MAR-2-05 CO:R:C:V 734435 GRV
David A. Riggle, Esq.
Riggle and Craven
205 West Wacker Drive - Suite 2022
Chicago, IL 60606-1215
RE: Country of origin of greige fabric from Taiwan, processed in
Hong Kong, and imported into the U.S. for further process-
ing. Textiles; 19 CFR 12.130; T.D. 90-17; substantial
transformation; C.S.D. 90-29; 19 CFR 12.130(e)(2); 082830;
finishing operations
Dear Mr. Riggle:
This is in response to your letter of December 12, 1991, on
behalf of The Company Store of LaCrosse, Wisconsin, concerning
the country of origin of textile products in the greige that are
processed in a country other than the country of origin where the
fabric was manufactured.
FACTS:
Greige goods--encompassing some nine types of cotton fabric
--produced in Taiwan will be processed as follows in Hong Kong:
desizing, scouring, bleaching, dyeing, softening, stentering,
and calendering. Following these operations in Hong Kong, the
dyed and finished fabric is exported in rolls or bales to your
client for further processing.
No information concerning the domestic processing operations
was provided, nor were samples of the subject merchandise
submitted for examination.
You inquire as to which country--Taiwan or Hong Kong--is
the country of origin of the imported fabric, for purposes of the
U.S. marking laws.
ISSUE
Do the processing operations performed in Hong Kong
substantially transform the Taiwanese greige fabric for purposes
of country of origin marking.
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
The country of origin rules for textiles and textile prod-
ucts are found at 19 CFR 12.130. For purposes of 12.130, where
a textile or textile product, subject to 204 of the Agricultural
Act of 1956, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1854), consists of materials
produced or derived from, or processed in, more than one foreign
territory or country, or insular possession of the U.S., the
country of origin is defined as that foreign territory or coun-
try, or insular possession where it last underwent a substantial
transformation. A textile or textile product will be considered
to have undergone a substantial transformation if it has been
transformed by means of substantial manufacturing or processing
into a new and different article of commerce. 19 CFR 12.130(b).
Factors indicating whether or not a particular manufactur-
ing/processing operation is substantial are set forth in 19 CFR
12.130(d)-(e). While 12.130(e)(1)(i) provides that an article
or material usually will be a product of the particular country
where it has been both dyed and printed when accompanied by two
or more finishing operations, 12.130(e)(2) provides that the
article or material usually will not be considered to be a
product of the particular country by virtue of merely having
undergone one or more finishing operations or been dyed and/or
printed. (Emphasis supplied).
As the merchandise imported is classifiable in HTSUS section
XI and was processed in more than one foreign country, the coun-
try of origin rules of 12.130(b) are applicable, and Customs has
stated that the principles of origin contained in 12.130 are
applicable to such merchandise for all purposes, including duty
and marking. T.D. 85-38, 19 Cust.Bull. 58, 68 (1985), and T.D.
90-17, 24 Cust. Bull. ___ (1990). Further, regarding the sub-
stantial transformation criteria and examples found at 12.130,
Customs has stated that "[a]ny factual situations not squarely
within those examples will be decided by Customs in accordance
with the provisions of section 12.130(b) and (d)." T.D. 85-38,
at p. 72.
For the reasons which follow, we find that the imported
fabric will be products of Taiwan when imported into the U.S.--
subject to all applicable visa and quota requirements, as the
Taiwanese fabric will not be substantially transformed by the
textile processing operations performed in Hong Kong.
In C.S.D. 90-29, greige terry toweling was imported into
the Philippines and desized, bleached, dyed, hydro extracted,
dried, printed by hand, cut to size, stiched [sic], mended,
graded and packaged for export. Although the manufacturing
processes in the Philippines involved both dyeing and printing,
it did not include at least two of the major finishing operations
enumerated at 19 CFR 12.130(e)(1)(i). Accordingly, we held that
the country of origin of the greige terry toweling would be that
country where the towelling was made and not the Philippines.
See also, Mast Industries, Inc. v. United States, 11 CIT 30, 652
F.Supp. 1531 (1987), aff'd, 5 Fed.Cir. 105, 822 F.2d 1069 (1987)
(ten operations--singing, desizing, scouring, bleaching, mercer-
izing, dyeing, softening, tentering (stentering), pre-shrinking
(sanforizing), and inspection/measuring and packaging--
performed in Honk Kong on greige fabric imported from the
People's Republic of China (P.R.C.) did not substantially
transform the fabric, for purposes of country of origin marking
under 19 CFR 12.130. See also, Headquarter Ruling Letter 082830
dated December 20, 1989 (greige goods produced in the P.R.C. and
finish processed in Hong Kong not substantially transformed, for
purposes of 12.130).
In this case, the greige fabric will be dyed, but not
printed in Hong Kong. Therefore, the example set forth at
12.130(e)(1)(i) is not applicable. Concerning the seven
processing operations performed on the greige goods in your
scenario, we note that six (desizing, scouring, bleaching,
dyeing, softening, and stentering) were the subject of the Mast
decision, and that the seventh processing operation (calendering)
is defined in Fairchild's Dictionary of Textiles (2d printing,
1970) as a finishing process which produces a flat, glossy,
smooth surface; although the calender is sometimes used in
applying some of the so-called "permanent finishes," the finish
is not permanent. As six of the operations performed in Hong
Kong on the Taiwanese fabric constitute textile finishing
operations, as contemplated by 12.130(e)(2)(iv), and the dyeing
operation is not in conjunction with a printing operation, the
textile fabric will remain a product of Taiwan when imported into
the U.S.
HOLDING:
The processing operations performed in Hong Kong do not
substantially transform the Taiwanese greige fabric for purposes
of country of origin marking. Accordingly, the fabric imported
remains a product of Taiwan and must be marked as such.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division