United States International Trade Commision Rulings And Harmonized Tariff Schedule
faqs.org  Rulings By Number  Rulings By Category  Tariff Numbers
faqs.org > Rulings and Tariffs Home > Rulings By Number > 1990 HQ Rulings > HQ 0078115 - HQ 0080900 > HQ 0080145

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

HQ 080145

April 21, 1988

CLA-2 CO:R:C:G 080145 DSN


TARIFF NO.: 322.0779

Mrs. D.W.S. Wai
Second Secretary
Hong Kong Commercial Affairs
British Embassy
3100 Massachusetts Ave. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20006

RE: Tariff Classification of cotton fabrics

Dear Mrs. Wai:

This is in response to your letters of October 29, 1986, and April 15, 1987, in which you requested tariff classification for cotton fabrics which are produced in Hong Kong and imported into the United States, by California Y.H. Corporation, and are presently being held at Los Angeles seaport for want of a correct visa. A sample accompanied the ruling request.


The fabric is 100 percent cotton and is composed of filling yarns which have not been dyed and indigo dyed warp yarns. The fabric contains 42 single threads per inch in the filling and 72 single threads per inch in the warp. The fabric has not been napped and is constructed by using 10/1 c.c. yarns in both the filling and the warp. The average yarn number is seven, and the fabric weighs 9.9 ounces per square yard.


Whether the subject fabric falls within the purview of textile category 318 or 313.


In order to determine the proper textile category designation for this fabric it must first be classified under the Tariff Schedules of the United States Annotated (TSUSA). The textile category is derived from the classification of the fabric and not the inverse. Based on the construction of the sample, the fabric would be classified under item 322.07__. The last two digits are determined by reference to the statistical suffix table for items 320.01 through 331.__, as prescribed in headnote 2 of subpart A and statistical headnote 2 of this subpart. The fabric meets the requirements for sheeting as described in statistical headnote 1(f) of subpart A, part 3, schedule 3,which requires an examination of statistical suffixes 77-82.

Suffixes 81 and 82 are easily eliminated as they provide for napped fabric. Suffix 77 does not apply as it requires that the yarns of the fabric not be of different colors. The subject fabric contains yarns of different colors as the filling yarns are white and the warp yarns are blue. With respect to yarns of different colors, statistical headnote 1(l)(ii), subpart A, part 3, schedule 3, states in part that yarns of different colors include fabrics consisting of unbleached or bleached yarn and colored yarn. Therefore, suffix 80 is eliminated as it includes only fabrics which are made with other than yarns of different colors. This analysis leaves only suffixes 78 and 79 to consider. Since the fabric contains neither checks, plaids nor stripes, suffix 78 is inapplicable. Thus, suffix 79 is the only appropriate choice in classifying this fabric.


In view of the foregoing, the subject fabric is properly classified under the TSUSA as woven fabrics other than the foregoing, wholly of cotton: not fancy or figured: colored, whether or not bleached: weighing more than 5.9 oz. per sq. yd.: sheeting: not napped: other: of yarns of different colors: other under item 322.0779, dutiable at the 1986 rate of 8.7 ad valorem, textile category 318.

The proposed Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA) is scheduled to replace the TSUSA. The HTSUSA provision applicable to the above described merchandise is subheading 5209.41.60.20, which provides for woven fabrics of cotton, containing 85 percent or more by weight of cotton, weighing more than 200 g/m: of yarns of different colors: plain weave: other, not napped. The fabric is subject to textile
quota category 218 and is dutiable at the rate of 8.9 percent ad valorem. This classification represents the present position of the Customs Service regarding the dutiable status of the merchandise under the proposed HTSUSA. If there are any changes before enactment, this advice may not continue to be applicable.


John Durant

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: