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 0082704 - HQ 0082931 > HQ 0082830

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

HQ 082830

December 20, 1989

CLA-2 CO:R:C:G 082830 CRS


Mr. Charles A. Haigh
Haigh & Associates
1404 Havenhurst Drive
Los Angeles, CA 90046

RE: Greige Goods from China

Dear Mr. Haigh:

This is in reply to your letter to our New York office dated July 11, 1988, in which you requested a country of origin determination in regard to certain greige goods produced in the People's Republic of China and processed in Hong Kong.


The articles in question are described as 100 percent cotton, 20 x 20 and 60 x 60 greige goods which are woven in China in 44/45 inch widths. They are then exported to Hong Kong where they are subjected to various manufacturing processes, including scouring, bleaching, mercerizing, singeing, resin finishing and pre-shrinking. The fabrics are dyed in Hong Kong but are not printed there. The finished fabrics are imported from Hong Kong.


Whether the finishing operations to which the articles are subjected constitute a substantial transformation such that the finished fabrics would be considered a manufacture of Hong Kong for the purposes of 19 C.F.R. 12.130?


Section 12.130 of the Customs Regulations set forth guidelines for determining the country of origin of textile products. As a general matter, textile products which consist of materials produced from or processed in more than one foreign country are considered to be the product of that country where they last underwent a substantial transformation (19 C.F.R. 12.130(b)). Such a transformation occurs when the manufacturing or processing operation results in a new and different article of commerce.

You have asked whether the processing operations undertaken in Hong Kong represent a significant enough transformation to change the country of origin. Generally, a fabric will be considered a product of a particular country when it has been dyed and printed in that country, prior to importation into the U.S., and in addition, been subjected to
two or more of the following operations: bleaching, shrinking, fulling, napping, decating, permanent stiffening, weighting, permanent embossing, or moireing.

19 C.F.R. 12.130(e)(1)(i). Here, the greige goods have not been both printed and dyed, nor have they have they been subjected to two or more of the above finishing operations.

In Mast Industries, Inc. v. United States, 652 F.Supp. 1531 (CIT 1987), an identical issue was before the Court. There, cotton fabric piece goods manufactured in China were subjected to certain processing operations in Hong Kong; however, these did not include both printing and dyeing in combination with two or more of the finishing operations enumerated above. The Court held that
it was not erroneous or inconsistent with 19 C.F.R. {12.130, and certainly not unreasonable for Customs to have concluded the country of origin of the goods Mast was trying to enter, was the P.R.C.

652 F.Supp. 1531, 1538. We find nothing in the instant case to distinguish it from Mast. Consequently, the greige goods have not been substantially transformed into a new and different article of commerce as a result of the second country processing operations performed in Hong Kong.


The greige goods are a product of the People's Republic of China pursuant to subsection 12.130 of the Customs Regulations.


John Durant, Director

Previous Ruling Next Ruling