The tariff classification of a woman's low-heel shoe fromTaiwan. Dear Ms. Peterson: In your letter dated October 30, 1991, you requested aclassification ruling. The submitted sample, your style Snipit/Denim/A, is awoman's low-heel, slip-on shoe. It has an unlined textile(denim) upper with a PVC topline, a decorative PVC bow stitchedover the toes, and a plastic toe and heel overlay. The shoe alsohas, you state, a leather insole/sockliner and a leather outsole. On the breakdown sheet you indicate that the outsole iscomposition leather. In either case, we will assume for thepurposes of this ruling letter, that the black coating on it isless than .15mm thick.

NY 868472 November 20, 1991 CLA-2-64:S:N:N3D:346 M 868472 CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO.: 6404.20.40 Ms. Jill Peterson Sam & Libby 1123 Industrial Road, Suite C San Carlos, CA 94070 RE: The tariff classification of a woman's low-heel shoe from Taiwan. Dear Ms. Peterson: In your letter dated October 30, 1991, you requested a classification ruling. The submitted sample, your style Snipit/Denim/A, is a woman's low-heel, slip-on shoe. It has an unlined textile (denim) upper with a PVC topline, a decorative PVC bow stitched over the toes, and a plastic toe and heel overlay. The shoe also has, you state, a leather insole/sockliner and a leather outsole. On the breakdown sheet you indicate that the outsole is composition leather. In either case, we will assume for the purposes of this ruling letter, that the black coating on it is less than .15mm thick. We note that in addition to stating in your letter that the value of the shoe is $6.40 per pair, you have submitted a component material breakdown of the shoe prior to assembly. Your figures indicate that the weight of the textile, plastic and rubber components present in this shoe is 40.9% of the weight of the entire shoe. We do not see any obvious errors in the breakdown. As this is a prototype sample, the accuracy of the component weight breakdown figures for the actual imported shoe will have to be verified by Customs at the time of importation. We also note that previous versions of this style had a textile/plastic socklining. They would obviously have had a different weight breakdown. Although this is a prototype sample and marking is not required, when the actual shoes are imported, marking, indicating the country of origin, will be required. If the shoes have not been marked to indicate the country of origin, they will not meet the requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304. According to that Section, the shoes would be considered not legally marked under the provisions of 19 C.F.R. 134.11 which states, "every article of foreign origin (or its container) imported into the U.S. shall be marked in a conspicuous place as legibly, indelibly, and permanently as the nature of the article (or container) will permit". The applicable subheading for the shoe submitted, based on your sample and your statement, will be 6404.20.40, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), which provides for footwear, in which the upper's external surface is predominately textile materials; in which the outer sole's external surface is predominately leather or composition leather; which is, by weight, not over 50% as a total of textile materials, rubber and/or plastics; and which, you have stated, is valued over $2.50 per pair. The rate of duty will be 10 percent ad valorem. This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Section l77 of the Customs Regulations (l9 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