CLA-2: CO:R:C:T 956423 PR
Mr. Mervyn Taub
Advanced Apparel Associates
51 Magazine Street
Bedford, NH 03110 -4810
Re: Reconsideration of NY 896271 Concerning the Applicability of
NAFTA to Men's Jackets
Dear Mr. Taub:
This is in reply to your letter of May 9, 1994, in which you
requested that we reconsider the portion of New York Ruling
Letter (NY) 896271 which concerned the applicability of the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Our ruling on that matter
follows.
FACTS:
According to NY 896271, the garment in question is man's jacket
with an outer shell of 100 percent cotton denim fabric and is
classifiable in subheading 6201.92, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of
the United States Annotated (HTSUSA). When imported, it will
consist of 98 percent United States fabric. The remaining two
percent is a cotton flannel fabric from Taiwan. Both fabrics
will be cut and assembled into the garment in Mexico. The cotton
flannel fabric is used as a lining for the yoke.
In NY 896271, the goods were classified it was stated:
The merchandise does not qualify for preferential
treatment under the NAFTA because one of the non-originating
materials used in the production of the goods will not
undergo the change in tariff classification required by
General Note 12(t)/62.1(B), HTSUSA. The material which
comprises the visible lining is cut from Taiwanese fabric. -2-
ISSUE:
It is your belief that the de minimis rule contained in General
Note 12(f)(vi), HTSUSA, is applicable to the subject garment and,
therefore, the New York ruling erroneously applied General Note
12(t)/62.1(B), HTSUSA. Accordingly, you contend that the subject
garment is entitled to preferential tariff treatment under the
NAFTA.
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
General Note 12(b), HTSUSA, provides, in pertinent part:
(b) For the purposes of this note, goods imported into
the customs territory of the United States are eligible
for the tariff treatment and quantitative limitations
set forth in the tariff schedule as "goods originating
in the territory of a NAFTA party" only if--
* * *
(ii) they have been transformed in the territory
of Canada, Mexico and/or the United states so
that--
(A) except as provided in subdivision (f) of
this note, each of the non-originating materials
used in the production of such goods undergoes a
change in tariff classification described in
subdivisions (r), (s) and (t) of this note or the
rules set forth therein * * *
As the inquirer has correctly pointed out, General Note
12(t)/62.1(B), HTSUSA, is applicable to goods classifiable in
subheadings 6201.11 through 6201.13, HTSUSA, not to goods
classifiable under subheading 6201.92, HTSUSA. General Note
12(t)/62.3(B), HTSUSA, is the note that should have been cited
since that is the note which is applicable to goods classifiable
in subheading 6201.92, The tariff shift rule in that note
provides, in pertinent part:
3. A change to subheadings 6201.91 through 6201.93
from any other chapter, except from . . . 5204 through
5212, . . . provided that:
* * *
(B) the visible lining fabric listed in chapter rule 1
for chapter 62 satisfies the tariff change requirements
provided therein.
-3-
Chapter rule 1 for chapter 62 provides, in pertinent part:
A change to any of the following headings or
subheadings for visible lining fabrics:
. . . 5208.31 through 5208.59, 5209.31 through 5209.59,
5210.31 through 5210.59, 5211.31 through 5211.59,
5212.13 through 5212.15, 5212.23 through 5212.25 . . .
from any other heading outside [sic] that group.
In view of the specific reference in NY 896271 to General Note
12(t)/62.1(B), and the conclusion in that rule that the goods did
not qualify for preferential treatment under the NAFTA, we assume
that the cotton fabric from Taiwan is classifiable under one of
the subheadings mentioned in rule 1 to chapter 62. We also note
that the request for reconsideration does not contain any
information which would indicate otherwise.
The request for reconsideration hinges on the applicability of
the de minimis rule contained in General Note 12(f), HTSUSA.
That note provides, in pertinent part:
(i) Except as provided in subdivision (f)(iii) through
(vi) . . .
* * *
(vi) A good provided for in chapters 50 through 63,
inclusive, of this schedule that does not originate
because certain fibers or yarns used in the production
of the component of the good that determines the tariff
classification of the good do not undergo an applicable
change in tariff classification, provided for in
subdivisions (r), (s) and (t) of this note, shall
nonetheless be considered to originate if the total
weight of all such fibers or yarns in that component is
not more than 7 percent of the total weight of that
component. (underscoring added)
Under the instant factual situation, the goods in question do not
qualify for preferential tariff treatment under the NAFTA for two
reasons--(1)the cotton fabric from Taiwan does not meet the
requisite tariff shift rule contained in General Note
12(t)/62.3(B); and (2) since lining fabrics do not determine the
tariff classification of the good, the de minimis rule is not
applicable to the subject goods.
-4-
HOLDING:
The holding in NY 896271 concerning the applicability of
preferential tariff treatment under the NAFTA to the instant
goods is affirmed.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division