U.S. Customs and Border Protection · CROSS Database · 1 HTS code referenced
Primary HTS Code
6402.99.18
$542.4M monthly imports
Compare All →
Court Cases
1 case
CIT & Federal Circuit
Ruling Age
23 years
Data compiled from CBP CROSS Rulings, Census Bureau Trade Data, CourtListener (CIT/CAFC) · As of 2026-04-30 · Updates monthly
The tariff classification of footwear from China.
NY I87747 November 26, 2002 CLA-2-64: RR: NC: TA: 347 I87747 CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO.: 6402.99.18 Mr. Charles G. Hartill Capital Transportation 147-217 175th Street Jamaica, NY 11434 RE: The tariff classification of footwear from China. Dear Mr. Hartill: In your letter dated November 12, 2002, on behalf of your client, Ballet Makers Inc., you requested a tariff classification ruling. The submitted half pair sample identified as Style FF3, is an open-toe, open-heel sandal. The upper consists of an approximately 2 ?-inch wide rubber/plastic material strap that features a middle-vamp hook and loop closure. The sandal also has a rubber/plastic insole and a molded rubber/plastic outsole. The applicable subheading for Style FF3, will be 6402.99.18, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), which provides for footwear with outer soles and uppers of rubber or plastics, having uppers of which over 90% of the external surface area (including accessories and reinforcements such as those mentioned in Note 4(a) to this chapter) is rubber or plastics, not covering the ankle. The rate of duty will be 6% 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. If you have any questions regarding the ruling, contact National Import Specialist Richard Foley at 646-733-3042. Sincerely, Robert B. Swierupski Director, National Commodity Specialist Division
Other CBP classification decisions referencing the same tariff code.
CIT and CAFC court opinions related to the tariff classifications in this ruling.