CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 952081 CAB
Andrew P. Vance, Esquire
Barnes, Richardson & Colburn
475 Park Avenue South
New York, NY 10016
RE: Country of origin of women's pajamas
Dear Mr. Vance:
This letter is in response to your inquiry of June 25, 1992,
on behalf of Val Mode Lingerie, Inc., requesting a country of
origin determination of women's pajamas. A sample has been
submitted for examination.
FACTS:
The garment at issue, Style 3512, is a pair of woven women's
polyester pajamas. Woven polyester fabric purchased in Korea
will be shipped to Hong Kong. In Hong Kong the fabric will be
marked and cut. After the processing is completed in Hong Kong,
the fabric pieces and accessories will be shipped to China for
assembly, sewing, and finishing. The finished goods will then be
shipped to Hong Kong for export to the United States.
ISSUE:
What is the country of origin of the garment at issue?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Country of origin determinations for textile products are
subject to Section 12.130, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 12.130).
Section 12.130 provides that a textile product that is processed
in more than one country or territory shall be a product of that
country or territory where it last underwent a substantial
transformation. A textile product will be considered to have
undergone a substantial transformation if it has been transformed
by means of substantial manufacturing or processing operations
into a new and different article of commerce.
Section 12.130(d), Customs Regulations, sets forth criteria
in determining whether a substantial transformation of a textile
product has taken place. This regulation states that these
criteria are not exhaustive; one or any combination of criteria
may be determinative, and additional factors may be considered.
Section 12.130(d)(1) states that a new and different article
of commerce will usually result from a manufacturing or
processing operation if there is a change in:
(i) Commercial designation or identity, (ii) fundamental
character or (iii) Commercial use.
Section 12.130(d)(2) of the Customs Regulations states that
in determining whether merchandise has been subjected to
substantial manufacturing or processing operations, the following
will be considered.
(i) The physical change in the material or article
(ii) The time involved in the manufacturing or processing
(iii) The complexity of the manufacturing or processing
(iv) The level or degree of skill
(v) The value added to the article or material
According to T.D. 85-38, the final document rule
establishing 19 CFR 12.130:
The assembly of all the cut pieces of a garment usually
is a substantial manufacturing process that results in
an article with a different name, character, or use
than the cut pieces. It should be noted that not all
assembly operations of cut garment pieces will amount
to a substantial transformation of those pieces. Where
either less than a complete assembly of all the cut
pieces of a garment is performed in one country, or the
assembly is a relatively simple one, then Customs will
rule on the particular factual situation as they arise,
utilizing the criteria in section 12.130(d).
Customs has consistently ruled that the mere assembly of
goods, entailing simple combining operations, trimming or joining
together by sewing is not enough to substantially transform the
components of an article into a new and different article of
commerce. See Headquarters Ruling Letter (HRL) 951424 of April
24, 1992 and HRL 082787 of March 9, 1989.
The issue in this instance is similar to the question
Customs confronted in HRL 951424. In HRL 951424 Customs
determined the country of origin of men's shirts that had been
processed in more than one country. The shirts were marked and
cut in Singapore, and then sent to Malaysia for simple assembly.
Customs decided that the final substantial transformation
occurred in Singapore because the cutting process materially
altered the fabric into designated parts. In this case, the
garment at issue is marked and cut in Hong Kong, and is then sent
to China for assembly into a finished product. This final
operation involves no more than minor processing and finishing.
The processing in China does not materially alter the garment at
issue. However, the marking and sewing operation performed in
Hong Kong substantially transforms the garment into designated
garment pieces. Consequently, the country of origin of the
merchandise at issue is Hong Kong.
HOLDING:
The country of origin of the merchandise at issue is Hong
Kong. As requested, your sample will be returned under separate
cover.
The holding set forth above applies only to the specific
factual situation and merchandise identified in the ruling
request. This position is clearly set forth in section
177.9(b)(1) Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.(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 CFR 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 effect the
determination of country of origin. Accordingly, it is
recommended that a new ruling request be submitted in accordance
with section 177.2, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.2).
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division