CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 952531 CAB
Mr. Bruce Shulman, Esq.
Stein Shostak Shostak & O'Hara
1620 L Street, N.W.
Suite 807
Washington, D.C. 20036-5605
RE: Country of origin of men's golf and polo shirts
Dear Mr. Shulman:
This letter is in response to your inquiry of August 31,
1992, on behalf of your client, BCTC, requesting a country of
origin determination of men's polo and gulf shirts. No samples
were submitted for examination.
FACTS:
The merchandise at issue will be constructed of pique knit
fabric manufactured in Taiwan. The fabric will also be cut into
garment pieces in Taiwan. After the processing in Taiwan, all
the fabric pieces will be sent to China for final assembly which
includes, sewing, ironing, folding, and packaging. The finished
product will then be exported to the United States.
You state that the processing time in Taiwan is 13.3 minutes
while the processing time in China is 7.05 minutes. Also, the
total cost of processing in Taiwan is $4.07 and it is $1.325 in
China.
ISSUE:
What is the country of origin for the merchandise 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
for determining whether a substantial transformation of a textile
product has taken place. This regulation states 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), Customs Regulations, 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), Customs Regulations, states that for
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 of material
Section 12.130(e)(1), Customs Regulations, describes
manufacturing or processing operations from which an article will
usually be considered a product of the country in which those
operations occurred. Section 12.130(e)(1)(v) provides the
following:
Substantial assembly by sewing and/or tailoring of all cut
pieces of apparel articles which have been cut from fabric
in another foreign territory or country, or insular
possession, into a completed garment (e.g. the complete
assembly and tailoring of all cut pieces of suit-type
jackets, suits and shirts).
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 determined that cutting of fabric
into garment pieces constitutes a substantial transformation of
the fabric, whereby the clothing pieces become a product of the
country where the fabric is cut. (See e.g. Headquarters Ruling
Letter (HRL) 089539, dated April 22, 1992; HRL 951426, dated
April 8, 1992; HRL 089834, dated September 26, 1991; and HRL
084979, dated October 23, 1989.)
Also, Customs has long held 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 e.g. HRL 082787, dated March 9, 1989; and HRL
082747, dated February 23, 1989.)
The sewing operation performed in China involves the simple
assembly of several cut pattern pieces. The sewing does not
involve the complex sewing operation required by Section
12.130(e)(1)(v). The cutting process in Taiwan, however, does
constitute a substantial transformation. The processing
materially changes the fabric into designated garment pieces,
which constitutes new and different articles of commerce. Thus,
the country of origin of the articles in question is Taiwan.
HOLDING:
The country of origin of the articles in question is Taiwan.
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 177.9(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 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 affect 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