The tariff classification of footwear from China

NY K83707 March 17, 2004 CLA-2-64:RR:NC:SP:247 K83707 CATEGORY: Classification TARIFF NO.: 6402.19.15 Mr. John J. Kenney Reebok International LTD 1895 J. W. Foster Boulevard Canton, MA 02021 RE: The tariff classification of footwear from China Dear Mr. Kenney: In your letter dated February 27, 2004 you requested a tariff classification ruling. The submitted samples consist of four half pairs of baseball shoes, all of which have functionally sewn, predominately rubber/plastic material uppers that do not cover the wearer’s ankle. All four baseball shoes will be classifiable as “sports footwear” for footwear classification purposes in Chapter 64, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, because they are all designed for a sporting activity and have plastic and/or metal cleats on their outer soles. Sample #1 - “Vero M LOW MLB, srf #18-081808A” - A men’s baseball shoe with a lace closure and an upper that has an external surface area of over 90% rubber/plastics. The shoe also has a rubber/plastic outer sole with six widely spaced large raised metal cleats. You have provided a separate sample of the plastic bottom/outsole component with its metal cleats for examination. You have also provided an independent lab report that found only 33.80% of the perimeter of this shoe’s bottom/outsole has a lip that overlaps the upper at the sole of ¼-inch or more. An overlap of the upper at the sole by a height of ¼-inch or more that accounts for an encirclement of less than 40% does not indicate the presence of a foxing-like band. Sample #2 - “VERO CU LOW, srf #18-081806A” - A men’s baseball shoe with a lace closure and an upper that has an external surface area of over 90% rubber/plastics. The shoe also has a rubber/plastic outer sole with six widely spaced large removable plastic cleats. You have provided a separate sample of the plastic bottom/outsole component with plastic cleats for examination. You have also provided an independent lab report that found only 33.52% of the perimeter of this shoe’s bottom/outsole has a lip that overlaps the upper at the sole of ¼-inch or more. An overlap of the upper at the sole by a height of ¼-inch or more accounting for an encirclement of less than 40% does not indicate the presence of a foxing-like band. Sample #3 - “WOS WERO CU MID, srf #18-090101A” - A women’s baseball shoe with a lace closure and an upper that has an external surface area of over 90% rubber/plastics. The shoe also has a rubber/plastic outer sole with six widely spaced large removable plastic cleats. You have provided a separate sample of the plastic bottom/outsole component with plastic cleats for examination. You have also provided an independent lab report that found only 32.58% of the perimeter of this shoe’s bottom/outsole has a lip that overlaps the upper at the sole of ¼-inch or more. An overlap of the upper at the sole by a height of ¼-inch or more accounting for an encirclement of less than 40% does not indicate the presence of a foxing-like band. Sample #4 - “VERO MR LOW, srf #18-083005” - A junior boys baseball shoe with a lace closure and an upper that has an external surface area of over 90% rubber/plastics. The shoe also has a rubber/plastic outer sole with numerous widely spaced molded-in plastic cleats that are over ¼-inch in height. You have provided a separate sample of the plastic bottom/outsole component with plastic cleats for examination. You have also provided an independent lab report that found only 32.71% of the perimeter of this shoe’s bottom/outsole has a lip that overlaps the upper at the sole of ¼-inch or more. In addition we note that based on our measurements of this junior boys sized shoe, any measurable height overlap of 3/16-inch or more does not constitute any significant additional encirclement. On a child’s shoe, on overlap of the upper at the sole by a height of 3/16-inch or more accounting for an encirclement of less than 40% does not indicate the presence of a foxing-like band. The applicable subheading for all four of the baseball shoe samples, as identified by your style numbers and described above, will be 6402.19.15, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States (HTS), which provides for footwear in which both the upper’s and the outer sole’s external surface is predominately rubber and/or plastics; which is “sports footwear” other than golf shoes; in which the upper’s external surface area is over 90% rubber or plastics (including any accessories or reinforcements); and which does not have a foxing or a foxing-like band. The rate of duty will be 5.1% ad valorem. We are returning the samples as you requested. 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 646-733-3042. Sincerely, Robert B. Swierupski Director, National Commodity Specialist Division