Base
B862731997-06-19New York: Classification

The tariff classification of men's western boots from Brazil

U.S. Customs and Border Protection · CROSS Database · 2 HTS codes referenced

Cross-Source Intelligence

Primary HTS Code

6403.91.60

$165.6M monthly imports

Compare All →

Federal Register

1 doc

Related notices & rules

Court Cases

4 cases

CIT & Federal Circuit

Ruling Age

28 years

Data compiled from CBP CROSS Rulings, Census Bureau Trade Data, Federal Register, CourtListener (CIT/CAFC) · As of 2026-05-02 · Updates monthly

Summary

The tariff classification of men's western boots from Brazil

Ruling Text

PD B86273 June 19, 1997 CLA-2-64-NO:CO:FNIS D09 CATEGORY : Classification TARIFF NO.: 6403.91.60 and 6403.91.90 Louis P. Vizza Men's Footwear Buyer Menswear Division Blair Corporation 220 Hickory Street Warren, Pennsylvania 16366-0001 RE: The tariff classification of men's western boots from Brazil Dear Mr. Vizza: In your letter dated June 5, 1997, you requested a tariff classification ruling on men's western boots, Blair product #3935. You submitted two samples which are labeled Reference 5003 and 6000. You also submitted descriptive literature. Both styles are western pull-on boots with decorative stitched leather uppers and rubber soles. Reference 5003 is a mid pull-on boot with elastic gore shafts; whereas, Reference 6000 is a high boot with leather vamps and soft Nubuck shafts. We note that the submitted samples are not marked with the country of origin. Therefore if imported as is, the samples will not meet the country of origin marking requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304. Accordingly, the shoes would not be considered 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." We are returning your samples as requested. The applicable subheading for the above samples for Men's U.S. size 8 1/2 and above will be 6403.91.60, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), which provides for footwear in which the upper's external surface is predominately leather; in which the outer sole's external surface is predominately rubber, plastic or composition leather; which is other than "sports footwear"; which does not have a protective metal toe-cap; in which the top of the upper covers most of the wearer's ankle bone; in which the sole is attached to the upper by a means other than welt stitched construction; and which is worn only by males. The rate of duty will be 8.5 percent ad valorem. The applicable subheading for the above shoes up to and including men's U.S. Size 8 will be 6403.91.90, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), which provides for footwear in which the upper's external surface is predominately leather (noting that an accessory or reinforcement stitched on top of another material is not part of the upper's external surface but the material hidden underneath is); in which the outer sole's external surface is predominately rubber, plastic or composition leather; which is other than "sports footwear"; which does not have a protective metal toe-cap; in which the top of the upper covers most of the wearer's ankle bone; in which the sole is attached to the upper by a means other than welt stitched construction; and which is unisex. The rate of duty will be 10 percent ad valorem. This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. 177). A copy of the ruling or the control number indicated above should be provided with the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is imported. Sincerely, Allen H. Paterson Port Director New Orleans, LA

Related Rulings for HTS 6403.91.60

Other CBP classification decisions referencing the same tariff code.

Federal Register (1)

Trade notices, proposed rules, and final rules related to the tariff codes in this ruling.

Court of International Trade & Federal Circuit (4)

CIT and CAFC court opinions related to the tariff classifications in this ruling.