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 > 1995 HQ Rulings > HQ 558836 - HQ 558982 > HQ 558857

Previous Ruling Next Ruling
HQ 558857





April 20, 1995

MAR-2-05 R:C:S 558857 MLR

CATEGORY: MARKING

Robert T. Stack, Esq.
Siegel, Mandell & Davidson, P.C.
One Astor Plaza
1515 Broadway, 43rd Floor
New York, NY 10036-8901

RE: Country of origin marking of woman's knit blouse; "Made (Knit and Cut) in Korea, Assembled in China"; 19 CFR 134.46

Dear Mr. Stack:

This is in reference to your letters of July 12, 1994, and February 23, 1995, requesting a ruling on behalf of Liz Claiborne, Inc., regarding the proposed country of origin marking "Made (Knit and Cut) in Korea, Assembled in China" on a woman's knit blouse. Samples of two shirts were submitted with your request. A separate classification and country of origin determination, Headquarters Ruling Letter (HRL) 956843, was issued to you on October 21, 1994.

FACTS:

The sample submitted is a woman's 100 percent polyester knit blouse, known as Style No. V4460174. The blouse has a round neckline, a rear opening with a single button closure, short sleeves, shoulder pads, and a straight hemmed bottom.

Fabric for the blouse will be cut into eight components in Korea. The components consist of a single front panel; a single back panel; two sleeve panels, two shoulder pad coverings; and the capping pieces for the neckline and the neck opening.

The cut components will be sent to the People's Republic of China for assembly. The assembly operations will consist of sewing the components together by machine and attaching textile labels and buttons. In your letter dated July 12, 1994, you proposed marking the blouse "Knit in Korea, Assembled in China"; however, you have amended this proposal and request that we consider the marking "Made (Knit and Cut) in Korea, Assembled in China." In HRL 956843, it was held that the country of origin of the blouse, cut in Korea and assembled in the People's Republic of China, is Korea.

ISSUE:

Whether the country of origin marking "Made (Knit and Cut) in Korea, Assembled in China" satisfies the requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304.

LAW AND ANALYSIS:

The marking statute, section 304, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1304) provides that, unless excepted, every article of foreign origin imported into the U.S. shall be marked in a conspicuous place as legibly, indelibly, and permanently as the nature of the article (or container) will permit, in such a manner as to indicate to the ultimate purchaser in the U.S. the English name of the country of origin of the article. Congressional intent in enacting 19 U.S.C. 1304 was "that the ultimate purchaser should be able to know by an inspection of the marking on the imported goods the country of which the goods is the product. The evident purpose is to mark the goods so that at the time of purchase the ultimate purchaser may, by knowing where the goods were produced, be able to buy or refuse to buy them, if such marking should influence his will." United States v. Friedlaender & Co. Inc., 27 CCPA 297, 302, C.A.D. 104 (1940). Part 134, Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part 134), implements the country of origin marking requirements and exceptions of 19 U.S.C. 1304.

In this case, you propose to mark the blouse "Made (Knit and Cut) in Korea, Assembled in China." When a name of any country other than the country in which the article was manufactured or produced appears on an imported article or its container, there shall appear, legibly and permanently, in close proximity to such words, letters or name, and in at least a comparable size, the name of the country of origin preceded by "Made in," "Product of," or other words of similar meaning. 19 CFR 134.46.

In HRL 735568 dated June 1, 1994, Taiwanese-origin fabric was cut into garment panels in Taiwan and shipped to China where they were assembled into finished men's golf and polo shirts. Customs held that the words "Cut in" and "Fabric Made & Cut in" are not other words of similar meaning to "Made in" and "Product of," as required by 19 CFR 134.46, since the words "Cut in" and "Fabric Made & Cut in" did not clearly indicate that the country of origin of the shirts was Taiwan.

Furthermore, in HRL 558722 dated December 19, 1994, we held that "Knit and Cut in Korea, Assembled and Finished in China" did not satisfy the requirements of 19 CFR 134.46, in regard to the marking of shirts dyed and cut-to-shape in Korea and assembled in China. The reasoning was that the ultimate purchaser reading this marking could only determine that the shirt was processed in both Korea and China, but could not determine the single country of origin of the shirt. However, the markings "Made in Korea, Assembled and Finished in China, Knit and Cut in Korea" and "Made in Korea, Assembled in China" were found to satisfy the requirements of 19 CFR 134.46, as the words "Made in Korea" in both of these markings clearly indicated that Korea was the country of origin of the shirts.

Similar to HRL 558722, we find in this case that the marking "Made (Knit and Cut) in Korea, Assembled in China," satisfies the criteria of 19 CFR 134.46. The marking gives as much information as HRL 558722 (i.e., where the blouse fabric was knit, cut, and assembled), and although the words "Made" and "in" are not together, we find that the phrase "Made (________) in" constitutes words of similar meaning to "Made in" so that the ultimate purchaser is aware that the country of origin of the blouse is Korea, thereby satisfying the requirements of 19 CFR 134.46.

HOLDING:

On the basis of the information and samples submitted, we find that the country of origin marking "Made (Knit and Cut) in Korea, Assembled in China" satisfies the marking requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304 and 19 CFR 134.46.

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

Sincerely,

John Durant, Director

Previous Ruling Next Ruling