Reconsideration of HRL 954337; DD 885233; jacket with attached scarf

HQ 955440 December 7, 1993 CLA-2 CO:R:C:T 955440 NLP CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO.: 6202.93.4500; 6202.93.5021 Mr. Robert L. Eisen and Ms. Karen Bysiewicz Coudert Brothers 1114 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036-7794 RE: Reconsideration of HRL 954337; DD 885233; jacket with attached scarf Dear Mr. Eisen and Ms. Bysiewicz: On May 11, 1993, Customs issued to you District Ruling Letter (DD) 885233, which classified a child's jacket with an attached scarf as a set under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). In a letter to Customs Headquarters, dated June 3, 1993, you requested reconsideration of DD 885233 and provided us with a sample jacket with an attached scarf. After reviewing your submission and the enclosed sample, Customs issued HRL 954337 on October 25, 1993, wherein we determined that the jacket and scarf combination was classified as a composite good, not a set. Therefore, the ruling modified DD 885233. Upon discussion with our New York office and review of HRL 954337, it is our position that this ruling should be revoked and DD 885233 should be affirmed. FACTS: DD 885233 dealt with the classification of a jacket and an attached scarf. In describing the attachment of the scarf to the jacket the ruling stated the following: "The 100 percent acrylic knit scarf is attached at the back of the collar with top stitching." DD 885233 held that the jacket and scarf were considered a set and were classified based on their essential character, which was represented by the jacket. DD 885233 held that, if the jacket passed the water resistance test as specified in Additional U.S. Note 2 to Chapter 62, HTSUS, then the set was classifiable in subheading 6202.93.4500, HTSUS, which provides for "[w]omen's or girls' overcoats, carcoats, capes, cloaks, anoraks...: [a]noraks (including ski-jackets), windbreakers and similar articles (including padded, sleeveless jackets): [o]f man-made fibers: [o]ther: [o]ther: [o]ther: [w]ater resistant." The rate of duty is 7.6% ad valorem and the textile category code is 635. If the jacket did not pass the water resistance test, then the set was classifiable in subheading 6202.93.5021, HTSUS, which provides for "[w]omen's or girls' overcoats, carcoats, capes, cloaks, anoraks...: [a]noraks (including ski-jackets), windbreakers and similar articles (including padded, sleeveless jackets): [o]f man-made fibers: [o]ther: [o]ther: [o]ther: [o]ther: [g]irls'." The rate of duty is 29.5% ad valorem and the textile category code is 635. Moreover, as the jacket and scarf constituted a set, each of the articles required their own separate visa for quota purposes. On June 3, 1993, you requested a reconsideration of DD 885233. As part of your submission, you enclosed a sample of a jacket and scarf combination. It was your position that the jacket and scarf formed an inseparable whole and should be considered a composite good for tariff purposes. Furthermore, for articles that are considered to be composite goods for tariff purposes, the textile category and quota-visa requirements are determined by the classification of the component which imparts the essential character and only one visa is required for these articles. On October 25, 1993, we issued HRL 954337 to you. This ruling held that the sample jacket and scarf were considered a composite good for tariff purposes and, therefore, only one visa was required for the combination. This ruling modified DD 885233. LAW AND ANALYSIS: Upon review of both DD 885233 and HRL 954337, it is our position the jacket and scarf combinations described in the rulings are distinguishable. The difference between the two combinations lies in the physical connection between the jacket and scarf. For example, DD 885233 describes the attachment of the scarf in following manner: "The 100 percent acrylic knit scarf is attached at the back of the collar with top stitching." In discussing the method of attachment with our National Import Specialist we were informed that the stitching was easily removed and the two items could be separated with neither piece sustaining any damage. Therefore, the jacket and scarf were not considered a composite good pursuant to General Rule of Interpretation (GRI) 3(b). The jacket and scarf were considered to be a set and each item was, therefore, subject to visa requirements and quota restraints. In HRL 954337, the attachment of the scarf to the jacket was described in the following manner: "The scarf is machine stitched to the outer and inner shell of the jacket at a point underneath the hood. The stitching extends for approximately 2 inches in the vertical direction and a 1/2 of an inch in the horizontal direction." Moreover, this ruling stated that "[t]he scarf could only be removed with effort and damage to both the jacket and scarf." Therefore, Customs determined that the jacket and scarf were an inseparable whole and were classified as a composite good. As the description of the merchandise in HRL 954337 differs significantly from the articles described in DD 885233, HRL 954337 cannot be considered a valid modification of the classification set out in DD 885233. Therefore, in accordance with Customs Regulations 177.9(d), HRL 954337 is revoked. Moreover, Section 177.9(a)(2), Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.9(a)(2), states the following: Each ruling letter setting forth the proper classification of an article under the provisions of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States will be applied only with respect to transactions involving articles identical to the sample submitted with the ruling request or to articles whose description is identical to the description set forth in the ruling letter. As the garments in each ruling are not identical, HRL 954337 cannot be applied with respect to transactions involving articles described in DD 885233. We agree with the conclusion reached in DD 885233 concerning the classification of the jacket and scarf described therein as a set and we, therefore, affirm DD 885233. HOLDING: In order to ensure uniformity in Customs classification of this merchandise and eliminate uncertainty, pursuant to section 177.9(d)(1), Customs Regulations (19 CFR 177.9(d)(1)), HRL 954337 is revoked by this ruling and the holding in DD 885233 is affirmed. The jacket and scarf are classified in subheading 6202.93.4500, HTSUS,, if they pass the water resistance test as specified in Additional U.S. Note 2 to Chapter 62, HTSUS. If they do not pass the water resistance test, the jacket and scarf are classified in subheading 6202.93.5021, HTSUS. As the jacket and scarf are considered a set, a separate visa is required for each item. Sincerely, John Durant, Director Commercial Rulings Division