CLA-2 RR:TC:TE 960489 GGD
Mr. Alan Siegal
Genghis Khan Freight Service, Inc.
161-15 Rockaway Boulevard
Jamaica, New York 11434
RE: Reconsideration of Port Ruling Letter (PD) B83444; Shoulder
Bag with Strap; PD B83444 Correct as to Sample Article
Submitted; General Note 19(e), HTSUS; "In Part Of" Braid
Dear Mr. Siegal:
This letter is in response to your request of May 9, 1997,
on behalf of your client, Barganza, Inc., for reconsideration of
PD B83444, issued April 14, 1997, as it pertains to the
classification under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States Annotated (HTSUSA) of a certain shoulder bag made in China
or India. A sample of style number 61085 was submitted at the
time of the original determination. A separate sample has been
submitted with your current request.
FACTS:
In PD B83444, style no. 61085 was one of five shoulder bags
classified based upon samples submitted. No braid was found on
any of the articles. The five shoulder bags were classified in
subheading 4202.22.8050, HTSUSA, textile category 670, the
provision for "Handbags, whether or not with shoulder strap,
including those without handle: With outer surface of sheeting of
plastic or of textile materials: With outer surface of textile
materials: Other: Other: Other, Of man-made fibers," with a
general column one duty rate of 19.3 percent ad valorem. -2-
With your request for reconsideration, you submitted a
separate sample, again identified by style no. 61085. You
correctly note that the shoulder strap of this bag is braided,
being composed of separate strands of yarn that are mingled in
"maypole" fashion. Upon review of the record and the description
of the previously submitted sample, we find that PD B83444 is
correct based upon the description of the sample bag subject to
that ruling. However, this letter additionally provides a
binding ruling as to the tariff classification of the shoulder
bag with braided shoulder strap, based upon the sample you
subsequently submitted.
The sample article, style no. 61085, is a shoulder bag with
an outer surface composed of crocheted chenille yarns of man-made
fibers. Only the nondetachable shoulder strap is of braided
construction. The strap, which measures approximately 45 inches
in length, is otherwise made of the same material in the same
color and texture as the outer surface of the body of the bag.
The bag measures approximately 8 inches in height by 7-1/2 inches
in width. Extending across the top of the bag is a zippered
closure, which opens to reveal one central compartment.
ISSUE:
Whether the presence of a braided strap is sufficient basis
upon which to classify the shoulder bag in subheading
4202.22.4030, HTSUSA, the provision for "Handbags...With outer
surface of textile materials: Wholly or in part of braid...."
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Classification under the HTSUS is made in accordance with
the General Rules of Interpretation (GRI). GRI 1 provides that
the classification of goods shall be determined according to the
terms of the headings of the tariff schedule and any relative
Section or Chapter Notes. In the event that the goods cannot be
classified solely on the basis of GRI 1, and if the headings and
legal notes do not otherwise require, the remaining GRI may then
be applied. The Explanatory Notes (EN) to the Harmonized
Commodity Description and Coding System, which represent the
official interpretation of the tariff at the international level,
facilitate classification under the HTSUS by offering guidance in
understanding the scope of the headings and GRI.
Among other goods, heading 4202, HTSUS, provides for
traveling bags, handbags, and similar containers. Since the
merchandise is a shoulder bag or handbag, it is covered by the -3-
heading. Subheading 4202.22 (as well as subheadings 4202.21 and
4202.29), HTSUS, covers handbags, whether or not with shoulder
strap, including those without handle. Subheading 4202.22.40 (as
well as subheading 4202.22.35), HTSUS, provides for handbags
having an outer surface of textile materials wholly or in part of
braid. The sample bag's outer surface is not wholly of braid.
To determine whether it is considered to be "in part of" braid,
we first look to General Note 19(e), HTSUS, which in pertinent
part states that:
the terms..."in part of", and "containing", when used
between the description of an article and a material...have
the following meanings:
(ii) "in part of" or "containing" mean that the goods
contain a significant quantity of the named material.
With regard to the application of the quantitative
concepts specified above, it is intended that the de
minimis rule apply.
The de minimis rule provides that an ingredient or component
of an article may be ignored for classification purposes
depending upon "whether or not the amount used has really changed
or affected the nature of the article and, of course, its
salability." Varsity Watch Company v. United States, 34 CCPA
155, C.A.D. 359 (1947).
In Headquarters Ruling Letter (HQ) 081483, issued April 27,
1989, this office classified a handbag of man-made textile
materials with a braided shoulder strap in subheading
4202.22.8050, HTSUSA. Noting that the language of General Note
19(e)(ii), HTSUS (defining the term "in part of" and providing
for application of the de minimis rule), is essentially identical
to that set forth in General Headnote 9(f)(iv), Tariff Schedules
of the United States Annotated (TSUSA), we referred to court
cases decided under the TSUS (including Varsity Watch) which
interpreted the term "in part of," applied the de minimis rule,
and determined whether to ignore the ingredient or component of
an article, which would otherwise constitute a significant
quantity.
