Base
I899622003-01-23New YorkClassification

The tariff classification of footwear from China.

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

Cross-Source Intelligence

Primary HTS Code

6404.19.35

$300.8M monthly imports

Compare All →

Federal Register

2 docs

Related notices & rules

Court Cases

8 cases

CIT & Federal Circuit

Ruling Age

23 years

Data compiled from CBP CROSS Rulings, Census Bureau Trade Data, Federal Register, CourtListener (CIT/CAFC) · As of 2026-05-04 · Updates monthly

Summary

The tariff classification of footwear from China.

Ruling Text

NY I89962 January 23, 2003 CLA-2-64:RR:NC:TA:347 I89962 CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO. 6404.19.35, 6404.19.90 Mr. Tim O’Conner Lowell Shoe, Inc. 8 Hampshire Drive P.O. Box 904 Hudson, NH 03051-0904 RE: The tariff classification of footwear from China. Dear Mr. O’Conner: In your letter dated January 10, 2003 you requested a classification ruling for four styles of footwear. All four styles have outer soles of rubber/plastics and uppers of textile material, plastics and leather. You describe all styles as commonly referred to as “duck boot” construction. You state that the portion of the upper that is adjacent to the outsole is actually molded with the outsole as a one piece molded unit. The texture on this part of the upper is created by a surface treatmant called “flocking” giving the rubber/plastic part of the upper more of a leather/textile “feel.” You have not provided information concerning how this material is manufactured. Tariff classification of footwear is determined by many factors, one of which is the constituent material of the upper comprising the greatest external surface area. It is Customs position that the external surface area of the upper is whatever is visible and tactile on the surface. For “flocked” material such as this, the textile fibers are visible and tactile of the surface and therefore, the “flocked” material is considered non-woven textile for footwear classification purposes. The four styles submitted are: Style “Blizzard” (Stock #QK208-01) is a lady’s “above the ankle” boot with a lace front closure and a removable neoprene bootie. The boot’s upper consists of a sewn-on “cordura” fabric collar with a suede leather trim. The foot portion of the upper is composed of a “flocked” duck boot. You have supplied a value of $15.52/pair for this style. The applicable subheading for “Blizzard” will be 6404.19.90 Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS) which provides for footwear with outer soles of rubber/plastics and uppers of textile material, other, valued over $12/pair. The rate of duty will be 9 percent ad valorem. Style “Storm” (Stock #QK208-06) is a lady’s mid-ankle, zip-front boot with a removable neoprene bootie. The upper consists of a sewn-on leather collar, the visible portion of the neoprene bootie and the “flocked” duck boot foot portion. You have not provided external surface area percentage measurements for the component materials of the upper however, visual examination indicates that the textile material “duck boot” portion comprises the greatest surface area. You have supplied a value of $15.75/pair for this style. The applicable subheading for “Storm” will be 6404.19.90 (HTS) which provides for footwear with outer soles of rubber/plastics and uppers of textile material, other, valued over $12/pair. The rate of duty will be 9 percent ad valorem. Style “Summit” (Stock #QK208-04) is a “below the ankle” lady’s slip-on shoe. The upper consists of leather, neoprene and the “flocked” duck boot foot portion. You have not provided external surface area percentage measurements for the component materials of the upper however, visual examination indicates that the textile material “duck boot” portion comprises the greatest surface area. The applicable subheading for “Summit” will be 6404.19.35 (HTS) which provides for footwear with outer soles of rubber/plastics and uppers of textile, other, footwear of the slip-on type, other. The rate of duty will be 37.5 percent ad valorem. Style “Apex” (Stock QK208-05) is a oxford style lady’s shoe with a lace closure. The upper consists of leather, neoprene and the “flocked” duck boot foot portion. You have not provided external surface area percentage measurements for the component materials of the upper however, visual examination indicates that the textile material “duck boot” portion comprises the greatest surface area. You have provided a value of $14.50/pair for this style. The applicable subheading for “Storm” will be 6404.19.90 (HTS) which provides for footwear with outer soles of rubber/plastics and uppers of textile material, other, valued over $12/pair. The rate of duty will be 9 percent ad valorem. The submitted samples are not marked with the country of origin. Therefore, if imported as is, will not meet the country of origin marking requirements of 19 U.S.C. 1304. Accordingly, the footwear 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, in such manner as to indicate to the ultimate purchaser in the U.S. the English name of the country of origin of the article." This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. 177). A copy of this ruling letter 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 this ruling, contact National Import Specialist, Richard Foley at (646) 733-3042. Sincerely, Robert Swierupski Director, National Commodity Specialist Division

Related Rulings for HTS 6404.19.35

Other CBP classification decisions referencing the same tariff code.

Federal Register (2)

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

Court of International Trade & Federal Circuit (5)

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