CLA-2:CO:R:C:G 084131 SR
Mr. Robert D. Stang
Grunfeld, Desiderio, Lebowitz & Silverman
12 East 49th Street
New York, N.Y. 10017-1062
RE: Classification of articles of knit footwear
Dear Mr. Stang:
This is in reference to your letter dated March 13, 1989,
requesting the tariff classification of "Beartreads" under the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated
(HTSUSA). Samples were submitted.
FACTS:
The merchandise at issue is articles of knit footwear with a
decorative application of a plastic rubber compound on one side.
The article consists of a sock composed of man-made fiber that
has a coating/impregnation of a plastic rubber compound that is
applied in five applications that form the shape of a bear claw.
ISSUE:
Whether the merchandise at issue is classifiable as
footwear.
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Chapter 64, HTSUSA, is the chapter in which footwear is
classified. Note 1(a) to chapter 64, HTSUSA, states that this
chapter does not cover footwear without applied soles, of textile
material (chapter 61 or 62).
The importer claims that the merchandise has an applied sole
because the plastic rubber applications are on the bottom of the
sock and they are more water-resistant and abrasive than the
textile portion. The importer also provides several dictionary
definitions of the term sole including one from the Dictionary of
Shoe Industry Terminology, Footwear Industries of America (1986),
-2-
which defines sole as:
The bottom piece or pieces of leather or other material of
footwear. When used as a collective term, it includes the
complete bottom part of the shoe, except the heel.
The plastic rubber coating on the merchandise at issue
cannot be considered to be an applied sole. The coating on these
articles does not cover the complete bottom of the sock. On one
of these samples the coating does not even cover half of the
bottom surface. The coating is applied in five separate
irregularly shaped pieces, whereas, an applied sole is usually
only a single piece. The plastic is more water resistant
however, it would not keep the foot dry since it does not cover
the entire bottom of the foot. The places on the sock that are
coated are more abrasive and would have more tread, however the
coating is not sufficient to be considered an applied sole.
Because the merchandise at issue does not have an applied
sole it is classifiable in chapter 61. Heading 6115, HTSUSA,
provides for stockings, socks and other hosiery, and footwear
without applied soles, knitted or crocheted.
HOLDING:
The merchandise at issue is classifiable under subheading
6115.93.2000, HTSUSA, which provides for socks and other hosiery,
and footwear without applied soles, knitted, other, of synthetic
fibers, other, if it is made of synthetic fibers. If the
merchandise is made of artificial fibers it is classifiable under
subheading 6115.99.1800, HTSUSA, which provides for socks and
other hosiery, and footwear without applied soles, knitted,
other, of other textile materials, of artificial fibers, other.
For both of these classification numbers the textile category
number is 632, the rate of duty is 15.5 percent ad valorem under
the General rate of duty column.
Due to the changeable nature of the statistical annotation
(the ninth and tenth digits of the classification) and the
restraint (quota/visa) categories, you should contact your local
Customs office prior to importation of this merchandise to
determine the current status of any import restraints or
requirements.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division
6 cc A.D. New York Seaport
1 cc Durant
1 cc legal reference