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 0082056 - HQ 0082265 > HQ 0082239

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

HQ 082239

March 28, 1989

CLA-2 CO:R:C:G 082239 CMR


TARIFF NO.: 6108.91.0010

Mr. Ashu Sawhney
Ashco, Inc.
99-927 Iwaena Street
Aiea, Hawaii 96701

RE: Classification of certain women's garments under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA)

Dear Mr. Sawhney:

This ruling is in response to your letter of April 28, 1988, requesting a classification for certain women's wearing apparel from Pakistan.


The submitted sample, style #2, is a finely knit pullover of 100 percent cotton jersey fabric construction. It has short, hemmed sleeves, a capped V-neckline, and a straight hemmed bottom. The garment has eight-inch side slits which are finished with overlock stitching. The garment measures approximately 35 inches from shoulder to hem, and is sized "one size fits all."

Another sample, style #1, was submitted for comparison purposes. Like style #2, style #1 is of finely knit pullover of 100 percent cotton jersey fabric construction. It is sleeveless, has a rounded V-neckline, a straight bottom, and has nine-inch side slits. The neckline, sleeves, slits, and bottom are all finished with overlock stitching. The garment measures approximately 33 inches from shoulder to hem, and is sized "one size fits all."

You claim that style #1 has previously been classified as a beach cover-up, and that style #2 should likewise be classified. Photographs and copies of invoices were submitted to substantiate your claim.


Is style #2 classifiable as a beach cover-up, and if so, where are beach cover-ups to be classified in the HTSUSA?


Based on style #1's flimsy construction, loose fit, and body area coverage, we agree that it is most likely used and sold in the United States as a beach cover-up. It has the appearance of a garment used as a beach cover-up. The submitted photographs serve as additional support for our viewpoint, though are not determinative.

Most of the submitted photographs of beach cover-ups sold at retail and worn around beach areas are of style #1. However, three photographs of style #2 being worn in beach areas were submitted. While helpful, the submitted photographs are insufficient evidence in and of themselves.

Style #2 has a more substantial construction than style #1, and is more finished. However, in addition to the photographs, invoices have been submitted as evidence that style #2 is bought and sold as a beach cover-up as is style #1. The invoices show that both styles are purchased from the same Pakistani vendor by Ashco, Inc. as "100 percent cotton knitted beach cover[s]." Ashco, Inc. then sells the garments to other vendors in Hawaii, who in turn apparently sell the garments to retailers. Invoices which illustrate the chain have been submitted and on all of these invoices both styles are referred to as beach cover-ups.

In light of the evidence presented by you in the way of invoices and photographs, Customs is sufficiently convinced that these garments are marketed, advertised, and sold as beach cover-ups.


Styles 1 and 2 are classifiable under the provision for women's or girls' bathrobes, dressing gowns and similar garments, knitted or crocheted, other, of cotton, subheading 6108.91.0010, HTSUSA, textile category 350, dutiable at 9 percent ad valorem.

Due to the changeable nature of the statistical annotation (the ninth and tenth digits of the classification) and the restraint (quota/visa) categories, you should contact your local Customs office prior to importation of this merchandise to determine the current status of any import restraints or requirements.


John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: