U.S. Customs and Border Protection · CROSS Database · 1 HTS code referenced
Primary HTS Code
6402.99.15
$496.4M monthly imports
Compare All →
Court Cases
5 cases
CIT & Federal Circuit
Ruling Age
34 years
Data compiled from CBP CROSS Rulings, Census Bureau Trade Data, CourtListener (CIT/CAFC) · As of 2026-05-02 · Updates monthly
The tariff classification of footwear from China, Indonesia,Taiwan,or Korea.
NY 866694 Sep 23, 1991 CLA-2-64:S:N:N3:D 347 CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO.: 6402.99.15 Mr. Joseph M. Collins Polo International 1699 S. Hanley Road St. Louis, MO 63144 RE: The tariff classification of footwear from China, Indonesia, Taiwan,or Korea. Dear Mr. Collins: In your letter dated August 22, 1991, you requested a tariff classification ruling. The sample, Style ASR#19805, is a man's low-cut athletic shoe with a unit-molded plastic bottom and an upper of pieces of plastic. The upper has a textile mustache which comprises less than 10 percent of its external surface area. Although the textile tongue is attached to the top surface of the upper and is visible beyond (below) the laces and the eyelet stays, we do not consider it to be part of the upper. The sole, of which you submitted a separate sample, is not considered to form a foxing- like band. The applicable subheading for the your sample will be 6402.99.15, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), which provides for other footwear with outer soles and uppers of rubber or plastics, other. The rate of duty will be 6 percent ad valorem. This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Section 177 of the Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. 177). A copy of this ruling letter should be attached to the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is imported. If the documents have been filed without a copy, this ruling should be brought to the attention of the Customs officer handling the transaction. Sincerely, Jean F. Maguire Area Director New York Seaport
Other CBP classification decisions referencing the same tariff code.
CIT and CAFC court opinions related to the tariff classifications in this ruling.