The tariff classification of footwear from China

NY L84782 May 25, 2005 CLA-2-64:RR:NC:SP:247 L84782 CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO.: 6403.99.90 Ms. Florence Lam S4 LLC 155 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10013 RE: The tariff classification of footwear from China Dear Ms. Lam: In your letter dated May 4, 2005 you requested a tariff classification ruling for a women’s leather upper, rubber/plastic soled athletic-type shoe that does not cover the wearer’s ankle. The shoe has a six eyelet lace closure complete with a laced in grey color cotton shoelace. You also intend to import a second pair of orange color shoelaces that are to be included in the same retail package for sale with the instant pair of shoes. Your intention is to offer the consumer this second contrasting color shoelace as a fashion choice to coordinate her/his attire. The submitted sample is a women’s low-top, leather upper athletic-type shoe with a shoelace closure that you identify as Style “Flare.” The shoe has a unit molded, rubber/plastic cupsole bottom that overlaps the upper at the sole, all around the shoe’s lower perimeter. You state in your letter that the second contrasting orange color shoelace is to be fed through the topmost set of eyelets on this sneaker. You also state in your letter, and we agree, that the second set of shoelaces supplied cannot simultaneously fit through the same eyelets, and lacing into alternating eyelets is possible but not practical. On this shoe, the simultaneous use of two laces is not intended since, as you point out, the shoelace ends become extremely long and impractical to secure. We are of the opinion that the second set of shoelaces, whether laced into the topmost eyelets or not, are merely redundant and intended for replacement or alternate color lacings as a fashion choice. The intent behind supplying the additional pair of laces is to meet a particular need (coordinate the wearer’s attire) and not to create a “completed article.” Therefore, the second pair of shoelaces imported together with these shoes will be considered as a set, with the essential character of the set imparted by the pair of shoes completed with a single pair of laces. The applicable subheading for the women’s athletic shoe identified as Style Flare, with an extra pair of shoelaces included, will be 6403.99.90, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), which provides for footwear with upper’s predominately of leather and outer soles of rubber, plastics or composition leather; which is not “sports footwear”; which does not cover the ankle; which is valued over $2.50 per pair; for other persons. The rate of duty will be 10% ad valorem. The marking statute, section 304, Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19 U.S.C. 1304), provides that, unless excepted, 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 its container) will permit, in such a manner as to indicate to the ultimate purchaser in the U.S. the English name of the country of origin of the article. We note that the shoe you have provided has not been marked with the country of origin. Therefore, if imported as is, the shoe does not meet the country of origin marking requirements of the marking statute and it will be considered not legally marked. 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