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 > 2001 NY Rulings > NY G85325 - NY G85400 > NY G85394

Previous Ruling Next Ruling
NY G85394

January 8, 2001

CLA-2-64:RR:NC:TP:347 G85394


TARIFF NO.: 6402.99.18, 6404.19.70

Mr. Michael R. Spano
Michael R. Spano & Co. Inc.
190 McKee Street
Floral Park, NY 11001

RE: The tariff classification of women’s footwear from China.

Dear Spano:

In your letter dated December 12, 2000, written on behalf of your client, Kenneth Cole Productions L.P., you requested a tariff classification ruling.

You have submitted a sample of a woman’s shoe, style “You’re The One,” #70274, with an upper and outer sole of rubber/plastics, a closed toe and heel, and a button closure on the upper. The shoes are valued over $3.00 but under $6.50 per pair. You also ask for a ruling on an identical style shoe in a textile upper. You have provided a swatch of the textile material which will be used on the fabric version, and you state that the textile will make up 100% of the external surface area of the upper (ESAU) of the textile version shoe. The shoes will have rubber/plastic outer soles and what you refer to a separate imitation welt strip glued around the perimeter of the forepart of the soles.

You maintain that because the shoes at issue have mock welts, they do not possess foxing-like bands following T.D. 83-116. A mock welt is not defined in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS), but is generally considered to be a strip of material which is affixed to the outer edge of the sole and gives an appearance of a welt. As you stated in your letter, T.D. 83-116 set forth guidelines relating to the characteristics of a foxing. Characteristic 7 reads as follows:

7. A foxing does not include components known by another name clearly recognized in the trade such as mock welts, toe bumpers, wedge wraps and platform wraps.

In HRL 069633 dated June 22, 1982, Customs took the position that a separately applied imitation welt (cemented to the edge of the sole) is not a part of the sole. It should be noted that although T.D. 83-116 excludes mock welts from consideration as foxing, there is nothing in the guidelines relating to the characteristics of a foxing-like band which would preclude mock welts per se from consideration as foxing-like bands. The “imitation welts” on the shoes at issue have been engineered as actual parts of the molds and do not resemble a “mock welt” at all. The separately applied rubber/plastic strip that has been applied to the edge of the sole is an integral part of the unit molded sole and is not considered a “mock” or “imitation” welt but is part of the sole which overlaps the upper.

The applicable subheading for style “You’re The One” with the plastic upper will be 6402.99.18, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), which provides for footwear with outer soles and uppers of rubber or plastics, not covering the ankle, in which the upper’s external surface is over 90% rubber or plastics (including accessories or reinforcements such as those mentioned in Note 4(a) to this chapter), which does not have a foxing or foxing-like band applied or molded at the sole and overlapping the upper, which is not designed to be worn over, or in lieu of, other footwear as a protection against water, oil, grease or chemicals or cold or inclement weather. The rate of duty will be 6% ad valorem.

The applicable subheading for style “You’re The One” with the textile upper will be 6404.19.70, HTS, which provides for footwear in which the upper external surface area is predominately of textile material, in which the outer sole’s external surface is predominately of rubber and/or plastics, which has closed toes and closed heels, footwear held to the foot with the use of laces or buckles or other fasteners, which is not “athletic” footwear, footwear with soles which overlap the upper other than at the toe or heel. The rate of duty will be 90 cents per pair plus 37.5% ad valorem.

We also note that the submitted sample is not marked with the country of origin. Therefore, if imported as is, the sample submitted will not meet the country of origin marking requirement of 19 U.S.C. 1304. Accordingly, the shoes would be considered not legally marked under the provisions of 19 C.F.R 134.11 which states “every article of foreign origin (or its container) 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.”

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

A copy of the ruling or the control number indicated above should be provided with the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is imported. If you have any questions regarding the ruling, contact National Import Specialist Richard Foley at 212-637-7089.


Robert B. Swierupski

Previous Ruling Next Ruling

See also: