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 G89069 - NY G89422 > NY G89276

Previous Ruling Next Ruling
NY G89276

April 30, 2001

CLA-2-64:RR:NC:TA:347 G89276


TARIFF NO.: 6402.99.90 ; 6404.11.90 ; 7326.20.0050

Mr. Thomas M. Stanton
Edward M. Jones & Company
P.O. Box 55038
Portland, OR 97238-5038

RE: The tariff classification of footwear from China

Dear Mr. Stanton:

In your letter dated April 11, 2001, on behalf of your client Savier Inc., you requested a tariff classification ruling.

The submitted five half pair samples, which you state are skateboarding shoes, are five different styles of below the ankle height athletic type shoes. All five shoes have functionally stitched together uppers consisting of rubber, plastic and textile material external surface area components, lace closures, padded ankle collars and tongues, and cemented-on, molded rubber/plastic bottoms. We note that on all five samples, the rubber/plastic bottoms overlap their uppers at the sole by a vertical height of at least ¼-inch and more around most of the shoe’s lower perimeter. We consider all five of these “skateboard” shoes, which are like tennis shoes or sneakers, to have foxing-like bands for footwear classification purposes. Additionally, each sample shoe also has a small metal key ring with a miniature can opener ornament engraved with the logo “Savier”, attached to it by means of a plastic tie-on fastener looped through an eyelet hole. We consider this dangling metal key ring to be separately classifiable from the shoes.

The four sample shoes, identified by you as Style (A) “Brian Anderson, Style (B) “Folsom”, Style (C) “Overton” and Style (D) “Quimby” all have uppers with predominately rubber and/or plastic material external surface areas. You have provided documentation indicating that style names “Brian Anderson”, “Folsom” and “Quimby” all have uppers with external surface areas that have been found to consist of 92% rubber and/or plastics, and 8% textile materials. Style name “Overton” has documentation indicating that its upper has an external surface area that consists of 65% rubber and/or plastics and 35% textile materials. We note that you have indicated in your letter and during a follow up telephone conversation with this office that these four athletic type shoes will all be valued at over $12 per pair.

The fifth sample submitted and identified as Style (E) “Raleigh” is an athletic type shoe that has a predominately textile upper. You have provided documentation indicating that it has an upper with an external surface area consisting of 75% textile materials and 25% rubber and/or plastics. You also stated that this shoe will be valued over $12 per pair when imported.

The applicable subheading for the four “skateboard” shoes, identified as Style(A) “Brian Anderson”, Style(B) “Folson”, Style(C) “Overton” and Style(D) “Quimby” will be 6402.99.90, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), which provides for footwear, in which both the upper’s and outer sole’s external surface is predominately rubber and/or plastics; which is not “sports footwear”; which does not cover the ankle; in which the upper’s external surface area does not measure over 90% rubber or plastics (including any accessories or reinforcements), or which has a foxing or foxing-like band applied or molded at the sole and overlapping the upper; which is not designed to be a protection against water, oil, or cold or inclement weather; and which is valued over $12.00 per pair. The rate of duty will be 20% ad valorem.

The applicable subheading for the “skateboard” shoe, identified as Style(E) “Raleigh” will be 6404.11.90, HTS, which provides for footwear, in which the upper’s external surface is predominately textile materials (excluding accessories and reinforcements); in which the outer sole’s external surface is predominately rubber and /or plastics; which is “athletic footwear”; and which is valued over $12.00 per pair. The rate of duty will be 20% ad valorem.

The applicable subheading for the metal key ring will be 7326.20.0050, HTS, which provides for articles of iron or steel wire. The rate of duty will be 3.9% ad valorem.

We note that the sample shoes you have submitted for this ruling request are marked with the country of origin “Made in Taiwan” readily legible on a sewn-on textile label located at the top inner surface of the shoe’s tongue. You have provided a follow-up memo faxed to this office, confirming that these submitted sample shoes are “exact replicas of the production shoes being manufactured in China at this time.” In your memo, you state that the country of origin marking on these identical shoes, which will now be produced in China, will be “marked in exactly the same manner with “China” in place of Taiwan on the tongue.” Based on your affirmation, we will presume that these same shoes made in China will also be legally marked so as to satisfy the country of origin marking requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304, as implemented under the provisions of Part 134, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 134.11). The key chain should also be marked to indicate the country of origin in order to satisfy the legal requirements of the marking statute.

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: