CLA-2 CO:R:C:G 084823 CC
Mary Ann Ost
H.Z. Bernstein Co., Inc.
One World Trade Center, Suite 1973
New York, New York 10048
RE: Modification of classification for footwear
Dear Ms. Ost:
This letter concerns modification of the classification of
footwear in a ruling issued March 9, 1989 by the District
Director at Milwaukee concerning the tariff classification of
certain footwear.
FACTS:
As reported in the Milwaukee ruling letter, footwear was
submitted for classification. Style N335 is a ladies' quilted
satin closed toe, open back slipper with a leather sole. The
external surface area of the shoe is composed of 100 percent
rayon satin, with a rayon textile flower attached to the middle
of the shoe above the toes. The footwear is composed of 18.08
percent textile materials and 15.67 percent rubber and plastics
(vinyl), presumably by weight.
It was decided in the Milwaukee ruling letter that Style
N335 was subject to a 37.5 percent duty rate under subheading
6404.20.6060 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States Annotated (HTSUSA). According to that ruling, the shoe
was not classifiable under subheading 6404.20.20, HTSUSA, or
subheading 6404.20.40, HTSUSA, since over 10 percent by weight
was rubber and plastics. It appears that 6404.20.20/40, HTSUSA,
was interpreted as providing only for footwear that was both
under 50 percent by weight of textile materials and rubber and
plastics and under 10 percent by weight being rubber and
plastics.
ISSUE:
What is the proper interpretation of the phrase "not over 50
percent by weight of textile materials and rubber or plastics
with at least 10 percent by weight being rubber or plastics"
which appears in the qualifying language preceding U.S.
subheadings 6404.20.20/40, HTSUSA?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
In HRL 082614, dated October 17, 1988, the issue of
interpretation of the language presented in 6404.20.20/40,
HTSUSA, was considered. The language in question is "not over 50
percent by weight of rubber or plastics and not over 50 percent
by weight of textile materials and rubber or plastics with at
least 10 percent by weight being rubber or plastics." HRL 082614
found that the terms of the subheadings were ambiguous, making it
necessary to resort to legislative history to aid in interpreting
the statute. Based on the legislative history, it was found that
subheadings 6404.20.20/40, HTSUSA, were applicable "to footwear
with fabric uppers and leather or composition leather soles which
are under 10 percent by weight of rubber and plastics or not
over 50 percent by weight of textile materials, rubber and
plastics." Thus, according to precedent established in HRL
082614, footwear with fabric uppers and leather or composition of
leather soles does not have to be both under 10 percent by weight
of rubber and plastics and under 50 percent by weight of textile
materials, rubber, and plastics to be classifiable under
subheadings 6404.20.20/40, HTSUSA. Footwear with fabric uppers
and leather or composition of leather soles which is either under
10 percent by weight of rubber and plastics, or under 50 percent
by weight of textile materials, rubber, and plastics is
classifiable under subheadings 6404.20.20/40, HTSUSA.
Although Style N335 is over 10 percent by weight of rubber
and plastics, it is still classifiable under subheading
6404.20.20 or 6404.20.40, HTSUSA, since it is under 50 percent by
weight of textile materials, rubber, and plastics. Because the
Milwaukee ruling letter found that Style N335 was not
classifiable in 6404.20.20/40 when it was not over 50 percent by
weight of textile materials, rubber, and plastics, the Milwaukee
ruling was in error.
HOLDING:
The footwear in question, Style N335, is classified under
subheading 6404.20.2060, HTSUSA, dutiable at 15 percent, if
valued not over $2.50 per pair, and under 6404.20.4060, HTSUSA,
dutiable at 10 percent, if valued over $2.50 per pair.
Pursuant to Section 177(d) of the Customs Regulations, the
March 9, 1989 ruling letter from the Milwaukee office concerning
footwear imported by the Alta Products Corporation is modified
accordingly.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division
6cc AD NY Seaport
1cc J. Sheridan NY Seaport
1cc DD Milwaukee, WI
1cc John Durant
1cc Donald Cahill
1cc Legal Reference
CClark library
name: 084823