Classification of articles of knit footwear

Active· CBP ruling HQ 084711· Issued 1990-03-21

Ruling
HQ 084711
Issued
Status
Active
Category
Classification
HS prefixes
6404.19
Tariff numbers
6404.19.3560

Ruling text

HQ 084711

                                   March 21, 1990



          CLA-2:CO:R:C:G  084711  SR

          CATEGORY:  Classification

          TARIFF NO.:  6404.19.3560

          Mr. Robert D. Stang
          Grunfeld, Desiderio, Lebowitz & Silverman
          12 East 49th Street
          New York, N.Y. 10017-1062

          RE: Classification of articles of knit footwear

          Dear Mr. Stang:

               This is in reference to your letter dated May 2, 1989,
          requesting the tariff classification of knit footwear under the
          Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated
          (HTSUSA).  Samples were submitted.

          FACTS:

               The merchandise at issue is articles of knit footwear with a
          decorative application of a rubberized plastic compound on one
          side.  The article consists of a sock composed of man-made fiber
          that has two layers of a rubberized plastic compound that is
          applied to the bottom of the sock in the shape of a foot and
          covers most of the sole area.  The rubber compound is thick and
          acts as a sole.

          ISSUE:

               Whether the merchandise at issue is classifiable as
          footwear.

          LAW AND ANALYSIS:

               Chapter 64, HTSUSA, is the chapter in which footwear is
          classified.  Note 1(a) to chapter 64, HTSUSA, states that this
          chapter does not cover footwear without applied soles, of textile
          material (chapter 61 or 62).  

















                                         -2-

               The rubber of the footwear at issue can be considered to be
          an applied sole.  It covers the area that will be in contact with
          the ground and it is thick enough that it will protect the
          textile area and keep it dry.  It will also provide tread and
          traction for the wearer.

               HRL 084131 dated June 13, 1989, dealt with a similar type of
          footwear.  The footwear in this ruling was not considered to have
          an applied sole.  The rubber coating was applied in a pattern
          with separate pieces that did not cover very much of the bottom
          of the knit material.  The rubberized plastic  coating on the
          merchandise at issue is more extensive than that in HRL 084131.

               Subheading 6404.19, HTSUSA, provides for footwear with outer
          soles of rubber, and uppers of textile materials, other, of the
          slip-on type, that is held to the foot without the use of laces
          or buckles or other fasteners, the foregoing except footwear
          having a foxing or foxing-like band wholly or almost wholly of
          rubber or plastics applied or molded at the sole and overlapping
          the upper.  Further tariff breakout is determined by whether or
          not the rubberized plastic  applied to the sole makes up more
          than 10 percent of the weight.

               Note 3 to chapter 64, HTSUSA, states for the purposes of
          this chapter, the expression "rubber or plastics" includes any
          textile material visibly coated (or covered) externally with one
          or both of those materials.  Under this note the textile material
          to which the rubber is applied must also be counted as rubber for
          purposes of weighing and measuring.  The weight of the
          rubber/plastic includes the weight of the textile area to which
          it is applied.  This would provide a weight of over 10 percent of
          rubber.

               The inquirer states that Note 3 to Chapter 64, HTSUSA, does
          not apply to provisions at the 7 and 8 digit levels because the
          chapter notes were drafted before the 7 and 8 digit levels were
          drafted.  This is not true because the provisions at the 7 and 8
          digit level were drafted to comply with the chapter notes and
          other provisions in the chapter.  The inquirer also states that
          the application of this chapter note would produce absurd results
          in other chapters.  The language of the note reads "for the
          purposes of this chapter"; therefore, this note is only
          applicable to chapter 64, HTSUSA.  It is irrelevant that the
          textile and plastic can easily be separated for weight


















                                         -3-

          calculations, because under GRI 1, all applicable chapter notes
          must be administered in determining the classification of goods.

          HOLDING:

               The merchandise at issue is classifiable under subheading
          6404.19.3560, HTSUSA, as footwear with outer soles of rubber, and
          uppers of textile materials, other, footwear of the slip-on type,
          that is held to the foot without the use of laces or buckles or
          other fasteners, except footwear having a foxing or foxing-like
          band wholly or almost wholly of rubber or plastics applied or
          molded at the sole and overlapping the upper, other, other, for
          women.  The rate of duty is 37.5 percent ad valorem.

                                             Sincerely,




                                             John Durant, Director
                                             Commercial Rulings Division











































          6 cc A.D. New York Seaport
          1 cc Durant
          1 cc legal reference

Source: rulings.cbp.gov — ruling 084711, retrieved 2026-10-12T05:18:44Z, republished verbatim. This digest is informational; only CBP issues binding rulings.

Back to all CROSS rulings