The tariff classification of leather and textile fitness shoes from Indonesia.
Issued September 24, 1998 by U.S. Customs and Border Protection.
Tariff classification
HTS codes: 6403.91.60, 6404.19.90
Product description
The tariff classification of leather and textile fitness shoes from Indonesia.
CBP rationale
The applicable subheading for the leather style of the Ex-o-fit shoe will be 6403.91.60, HTS, which provides for footwear with leather uppers and plastic and/or rubber soles, covering the ankle, for men, youths and boys. The applicable subheading for the textile style of the Ex-o-fit shoe will be 6404.19.90, HTS, which provides for footwear in which the upper external surface is predominately textile materials, in which the outer sole's external surface is predominately rubber and/or plastics, which is not "athletic" footwear, in which the upper's external surface is still 50% or less leather even after every leather accessory or reinforcement present is included as part of the upper's external surface, which is not designed to be a protection against water, oil, grease or chemicals or cold or inclement weather, which has neither open toes or open heels and is not a slip-on, and which is valued over $12.
Full text
NY D81758 September 24, 1998 CLA-2-64:RR:NC:TP:347 D81758 CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO.: 6403.91.60, 6404.19.90 Mr. John J. Kenney Reebok International Ltd. 25 Littlefield Street Avon, MA 02322 RE: The tariff classification of leather and textile fitness shoes from Indonesia. Dear Mr. Kenney: This ruling replaces New York ruling C89813 issued to you on July 21, 1998, regarding the men's Ex-o-fit Workboot in both a leather and canvas version. This revision is based on additional information by you concerning the classification of the leather version of the shoe which our office classified as unisex footwear for men's size 8 and smaller. You have submitted samples for what you refer to as men's "Ex-O-Fit" fitness shoes in both a textile and leather version. You state that both shoes are constructed the same way but using different upper materials. Both shoes cover the ankle, have lace-tie closures, and feature rippled outer soles which are not flexible. You state that both the textile hi cut shoe, "Ex-O-Fit Hi Workboot Canvas, style# 2-40771" and the leather hi cut shoe, "Ex-O-Fit Hi Workboot, style# 2-39319 and 2-40928, also feature leather collars and foxing-like bands. You state that the textile shoe is valued at $13.28 per pair, and the leather shoe is valued at $22.89 per pair. You state that Reebok has been making the men's Ex-o-fit style from its beginning. You state that you do not offer a women's version of the Ex-o-fit, by name, but that Reebok has been making the exact same shoe for women called the Freestyle, from the beginning as well. Since Reebok offers a comparable style of shoe for women, a unisex ruling would not apply. You have provided photocopies of the men's and women's version from your catalog. The applicable subheading for the leather style of the Ex-o-fit shoe will be 6403.91.60, HTS, which provides for footwear with leather uppers and plastic and/or rubber soles, covering the ankle, for men, youths and boys. The rate of duty is 8.5% ad valorem. The applicable subheading for the textile style of the Ex-o-fit shoe will be 6404.19.90, HTS, which provides for footwear in which the upper external surface is predominately textile materials, in which the outer sole's external surface is predominately rubber and/or plastics, which is not "athletic" footwear, in which the upper's external surface is still 50% or less leather even after every leather accessory or reinforcement present is included as part of the upper's external surface, which is not designed to be a protection against water, oil, grease or chemicals or cold or inclement weather, which has neither open toes or open heels and is not a slip-on, and which is valued over $12.00 per pair. The rate of duty will be 11.2% ad valorem. This ruling is being issued under the provisions of Part 177 of the Customs Regulations (19 C.F.R. 177). A copy of the ruling or the control number indicated above should be provided with the entry documents filed at the time this merchandise is imported. If you have any questions regarding the ruling, contact National Import Specialist Richard Foley at 212-466-5890. Sincerely, Robert B. Swierupski Director, National Commodity Specialist Division
Ruling history
More rulings on the same tariff codes
Revocation of NY N298995; Tariff classification of certain women’s footwear
Protest and Application for Further Review No. 0401-14-100073; Classification of certain women's footwear
The tariff classification of footwear from China
The tariff classification of footwear from China and Vietnam
The tariff classification of footwear from Vietnam
The tariff classification of footwear from Austria
The tariff classification of boots from China
The tariff classification of footwear from China
The tariff classification of footwear from Indonesia
The tariff classification of boots from China
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 →