Reconsideration of NYRL 872548 of April 13, 1992; Sweater(6110) v. Dress (6104)

HQ 951900 September 28, 1992 CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 951900 CMR CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO: 6110.30.3020 Ms. Katty Ray D.T. Industries 525 Seventh Avenue New York, New York 10018 RE: Reconsideration of NYRL 872548 of April 13, 1992; Sweater (6110) v. Dress (6104) Dear Ms. Ray: This ruling is in response to your letters of April 16, 1992, and April 30, 1992, requesting reconsideration of NYRL 872548 of April 13, 1992, in which Customs classified your garment, style 910, as an oversized pullover sweater. Your requests have been forwarded to this office for a response, along with the samples you submitted. FACTS: The garment at issue, style 910, is a 100 percent acrylic knit garment that is constructed with less than nine stitches per two centimeters measured in the horizontal direction. The garment features shoulder pads which are sewn onto the garment, a v-shaped rib knit neck, long sleeves with rib knit cuffs and a five-inch wide rib knit bottom. When the garment was originally submitted, it was submitted with a pair of stirrup tights. The classification of the tights is not at issue. Both the tights and style 910 are to be imported from Taiwan. ISSUE: Was style 910 properly classified as a sweater in NYRL 872548 of April 13, 1992, or is it more properly classified as a dress? -2- LAW AND ANALYSIS: Classification of goods under the HTSUSA is governed by the General Rules of Interpretation (GRIs). GRI 1 provides that "classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes and, provided such headings or notes do not otherwise require, according to [the remaining GRIs taken in order]." This office has examined the garment at issue, style 910, along with the other two garments you submitted which we assume are for comparison purposes. We have also reviewed the advertising material submitted with your request. The advertisement you submitted is from 1985 and does not show the garment at issue. Nor, do any of the garments shown in the advertisement appear to be similar to the garment at issue. You indicate in your April 30th letter that the sample you have submitted with your request for reconsideration is two inches longer than the sample originally submitted. The sample was put on a size 10 (medium) mannequin so that the fit could be observed. You indicate in your April 16th letter that the garment is constructed so that it is fitted in the chest and hips and thus has the appearance of a dress. We disagree. When viewed on the mannequin the garment appears loose-fitting all over with the exception of the rib knit bottom. The garment at issue, style 910, has the appearance of an oversized pullover sweater. The five-inch wide rib knit bottom adds to this impression and the knowledge that the original sample was two inches shorter further supports the view that the garment was correctly classified as an oversized sweater in NYRL 872548. HOLDING: Style 910 was correctly classified in NYRL 872548 of April 13, 1992, as an oversized sweater of subheading 6110.30.3020, HTSUSA, textile category 646, dutiable at 34.2 percent ad valorem. The designated textile and apparel category may be subdivided into parts. If so, the visa and quota requirements applicable to the subject merchandise may be affected. Since 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 -3- suggest 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 updated weekly and is available for inspection at your local Customs office. Due to the changeable nature of the statistical annotation (the ninth and tenth digits of the classification) and the restraint (quota/visa) categories, you should contact your local Customs office prior to importation of this merchandise to determine the current status of any import restraints or requirements. Sincerely, John Durant, Director Commercial Rulings Division