Shoe mitt classified as a polishing cloth

HQ 088281 March 21, 1991 CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 088281jlj CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO.: 6307.10.1000 Mr. Ryden Richardson, Jr. Carmichael International Service P. O. Box 54772, Terminal Annex Los Angeles, California 90054-0772 RE: Shoe mitt classified as a polishing cloth Dear Mr. Richardson: This is in reference to your letter of November 27, 1990, on behalf of your client, Wessco International, in which you requested a tariff classification ruling under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA) for a shoe mitt to be imported from the Peoples' Republic of China. You submitted a sample along with your request. FACTS: The sample submitted with your request is a 100 percent cotton woven shoe mitt with a hang tape sewn onto a seam. It is a rectangular piece of fabric which, after being folded over is sewn together on two sides, leaving one side open for insertion of the hand. Lettering and a printed design appear on the article. The mitt is used for polishing shoes. ISSUE; Are shoe mitts of double-layered construction classified under the provision for other made up articles: dustcloths, mop cloths and polishing cloths, of cotton, in subheading 6307.10.1000? LAW AND ANALYSIS: You contend that previous administrative rulings under the Tariff Schedules of the United States (TSUS) and a court case under the TSUS indicate that the instant shoe mitt is not a polishing cloth because it is more than a cloth; it is an article which has been folded over and sewn together. You also argue that the same term, "polishing cloth," appeared under the TSUS and the HTSUSA, therefore the TSUS rulings and court case should apply even under the HTSUSA. The statutory language of the HTSUSA and the TSUS do differ, however, in that Heading 6307 provides for "made up articles," while the TSUS did not. Note 7 of Section 11, HTSUSA, which covers textiles and textile articles, defines "made up" in relevant part as follows: 7. For the purposes of this subsection, the the expression "made up" means: * * * * (e) Assembled by sewing.... Inasmuch as the instant shoe mitt has been assembled by sewing the edges of the fabric together, it is a made up article, classified as such in Heading 6307 by virtue of Note 7(e) of Section 11, HTSUSA. Since the TSUS provision had no comparable language, the two provisions are distinguishable. In Customs Headquarters Ruling Letter (HRL) 085671 of January 3, 1990, a similar cloth which was folded and sewn together was classified in subheading 6307.10, HTSUSA. In that letter we said that it was Customs' position that "cloths" such as those enumerated in HRL 085671 were not confined to material consisting of a single layer of fabric and that a single piece of fabric folded over and sewn together on three sides was also a cloth for the purposes of subheading 6307.10, HTSUSA. This is still Customs' position, and it is on point regarding the instant merchandise. HOLDING: The instant shoe mitt is classified in subheading 6307.10.1000, HTSUSA, dutiable at the rate of 4.7 percent ad valorem. Textile category 369 applies to this subheading. Due to the changeable nature of the statistical annotation (the ninth and tenth digits of the classification) and the restraint (quota/visa) categories applicable to textile merchandise, you should contact your local Customs office prior to importation of this merchandise to determine the current status of any import restraints or requirements. The designated textile and apparel category may be subdivided into parts. If so, visa and quota requirements applicable to the subject merchandise may be affected. Inasmuch as part categories are the result of international bilateral agreements which are subject to frequent renegotiations and changes, to obtain the most current information available, we suggest that you check, close to the time of shipment, the Status Report on Current Import Quotas (Restraint Levels), an internal issuance of the U. S. Customs Service, which is available for inspection at your local Customs office. Sincerely, John Durant, Director Commercial Rulings Division