CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 957463 PR
John M. Peterson, Esquire
Neville, Peterson & Williams
39 Broadway
New York, New York 10006
RE: Reconsideration and Modification of HQ 952909 Concerning the
Country of origin of Sheets
Dear Mr. Peterson:
This is in reference to Customs Headquarters Ruling Letter
(HQ) 952909, dated April 12, 1993, by this office, addressed to
you on behalf of Natural Feather and Textiles, Inc., concerning
the country of origin of sheets. We have reviewed that ruling
and determined that it is partially in error. This modifies that
ruling. Pursuant to section 625(c)(1), Tariff Act of 1930 (19
U.S.C. 1625(c)(1)), as amended by section 623 of Title VI
(Customs Modernization) of the North American Free Trade
Agreement Implementation Act, Pub. L. 103-182, 107 Stat. 2057,
2186 (1993) (hereinafter referred to as section 625), notice of
the proposed modification of HQ 952909 was published February 8,
1995, in the CUSTOMS BULLETIN, Volume 29, Number 6.
FACTS:
According to the recent submission from your law firm,
cotton fabric is woven, dyed, and finished in China and then
shipped to Hong Kong where it is made into finished bedding
products. This latter production consists essentially of marking
the fabric, cutting it on four sides, hemming three sides using
single needle lockstitch machines fitted with hemming
attachments, and then adding a wider hem at the top along with a
strip of textile fabric (piping). The piping is stated to add
"to the attractiveness and enhances the overall visual appeal of
the sheet."
-2-
ISSUE:
The issue presented is which country,China or Hong Kong, is the
country of origin of the subject sheets.
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Section 12.130, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 12.130)
provides, in pertinent part, that a textile or textile product
which consists of materials processed in more than one foreign
country shall be a product of the country 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 operations into a new and different article of
commerce.
Customs has consistently ruled that the cutting of fabric on
all four sides, and hemming, did not, by itself, involve
sufficient processing to constitute "substantial manufacturing or
processing operations." See the most recent ruling, HQ 956030,
of November, 22, 1994. To rise to that level, there must be
processing in addition to cutting and hemming. Adding piping to
that processing will not suffice. Piping takes little expense
and practically no time. It is done for minor decorative
purposes which have no relation to the utility or manner of use
of the sheet.
HOLDING:
The country of origin of the flat sheets that were cut and
hemmed on four sides and had piping added is China. HQ 952909,
dated April 12, 1993, is hereby modified to reflect this holding.
In accordance with section 625, this ruling will become effective
60 days after its publication in the CUSTOMS BULLETIN. Sections
177.10(b) and 177.10(c), Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.10(b)
and 177.10(c)) are not applicable to rulings or decisions
published pursuant to section 625. Accordingly, the publication
of this ruling neither establishes a uniform practice nor
constitutes a change of practice or position by the Customs
Service.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division