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 > 1994 HQ Rulings > HQ 0955303 - HQ 0955415 > HQ 0955380

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

HQ 955380

June 13, 1994

CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 955380 HP


Mr. Allan Gordon
Performance Trading, Inc.
520 South Lafayette Park Place
Suite 200
Los Angeles, CA 90057

RE: Classification and country of origin of diapers and burp pads.

Dear Mr. Gordon:

This is in reference to your letter of November 15, 1993. In our response dated November 17, 1993, you were advised that your questions concerning the classification and country of origin determination of burp pads, produced in China and Namibia, would be subject to a separate reply. Please reference your letter AP12393.


The merchandise at issue consists of baby's woven cotton diapers, or the fabric used to make such diapers, embroidered or appliqued to change that product into a burp pad. You have given us two potential manufacturing scenarios. In the first, completed woven cotton diapers currently in Namibia (and considered products of China) have applied to their center panel an embroidery or applique. In the second, diaper fabric, both with and without "lines of demarcation," would be exported from China and assembled in Namibia directly into the burp pads.


How are the burp pads classified under the HTSUSA? Whether the burp pads are considered products of Namibia or China?


Classification and Future Importation

From your description repeated above, it is not possible for Customs to provide a binding classification decision for the instant merchandise. Without a more complete description and, if possible, a completed sample, we cannot ascertain whether the item is an embroidered diaper or a burp pad. Should you obtain additional details, kindly reference this ruling letter in any new request you submit. Please be aware, however, that burp pads are currently classified as other made up articles under subheading 6307.90, HTSUSA. See HRL 089070 of July 2, 1991.

Country of Origin

On June 5, 1990, the U.S. Customs Service issued to you HRL 087138, informing you that woven cotton diapers assembled in Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Lesotho or Namibia from Chinese fabric were considered products of "Country 2" for quota/visa purposes. On May 17, 1993, we issued to you HRL 953677, revoking HRLs 086665 and 087138. You have questioned whether the above-described embroidery or applique work would transform the 27,210 dozen diapers remaining with your supplier into products of Namibia.

Textile commodities produced in more than one foreign country are subject to the country of origin requirements delineated in section 12.130 of the Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. 12.130). These regulations provide that:

. . . a textile product . . . which consists of materials produced or derived from, or processed in, more than one foreign . . . country shall be a product of that foreign . . . country where it last underwent a substantial transformation.

12.130(b). A textile product undergoes a substantial transformation when it is ". . . transformed by means of substantial manufacturing or processing operations into a new and different article of commerce."

Section 12.130 of the regulations outlines the criteria used to determine the country of origin for textiles and textile products. Specifically, this provision of the regulations is considered in determining whether a textile product has undergone substantial manufacturing or processing operations, and what constitutes a new and different article of commerce. The factors considered are not exhaustive. In fact, "one or any combination of criteria may be determinative, and additional factors may be considered." In determining whether merchandise has undergone substantial manufacturing or processing operations, we consider the (1) physical change in the material or the article; (2) time involved; (3) complexity of the operations; (4) level or degree of skill and/or technology required; and (5) value added to the article in each country.

As we stated in HRL 953677, supra, the weave structure of the Chinese fabric confirmed the fact that the material was intended for use as diapers. The changing of the weaves was performed at additional cost and for the specific purpose of creating markers for folding. As a result, no substantial transformation took place. The description you provided for the embroidery or applique work does not allow us to determine whether these Chinese diapers underwent substantial manufacturing or processing operations. Accordingly, our position remains that the items in Namibia are still considered products of China.


As a result of the foregoing, the instant merchandise is considered a product of China. The holding in this ruling applies only to the specific factual situation and merchandise identified in the ruling request. This position is clearly set forth in 177.9(b)(1), Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. 177.9(b)(1)). This section states that a ruling letter is issued on the assumption that all of the information furnished in connection with the ruling request and incorporated in the ruling letter, either directly, by reference, or by implication, is accurate and complete in every material respect. Should it subsequently be determined that the information furnished is not complete and does not comply with 19 C.F.R. 177.9(b)(1), the ruling will be subject to modification or revocation. In the event there is a change in the facts previously furnished, this may affect the determination of country of origin. In such a case, it is recommended that a new ruling request be submitted in accordance with 177.2, Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. 177.2).

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.


John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division

Previous Ruling Next Ruling