In HQ 081483, we cited to Bantam Travelware v. United
States, 11 C.I.T. 893, 679 F. Supp. 8, Slip Op. 87-131 (1987), in
which several factors were used to determine whether articles of -4-
luggage containing braided material (not observable to the naked
eye) within the handles/straps, were considered to be "in part
of" braid. The factors included: the commercial utility of the
particular quantity of braided component used in the article, the
component's effect on the article's salability, consumer
preference, and the relevant trade's recognition of the
importance of the component's use. The court found insufficient
evidence that the use of braid produced a meaningful advantage as
to the product's performance or appearance, and no proof that the
use of braid enhanced salability of the goods or that it was
preferred by consumers. Evidence as to trade recognition was
said to be inconclusive. It was held that the luggage did not
contain a commercially significant quantity of braid to be
classified as being "in part of braid."
Applying the factors used by the court in Bantam Travelware
to the facts of HQ 081483, we found that the handbag with braided
shoulder strap did not contain a significant quantity of braided
material. It was also found that the handbag's utility was not
affected by the strap's braided construction, that there was no
indication the braided material affected the article's
salability, and that the braided material was not present in a
commercially meaningful quantity.
In Headquarters Ruling Letter (HQ) 085996, issued March 6,
1990, this office classified four evening bags with braided
handles. It was determined that none of the articles contained a
sufficiently significant quantity of braid so as to be considered
"in part of braid" for classification purposes. We again
employed the factors used in Bantam Travelware. Although each of
the braided handles measured at least 43 inches in length, it was
noted that the braided material comprised a very small percentage
of the overall material of each handbag. We found that any
advantages possessed by braided handles that might be perceived
by consumers were not obvious, and that evidence was unconvincing
that handbags with braided handles had demonstrated superior
salability. It was further found that the primary function of a
handbag - to carry items - could be accomplished without a
braided shoulder strap, or without any strap whatsoever. This
particular finding as to the importance of any type of strap or
handle is supported by, and comports with, the six digit
subheading language of 4202.21 through 4202.29, HTS, i.e.,
"Handbags, whether or not with shoulder strap, including those
without handle." See also HQ 084075, issued July 14, 1989, and
HQ 083632, issued April 27, 1989. -5-
Customs has, under certain circumstances, classified evening
bags with braided shoulder straps as being "in part of braid."
In HQ 089386, issued March 18, 1992, we considered the
classification of certain ladies' evening bags which had a
visibly braided shoulder strap. Counsel for the importer had
stressed the importance and desirability of that particular
strap, which was said to add to the elegance, utility, and
salability of the bag. We agreed that the strap complemented and
highlighted the dressy nature of the bag. We noted that the
braided form of the strap was extravagant (adding to the expense
and complexity of manufacture), and that the strap would likely
be used to carry the bag (despite its capacity to be folded
inside). In allowing that a braided shoulder strap may affect a
handbag's classification in certain limited circumstances, we
stated that "[t]he de minimis rule in this case has been
satisfied, since a strap on an evening bag is a substantial part
of the bag, one which in this instance, affects the nature of the
article and distinguishes it for evening or formal wear. In this
respect, we agree with your assertions and deem the samples at
issue to be wholly or in part of braid.'"
Since circumstances similar to those above are not present
in this case, we find that this braided shoulder strap may be
ignored for classification purposes. The braided strap is
neither extravagant nor dressy, and it provides no indication
that the shoulder bag is designed as an article for evening or
formal wear. Without severing and unraveling the yarns of the
strap, it is difficult to discern that it is of braided
construction or even to distinguish the material of which it is
constructed from the same-colored, similarly-textured material
that composes the outer surface of the handbag.
Considering the factors used by the court in Bantam
Travelware, there is little, if any, evidence that the strap's
braided construction is a response to consumer preference, that
it enhances or affects the handbag's salability, that the small
percentage of braid included in the whole article is commercially
significant, or that the relevant trade attaches any importance
to the use of this type of braided component. In light of the
above, we find that the presence of the article's braided
component is insufficient to overcome application of the de
minimis rule. The shoulder bag is classified as being not "in
part of braid." -6-
HOLDING:
The shoulder bag with braided shoulder strap, identified by
style no. 61085, is classified in subheading 4202.22.8050,
HTSUSA, textile category 670, the provision for handbags with
outer surface of textile materials. The general column one duty
rate is 19.3 percent ad valorem.
The designated textile and apparel category may be
subdivided into parts. If so, visa and quota requirements
applicable to the subject merchandise may be affected. Since
part categories are the result of international bilateral
agreements which are subject to frequent renegotiations and
changes, to obtain the most current information available, we
suggest that you check, close to the time of shipment, the Status
Report On Current Import Quotas (Restraint Levels), an internal
issuance of the U.S. Customs Service, which is available for
inspection at your local Customs office.
Due to the changeable nature of the statistical annotation
(the ninth and tenth digits of the classification) and the
restraint (quota/visa) categories applicable to textile
merchandise, you should contact your local Customs office prior
to importation of this merchandise to determine the current
status of any import restraints or requirements.
PD B83444, issued April 14, 1997, is hereby affirmed.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division