CLA-2 RR:CR:TE 963531 SS
Michael O’Neill, Esquire
O’Neil & Whitaker, Inc.
1809 Baltimore Avenue
Kansas City, MO 64108
RE: Revocation of HQ 086055: Classification of Neoprene Boot Liners; Shoe Accessories; Other Made Up Textile Articles; Heading 6307, HTSUSA; Not Clothing Accessories; Heading 6117, HTSUSA
Dear Mr. O’Neill:
This letter is pursuant to Headquarters’ reconsideration of Headquarters Ruling Letter (HQ) 086055, dated January 9, 1990, addressed to you on behalf of your client Nelson/Weather-Rite, which concerned the classification under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA) of neoprene boot liners.
This letter is to inform you that after review of that ruling, it has been determined that the classification of the neoprene boot liners in subheading 6117.80.0035, HTSUSA, is incorrect. For the reasons that follow, this ruling revokes HQ 086055.
Pursuant to section 625(c), Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1625(c)), notice of the proposed revocation of HQ 086055 was published on April 26, 2000, in the Customs Bulletin, Volume 34, Number 17.
FACTS:
The neoprene boot liners which are the subject of this ruling were described in HQ 086055 as follows:
The sample at issue, model no. 2308, is a reversible ankle high boot liner composed of neoprene laminated between two layers of nylon jersey. The neoprene and nylon jersey materials weigh 80 percent and 20 percent respectively. A seam runs along the front center, in the back, and around the edge of the sole. One side of the boot fabric has a camouflage design, and the other is a solid brown color.
The ruling also indicates that the neoprene boot liner has an applied sole (a separate piece of the same material as the upper) which will be in contact with the insole of the boot rather than the ground. The fabric layer is too delicate for outdoor use to be considered an outer sole and the liner’s use as separate footwear is unlikely. The camouflage print on one side of the liner and its snug fitting design suggest that the liner will not remain in the boot when the foot is removed.
ISSUE:
What is the proper classification of the neoprene boot liners under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA)?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Classification of goods under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA) is governed by the General Rules of Interpretation (“GRIs”). GRI 1 provides that classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings of the tariff schedule and any relative section or chapter notes. In the event that the goods cannot be classified solely on the basis of GRI 1, and if the headings and legal notes do not otherwise require, the remaining GRI may then be applied. The Explanatory Notes (EN) to the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System,
which represent the official interpretation of the tariff at the international level, facilitate classification under the HTSUSA by offering guidance in understanding the scope of the headings and GRI.
As explained in HQ 086055, the boot liners at issue are excluded from Chapter 64, HTSUSA as footwear or parts of footwear. The boot liners are not “footwear” classified in heading 6401 through 6405, HTSUSA, because they do not have an “outer sole” as defined by the EN. The boot liners are not “parts of footwear” classified in heading 6406, HTSUSA, since they are closely shaped to the foot and will not remain in the boot when the foot is removed. They are not described by the “gaiter, leggings and similar articles” subdivision of heading 6406, HTSUSA, because they cover the whole foot. Lastly, the boot
liners are not considered hosiery of heading 6115, HTSUSA, because their structure and function do not conform to that of items generally designated as hosiery. Furthermore, the boot liners are not marketed as hosiery and will normally be worn over hosiery.
Heading 6117, HTSUSA, covers, among other things, other made up clothing accessories. The term “clothing accessory” is not defined in the HTSUSA. However, in HQ 084857, dated June 28, 1989, and HQ 081945, dated January 29, 1990, Customs clearly stated that accessories to shoes are not considered “clothing accessories” of heading 6217, HTSUSA. HQ 084857 (cited above), stated in pertinent part:
. . . [I]n order to be classifiable under Heading 6217, an article must be a clothing accessory. In our view, shoes are commonly considered to be apparel accessories and not “clothing”, and, while shoe covers may be considered to be shoe accessories, accessories of clothing accessories are not within the purview of Heading 6217.
Applying this rationale to the subject merchandise, the neoprene boot liners are shoe accessories, which are not clothing accessories, and, thus, are not properly classifiable under heading 6117, HTSUSA.
Despite this line of cases, in HQ 086055, the ruling issued to your client, Customs classified the neoprene boot liners as other made up clothing accessories. The ruling did not explain how the liners qualified as “clothing accessories”. Additionally, in HQ 952170, dated December 23, 1992, Customs classified booties worn with walking shoes as other made up clothing accessories. Reliance was placed upon the prior neoprene boot liner ruling. HQ 952170 (cited above) acknowledged that it and the prior boot liner ruling were inconsistent with the reasoning set forth in HQ 081945 (cited above), and stated that Customs was considering revocation of HQ 081945. However, no such revocation has occurred. In fact, Customs is in the process of revoking HQ 086055 and modifying HQ 952170 (cited above). Upon review of the matter, we find that HQ 084857 and HQ 081945 present a more reasoned approach to the classification of shoe accessories.
Heading 6307, HTSUSA, provides for other made up textile articles. The EN to heading 6307, HTSUSA, state that the heading covers made up articles of any textile material which are not included more specifically elsewhere in the tariff schedule. The neoprene boot liners are not included more specifically elsewhere in the tariff schedule.
In HQ 084857 and HQ 081945 (cited above), Customs classified disposable shoe covers under heading 6307, HTSUSA. As stated above, Customs reasoned that accessories to shoes are not considered “clothing accessories” of heading 6217, HTSUSA. Furthermore, Customs has classified other shoe accessories under heading 6307, HTSUSA. In HQ 083538, dated February 12, 1990, Customs classified animal head “shoe tie-ons” as other made up textile articles. The shoe tie-on was described as an animal head of man-made fibers with two small loops on the back which enabled the animal head to serve as a shoe decoration by running the shoe laces through the loops. Additionally, in HQ 086328, dated April 18, 1990, Customs classified shoe decorations which were attached to sneakers by hook and loop material under heading 6307, HTSUSA. The shoes had textile uppers composed of hook and loop type material. Woven strips with various dinosaur designs had hook and loop material on the back which allowed the strips to be attached to the upper of the shoe for decoration. Applying these cases to the merchandise at issue, the neoprene boot liners are accessories to clothing accessories and are properly classifiable under heading 6307, HTSUSA.
HOLDING:
HQ 086055 is hereby revoked to reflect that the neoprene boot liners described therein are classifiable under subheading 6307.90.9989, HTSUSA, which provides for “Other made up articles, including dress patterns: Other: Other: Other; Other: Other.” The general column one duty rate is 7 percent ad valorem.
In accordance with 19 U.S.C. 1625(c), this ruling will become effective 60 days after its publication in the Customs Bulletin.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division