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 > 1993 NY Rulings > NY 869102 - NY 870561 > NY 869887

Previous Ruling Next Ruling
NY 869887

January 15, 1992

CLA-2-64:S:N:N3:D 346


TARIFF NO.: 6404.1970

Chase Leavitt CHB, Inc.
POB 589
Portland, ME 04112

RE: The tariff classification and marking of a Beach Slipper from Taiwan.

Dear Sir:

In your letter dated December 9, 1991, received here on December 18,1991, for G.H. Bass, you requested a tariff classification ruling.

The sample, marked Taymor Style J-0738, is a beach slipper. Most of the upper is made of neoprene sandwiched between two layers of fabric, except the toe plug, which is a mesh looking fabric. There is a one inch wide elastic strap stitched to the sides of the upper and to the back seam .

The shoe is of simultaneously molded construction. In terms of the orthogonal projection in the vertical plane, the rubber/plastic sole overlaps the upper material by about 3/16 inch in the toe area, 1/4 inch in the heel area and 3/4 inch at the peaks along both sides.

You state that the price per pair is between $3.00 and $6.50.

You supplied with your request an "IFA/FRA Interim Footwear Invoice" signed by Jacopax International. This document indicates that this sample is "exclusively adhesive construction" (17.e) and "less than 10% by weight of rubber and plastics or not over 50% by weight of textile materials rubber and plastics" (20.a). Both of these statements are obviously and negligently false.

This document also indicates that this item does not have a foxing- like band. This is not true either. However, we routinely ignore statements made by overseas agents concerning the absence of foxing-like bands since that is a matter of purely statutory interpretation which is typically far beyond their competence so we do not consider your submission of this false statement to be particularly material.

The applicable subheading for the sample will be 6404.19.70, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), which provides for footwear, in which the upper's external surface is predominately textile materials (note that an accessory or reinforcement on top of another material is not part of the upper's external surface but the material hidden underneath is); in which the outer sole's external surface is predominately rubber and/or plastics; which is not "athletic" footwear; in which the upper's external surface is still 50% or less leather even after every leather accessory and reinforcement present is included as part of the upper's external surface; which is not designed to be a protection against water, oil, or cold or inclement weather; which is valued over $3.00 but not over $6.50; and which has a foxing-like band almost wholly of rubber or plastic. The rate of duty will be 37.5 percent ad valorem plus $.90 per pair.

To answer your specific questions, there is presently no visa required or any "special" marking requirements. However, we do not believe that this sample meets the "ordinary" marking requirements. The approximately 1/16 inch high type of the "Made in Taiwan" molded into the sole is not in a contrasting color. We can read it only with some strain and only at certain angles to the light. If imported with only this marking, Customs should not allow release of shipments (see CR 134.11 and .51).

This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Section 177 of the Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. 177).

A copy of this ruling letter should be attached to the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is imported. If the documents have been filed without a copy, this ruling should be brought to the attention of the Customs officer handling the transaction.


Jean F. Maguire
Area Director

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: