and offer the 수입목적확인서 to your supplier early.
- Put K-REACH to a specialist; powder and finished-target imports differ.
- Write the specification yourself, per the COA checklist above.
- Fix the return route before the first shipment and price the residue into unit cost.
The contract devices carrying licence risk are in Procurement Strategy Under Export Controls; supplier-side questions are in our vendor audit checklist.
Frequently Asked Questions
What HS code does a sputtering target use in Korea?
None dedicated. The lines compete: function (parts of machines used solely/principally for semiconductor or flat-panel-display manufacture, heading 8486) and constituent material. An April 2026 Korean commentary poses this for copper targets, between 제7409호 and 제8486호; conclusion not retrieved. Fix the line via an advance ruling under 관세법 제86조.
Does bonding the target to a backing plate change the classification?
Yes, in Korea. 조심2020관0138 (2022) held used ITO targets still bonded to a titanium tube or copper plate were a single article, part of flat-panel-display machinery, while bare debonded material went to the chemical-waste line. A decision on specific used goods — but a blank and a bonded assembly should not be assumed to share a tariff line.
Are sputtering targets caught by China's export controls?
Depends on the element. For the seven rare earths under Announcement No. 18 of 2025, "target" is a listed form with its own control code, and Note 2 confirms sheet, plate and tube forms are all inside. For gallium, germanium and indium, targets are not a listed form — no published determination for mixed oxides. One common claim is wrong: China's indium controls reach indium phosphide, trimethylindium, triethylindium — not ITO or targets.
Is a sputtering target exempt from K-REACH as a solid article?
Not self-evidently. Korea's exemption requires the substance be in a specific solid form performing a defined function and not released during use. A target passes the first limb but arguably fails the second, since sputtering releases material by design — our reading, not a determination.
Can we claim duty drawback on spent targets sent back for reclaim?
We do not know, and would not plan on it. The drawback statute covers raw material incorporated into an exported good, excluding indirect consumption in running machinery; a spent target sits awkwardly between those, since what leaves Korea is residue, not a product containing it. No ruling found — the re-export exemption under 관세법 제97조 is a different instrument with its own trap.
References (Public Sources)
- Korea Tax Tribunal 조심2020관0138, 22 February 2022 — classification, backing reasoning, consumption figures, re-export exemption.
- China MOFCOM/Customs Announcement No. 18 of 2025 (Chinese original + law-firm English) and Notice No. 61 of 2025 (US university translation) — target sub-items, Note 2, "Rare earth target materials," 0.1% rule, Declaration of Compliance, suspension per trade-press reporting.
- MOFCOM/Customs Announcements No. 10 of 2025 (indium), No. 33 of 2024 (antimony), No. 23 of 2023 (gallium/germanium) — Chinese originals; tariff codes 8486.90.9100/.9110/.9190.
- US CBP rulings HQ 964845 (2002), NY N303633, NY N306310 (2019).
- Korea Customs/관세평가분류원 on 관세법 제86조; 관세무역개발원 주간 관세무역정보 제2177호 (conclusion not retrieved); 한국관세신문 (ALD susceptor).
- 「전략물자 수출입고시」/별표 2 (August 2026: 1A228, 1C226, 1C230, 1C231, 1C234, 2B005.e); 무역안보관리원 (KOSTI)/YESTRADE; 수입목적확인서 basis.
- 한국화학융합시험연구원 — 환경부고시 제2018-234호. ASTM F1709, F1512, F3166, F3192, B962.
- Hong and Lee, Clean Technology Vol. 21 No. 4, 2015; Thin Solid Films, Nov. 2005 (abstract only); US patent literature on grain size/purity; a Japanese bonding house's criterion.
- 관세법 제97·98조; 「수출용 원재료에 대한 관세 등 환급에 관한 특례법」 제3·9·14조; 폐기물관리법; 「순환경제사회 전환 촉진법」 제21조; 「폐기물의 국가 간 이동 및 그 처리에 관한 법률」 제18조의2; 환경부고시 제2020-292호.
Figures above reflect public sources as of writing; control lists, suspensions and classification practice all move.
Nami Tech Solutions (NTS) does not hold sputtering targets as a standing line, and nothing above is an offer of stock. What we do is project work: fixing the classification and control determination on the object that will actually ship, writing the purity basis, bond map and return route into one specification, and settling the licence contingency as an ordinary contract term.
