958474 95 Ruling Active

Footwear; Leather Boot with Textile Bootie; DD 809587, modified

Issued October 6, 1995 by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.

Tariff classification

HTS codes: 6403.91.90

Headings: 6403

Product description

Footwear; Leather Boot with Textile Bootie; DD 809587, modified

CBP rationale

HQ 958474 October 6, 1995 CLA-2 R:C:M 958474 RFA CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO.: 6403.91.90 Mr. John B. Pellegrini Ross & Hardies 65 East 55th Street New York, NY 10022-3219 RE: Footwear; Leather Boot with Textile Bootie; DD 809587, modified Dear Mr. Pellegrini: This is in response to your letter dated August 24, 1995, to the District Director of Customs, Terminal Island, California, on behalf of The Timberland Company, seeking to correct a factual error in DD 809587, issued to you on May 18, 1995, which dealt with the tariff classification of men's boots with textile booties under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Your letter was referred to this office for a response. In your letter of April 21, 1995, you requested the classification of footwear described as a man's boot identified as Style 77300, "Mukluk Class III". Based upon the information provided, in DD 809587, dated May 18, 1995, the subject footwear was classified under subheading 6403.91.60, HTSUS, which provides for: "[f]ootwear with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leather or composition leather and uppers of leather: [o]ther footwear: [c]overing the ankle: [o]ther: [f]or men, youths and boys. . . ." Since the issuance of DD 809587, you have brought to our attention that there was a clerical error as to the men's boots being mistakenly labeled as Style 77300. Style 77300 is the women's version of the same style boot. The correct style number for the men's boots are Styles 77000 and 77009, the only difference being color. After reviewing all the information, we find that the men's boots, Styles 77000 and 77009, are classifiable under subheading 6403.91.60, HTSUS, which provides for: "[f]ootwear with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leather or composition leather and uppers of leather: [o]ther footwear: [c]overing the ankle: [o]ther: [f]or men, youths and boys. . . ." Goods classifiable under this provision have a column one, general rate of duty of 8.5 percent ad valorem. We further find that the women's boots, Style 77300, are classifiable under subheading 6403.91.90, HTSUS, which provides for: "[f]ootwear with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leather or composition leather and uppers of leather: [o]ther footwear: [c]overing the ankle: [o]ther: [f]or other persons. . . . " Goods classifiable under this provision have a column one, general rate of duty of 10 percent ad valorem. DD 809587 is modified as set forth in this ruling. Sincerely, John Durant, Director Tariff Classification Appeals Division

Full text

HQ 958474 October 6, 1995 CLA-2 R:C:M 958474 RFA CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO.: 6403.91.90 Mr. John B. Pellegrini Ross & Hardies 65 East 55th Street New York, NY 10022-3219 RE: Footwear; Leather Boot with Textile Bootie; DD 809587, modified Dear Mr. Pellegrini: This is in response to your letter dated August 24, 1995, to the District Director of Customs, Terminal Island, California, on behalf of The Timberland Company, seeking to correct a factual error in DD 809587, issued to you on May 18, 1995, which dealt with the tariff classification of men's boots with textile booties under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTSUS). Your letter was referred to this office for a response. In your letter of April 21, 1995, you requested the classification of footwear described as a man's boot identified as Style 77300, "Mukluk Class III". Based upon the information provided, in DD 809587, dated May 18, 1995, the subject footwear was classified under subheading 6403.91.60, HTSUS, which provides for: "[f]ootwear with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leather or composition leather and uppers of leather: [o]ther footwear: [c]overing the ankle: [o]ther: [f]or men, youths and boys. . . ." Since the issuance of DD 809587, you have brought to our attention that there was a clerical error as to the men's boots being mistakenly labeled as Style 77300. Style 77300 is the women's version of the same style boot. The correct style number for the men's boots are Styles 77000 and 77009, the only difference being color. After reviewing all the information, we find that the men's boots, Styles 77000 and 77009, are classifiable under subheading 6403.91.60, HTSUS, which provides for: "[f]ootwear with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leather or composition leather and uppers of leather: [o]ther footwear: [c]overing the ankle: [o]ther: [f]or men, youths and boys. . . ." Goods classifiable under this provision have a column one, general rate of duty of 8.5 percent ad valorem. We further find that the women's boots, Style 77300, are classifiable under subheading 6403.91.90, HTSUS, which provides for: "[f]ootwear with outer soles of rubber, plastics, leather or composition leather and uppers of leather: [o]ther footwear: [c]overing the ankle: [o]ther: [f]or other persons. . . . " Goods classifiable under this provision have a column one, general rate of duty of 10 percent ad valorem. DD 809587 is modified as set forth in this ruling. Sincerely, John Durant, Director Tariff Classification Appeals Division

View original on CBP CROSS →

More rulings on the same tariff codes

Searching CBP rulings the smart way

TariffLens semantically searches all 200,000+ CBP rulings, surfaces the ones that actually match your product, and builds defensible classifications backed by ruling citations.

Book a demo →