HQ 959277
CLA-2 RR:TC:TE 959277 RH
Thomas H. Botini, Esq.
Armstrong, Teasdale, Schlafly & Davis
One Metropolitan Square, Suite 2600
St. Louis, MO 63102-2740
RE: Headbands; heading 6507; heading 6307; baseball caps; cut to
length
Dear Mr. Botini:
This is in response to your letter dated May 25, 1996, on behalf
of your client, Western Textile Products Company ("WTP"),
requesting reconsideration of New York Ruling Letter (NY) 818295,
dated February 29, 1996. In that ruling, Customs classified
three-ply fabric to be used as headbands for baseball caps as
other made up articles under subheading 6307.90.9989 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated
(HTSUSA). You claim that the merchandise should be classified as
headbands under subheading 6507.00.0000, HTSUSA.
FACTS:
WTC supplies textile fabrics and textile intermediate components
to apparel manufacturers and is the largest manufacturer and
distributor of components and fabrics of baseball caps to
domestic manufacturers. WTP is negotiating with contractors in
Mexico to make absorbent headbands ("sweatbands") for baseball
caps. The headbands will be sold by WTP to cap manufacturers in
the United States, which will incorporate the headbands into the
inside edge of the cap. The headbands will support the cap and
absorb perspiration. The headbands are constructed of cotton or
poly/cotton print or twill fabric assembled with urethane foam
and nonwoven fabric. The print cloth derives from Pakistani
greige fabric which was finished in the United States. The other
components are products of the United States. The headbands will
be imported in roll form about 100 yards long and will consist of
a 1 1/4 inch to 1 1/2 inch wide fabric band. They will be cut
and sewn into caps after importation into the United States.
You claim that the headbands are finished products and are ready
for immediate incorporation into baseball cap crowns.
- 2 -
Your letter describes the process by which the headbands are
incorporated into the cap crown. It is supported by an affidavit
of the Product Development Manager of WTP, William F. Zurheide,
and is illustrated by photographs. Mr. Zurheide states that the
prevailing practice in the United States is not to precut to
length similar headbands prior to selling the goods to cap
manufactures because the manufacturers sew headbands directly
into the crown of the cap from the roll. After the headband is
sewn into the cap, the sewing machine operator cuts the headband
to length with an automatic cutter on the sewing machine. This
procedure provides the most convenient and productive means for
inserting the headband into the cap and allows manufactures to
make caps of different sizes with the same headband material
rather than stocking headbands in a variety of sizes or lengths.
The headband material in rolls is sewn directly into the cap as
imported.
ISSUE:
Whether the three-ply fabric qualifies for classification under
heading 6507 as headbands (i.e., is it cut to shape or otherwise
ready for incorporation into baseball caps)?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Classification of goods under the HTSUSA is governed by the
General Rules of Interpretation (GRIs). GRI 1 provides that
classification shall be determined according to the terms of the
headings and any relative section or chapter notes. You contend
that the three-ply fabric is classifiable under heading 6507,
which provides for "Headbands, linings, covers, hat foundations,
hat frames, peaks (visors) and chinstraps, for headgear."
The Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System
Explanatory Notes (EN), while not legally binding, are recognized
as the official interpretation of the Harmonized System at the
international level. The EN for heading 6507 provides in
pertinent part:
This heading covers only the following fittings for
headgear:
(1) Head-bands for fitting on the inside edge of the
crown. These are usually
of leather, but may also be of composition
leather, of oiled cloth or other
coated fabric, etc. They are classified in this
heading only when cut to length
or otherwise ready for incorporation in the
headgear. They frequently bear an
inscription of the hat-maker's name, etc.
The merchandise in question is imported in roll form and does
not, therefore, satisfy the "cut to length" criteria of the EN.
The more difficult question is whether the merchandise is
"otherwise ready for incorporation" in the headgear. In that
regard, you contend that no intermediate cuttings or changes in
form are needed between the completion of assembly of the
"headband" - 3 -
and its incorporation into the cap crown. They are made from
light-weight materials in a construction appropriate for baseball
caps. WTP does not sell the "headbands" to any other markets
and there are no other uses known to WTP for the "headbands."
You further contend that the imported fabric has the essential
character of completed or finished "headbands" in that they are
to be used only on the inside edge of baseball caps.
In Coraggio Design, Inc. v. United States, 12 CIT 143 (1988), the
Court of International Trade held that imported rolls or bolts of
drapery fabric which had a "continental hem" that dedicated its
use solely as drapery and made it commercially unsuitable for
other uses was, nevertheless, classified as fabric and not an
article because the hem did not fix the identity of the drapery
with certainty.
The principal that the identity of an article must be fixed with
certainty was discussed earlier in
The Harding Co. v. United States, 23 CCPA 250, TD 48109 (1936).
In that case, brake lining material was imported in 100 foot
rolls. It was used for brake lining for automobiles and was not
commercially suitable for other uses. After it was fitted and
riveted to a brake shoe it was cut off at one end. The brake
lining material was not marked to indicate where it was to be cut
for the reason that, even though used as brake linings for
automobiles, it was used in various lengths. The court held that
the imported merchandise was material for making automobile brake
linings and not parts of automobiles.
Moreover, in Bendix Mouldings, Inc. v. United States, 73 Cust.
Ct. 201, 388 F. Supp. 1193 (1974), the court stated that "no
matter how close the importation is to the finished article or
how dedicated it is to a single use, it remains a material until
the identity of actual articles can be seen emerging with
certainty from the undifferentiated material." In Bendix, uncut
wood moldings dedicated to use as picture frames but not
dedicated to the making of any particular frame were not
classifiable as unfinished frames but only as the material from
which frames were made. See, American Import v. United States,
26 CCPA 72 (1938) (the mere fact that 60 foot lengths of silk
fishing-leader gut was exclusively used for fishing leaders did
not take it out of material classification).
In the instant case, the three-ply fabric is imported in roll
form and is ready to be sewn into the inside edge of baseball
caps. It is not marked to indicate where it is to be cut because
it is first sewn into a baseball cap and then cut to fit the size
of the cap into which it is sewn. Like the drapery fabric
imported in rolls in Coraggio , the uncut wood picture frames in
Bendix, and the brake lining material in Harding, no single
headband made from the three-ply fabric in this case can be
identified with certainty as an independent article. Even though
the three-ply fabric is dedicated to use as headbands, like the
materials dedicated to use as specific articles in the cited
cases, the identity of the headbands cannot be seen emerging with
certainty until they are sewn into baseball caps and cut to
length.
- 4 -
In NY 818295 the three-ply fabric bands were classified under
subheading 6307.90.9989, HTSUSA, which provides for other made up
[textile] articles. According to Note 7(c) to Section XI, the
expression "made up" includes articles which are "Hemmed or with
rolled edges. . . ." The three-ply fabric bands in question
meet that definition and, therefore, remain classifiable under
subheading 6307.90.9989, as stated in NY 818295.
HOLDING:
The three-ply fabric bands imported in rolls is classifiable
under subheading 6307.90.9989, HTSUSA, which provides for other
made up articles. They are dutiable at the general rate of duty
at 7 percent ad valorem.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Tariff Classification Appeals
Division