CLA-2 CO:R:C:M 956942 DFC
Ms. Sandra Kutz
World Commerce Systems, Ltd.
P.O. Box 66593
Chicago, Illinois 60666
RE: Footwear; Riding shoe; DD 894043 revoked; HRL's 955260,
955014
Dear Ms. Kutz:
This is in reference to District Ruling Letter (DD) 894043
issued to you on February 7, 1994, by the Acting District
Director of Customs, Portland, Oregon, concerning the tariff
classification under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (HTSUS), of the "STEEDS" riding shoe manufactured in
Korea. We have reviewed that ruling and determined that it is in
error. Pursuant to section 625, Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C.
1625) as amended by section 623 of Title VI(Customs
Modernization) of the North American Free Trade Agreement
Implementation Act. Pub. L.103-182, 107 Stat. 2057,2186 (1993)
(hereinafter "section 625"), notice of the proposed revocation of
DD 894043 was published on October 5, 1994, in the CUSTOMS
BULLETIN, Volume 28, Number 39/40. No comments were received in
response to this notice.
FACTS:
The sample riding shoe submitted has a vamp and toe cap of
full grain leather, a quarter, eyestay, back counter, and outside
collar of polyurethane coated leather, and an outsole of rubber.
Portions of the outside collar pad, an area comprising less than
25% of the external surface area of the upper (ESAU), are of
Lycra, a man-made textile material. The coated and uncoated
leather constitutes about 75% of the ESAU of the riding shoe.
The outsole contains a steel shank wrapped by canvas in the
insole board contained in the rubber outsole. In your letter of
January 13, 1994, you indicated that the shoe would be imported
in ladies and childrens sizes with mens sizes to follow.
In DD 894043 Customs ruled that the "STEEDS" riding shoe is
classifiable under subheading 6403.19.60, HTSUS, which provides
for footwear with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leather or
composition leather and uppers of leather, sports footwear,
other, for other persons. The applicable rate of duty for this
provision is 10% ad valorem.
ISSUE:
Is the "STEEDS" riding shoe considered "sports footwear" for
tariff purposes?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Classification of goods under the HTSUS is governed by the
General Rules of Interpretation (GRI's). GRI 1 provides that
"classification shall be determined according to the terms of the
headings and any relative section or chapter notes, and provided
such headings or notes do not otherwise require, according to
[the remaining GRI's]." In other words, classification is
governed first by the terms of the headings of the tariff and any
relative section or chapter notes.
The rationale set forth in DD 894043 for classifying the
riding shoe as "sports footwear" was that "[t]he placement of the
steel shank, at the point where the medial arch comes into
contact with the stirrup surface, implies suitability for riding,
a recognized sporting activity."
Subheading note 1 to Chapter 64, HTSUS, reads, as follows:
1. For the purposes of subheadings 6402.11, 6402.19,
6403.11, 6403.19 and 6404.11, the expression
"sportsfootwear" applies only to:
(a) Footwear which is designed for a sporting activity
and has, or has provision for the attachment of
spikes, sprigs, cleats, stops, clips, bars or the
like;
(b) Skating boots, ski-boots and cross-country ski
footwear, wrestling boots, boxing boots and
cycling shoes.
It is our position that subheading note 1 to Chapter
64, HTSUS, should be interpreted narrowly. The rationale for our
position is that this note limits sports footwear to only the
general description set forth in (a) and the enumerated articles
in (b). To meet the definition, an article must either meet the
criteria set forth in (a) or be one of the enumerated types set
forth in (b). See Headquarters Ruling Letter (HRL) 955260 dated
November 3, 1993.
The "STEEDS" riding shoe does not qualify for
classification as "sports footwear" under note l(a) to Chapter
64, HTSUS, because the "steel shank" positioned inside the
outsole of the shoe is not "like" the spikes, sprigs, cleats,
stops, clips, bars" that are cited. As best as we can ascertain,
all these have relatively sharp points or edges which are
designed to dig into the ground (turf or ice), and appear on the
outside of the shoe. See HRL 955014 dated April 11, 1994.
The riding shoe does not qualify for classification as
"sports footwear" under note l(b) to Chapter 64, HTSUS, because
it is not one of the types of footwear enumerated therein.
HOLDING:
The "STEEDS" riding shoe is not considered "sports
footwear" for tariff purposes.
The "STEEDS" over-the-ankle riding shoe, in ladies and
childrens sizes, is properly classifiable under subheading
6403.91.90, HTSUS, which provides for footwear with outer soles
of rubber, plastics, leather or composition leather and uppers of
leather, other footwear, covering the ankle, other, for other
persons. The applicable rate of duty for this provision is 10%
ad valorem. If imported in mens, youths and boys sizes,
classification would be under subheading 6403.91.60, HTSUS, with
duty at the rate of 8.5% ad valorem.
Accordingly, DD 84043 is revoked.
In accordance with section 625, this ruling will become
effective 60 days after publication in the CUSTOMS BULLETIN.
Publication of rulings or decisions pursuant to section 625 does
not constitute a change of practice or position in accordance
with section 177.10(c)(1), Customs Regulations (19 CFR
177.10(c)(1)).
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director Commercial Rulings Division