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 0083979 - HQ 0084043 > HQ 0084016

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

HQ 084016

June 14, 1989

CLA-2 CO:R:C:G 084016 CMR


TARIFF NO.: 6201.13.4030

Mr. G.M. Columbe
A. N. Deringer, Inc.
30 West Service Road
Champlain, New York 12919-9703

RE: Classification of a men's nylon coat

Dear Mr. Columbe:

This ruling is in response to your letter of February 27, 1989, on behalf of your client, Evin Industries Ltd., requesting classifi- cation of a men's nylon coat, style 509, made with the fabric sample submitted with a sample coat.


Style 509 is a men's quilt-lined woven 3/4-length coat with an outershell of 100 percent nylon fabric. The fabric is coated on the inner surface with a 1000 mm polyurethane plastics coating. The lining is 100 percent quilted nylon with a filler of 100 percent polyester.

The coat has a full front zippered opening with a snap storm flap and Velcro-type fastener which cover the zipper area, a removable hood with drawstring, an inner drawstring at the waist, a cummerbund belt attached to the lining, concealed knit cuffs and covered pockets. The chest pockets, side pockets and inner pockets have Velcro-type fasteners. The body and sleeves have overlaid reflective striping. On the left sleeve of the sample is an embroidered patch with the logo of Pan American airlines.

This garment was the subject of NYRL 834676 of January 9, 1989, and was classified in 6201.13.40, HTSUSA, which covers overcoats,
carcoats and similar coats. It is now under consideration for classification when made with an outershell of the coated sample fabric submitted.


Is the fabric sample considered coated for the purpose of classification within heading 6210, HTSUSA, which provides for garments, made up of fabrics of heading 5602, 5603, 5903, 5906 or 5907?

Is the garment properly classified in the subheading for overcoats, carcoats and similar coats, or in the subheading for anoraks (including ski jackets), windbreakers and similar articles?


Heading 5903, HTSUSA, provides for textile fabrics impregnated, coated, covered, or laminated with plastics (except tire cord which is provided for in Heading 5902).

Note 2 of Chapter 59, HTSUSA, provides, in pertinent part:

Heading 5903 applies to:

(a) Textile fabrics, impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics, whatever the weight per square meter and whatever the nature of the plastic material (compact or cellular), other than:

(1) fabrics in which the impregnation, coating or covering cannot be seen with the naked eye (usually chapters 50 to 55, 58 or 60); for the purpose of this provision, no account should be taken of any resulting change of color.

It is our view that the wording of Note 2(a)(1) ("visible to the naked eye") is a clear expression by the drafters of the Harmonized System that a significant, if not substantial, amount of material must be added to a fabric for it to be considered "impregnated, coated, or covered."

Therefore, following the strict wording of Note 2(a)(1), for a fabric to be considered "impregnated, coated, or covered" within that requirement, the plastics material added to the fabric must be visibly distinguishable from that fabric without the use of
magnification. Customs believes that this criterion is satisfied when the application of a plastics material clearly changes the surface character of the fabric. In such an instance, the naked eye is seeing the plastics.

In the instant case, the coating on the fabric sample is evident only by a change in color, which we are directed to disregard. The coating does not change the surface character of the fabric, and therefore, the fabric is not considered coated within the meaning of heading 5903, HTSUSA.

The issue of classification of garments as anoraks or coats was addressed in HRL 081134 of April 27, 1989. In that ruling, parka- type garments and anoraks were described and distinguished as follows:

Parka-type garments are classifiable under the provisions for overcoats, car-coats, capes, cloaks and similar articles, not under the provisions for anoraks (including ski-jackets) and similar articles. In order for a garment to be considered a parka, it must have a hood, a complete opening at the front fastened by a zipper or a Velcro-like fastener, with or without a protective flap; a lining either quilted or of simulated fur fabric; a drawstring or other tightening device at the waist, except a belt, and outer pockets. The length of the parka may vary from mid-thigh to knee.

Anoraks have many features in common with parkas; however, they differ in regards to the length of the garment. The length of an anorak can vary from waist-length to mid-thigh only (bolding added). Anoraks must have a hood which can be concealed in the collar; a complete opening at the front fastened by a zipper or velcro; a lining quilted or padded, a drawstring or other means of tightening; close-fitting elasticized sleeve-ends; collar and pockets. If the length of the garment is longer than mid-thigh and yet has the features described above, it will nevertheless be considered a parka and classifiable under the provisions for overcoats, car-coats, capes, cloaks and similar articles.

Considering the garment at issue in light of the above, we believe it is a parka-type garment classifiable under the provisions for overcoats, carcoats, capes, cloaks and similar articles.


When made with an outer shell of the coated fabric sample submitted for review, the garment at issue, style 509, remains classifiable in subheading 6201.13.4030, HTSUSA, as ruled in NYRL 834676 of January 9, 1989. The garment falls within textile category 634 and is dutiable at 29.5 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: