CLA-2 CO:R:C:G 084282 PR
Mrs. Doreen Wai, Second Secretary
Hong Kong Economic & Trade Affairs
British Embassy
1233 20th Street, N.W., Suite 504
Washington, D.C. 20036
RE: Classification of Knit Pullovers; Your Reference
C/7/2 & C/7, Case No. HK 49/89
Dear Mrs. Wai:
This ruling is in response to your letter of April 13, 1989,
concerning knit pullovers imported at Los Angeles Seaport by La
Mode Du Golf Inc.--U.S. Entry Nos. 065--134426-8, 349-0737845-8,
and 349-0737650-2.
FACTS:
Five samples were submitted. Three are designed for wear by
men and two are designed for women. All of the garments are
essentially jersey knit sleeveless pullovers with rib knit
waistbands, V-necks, and rib knit bands around the arm and neck
openings. The knit acrylic fabric is constructed with more than
9 stitches per 2 centimeters. In regard to the two women's
garments, styles 2006 and 2008V, our National Import Specialist
has reported that:
Both garments are worn by women over underwear or
brassieres as blouses. They are not worn over other
wearing apparel as vests. . . . [they provide]
sufficient coverage for the wearer at the armholes and
neck so that no underclothing is revealed.
ISSUE:
The garments, when exported from Hong Kong, were licensed
for textile and apparel restraint categories 638/639 as shirts or
blouses. It is stated that Customs officers at the port of Los
Angeles issued a redelivery notice indicating that the garments
were vests and, therefore, fell in category 659.
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Customs has consistently classified as vests only garments
which are worn over other outer garments. Accordingly, based on
the report of our National Import Specialist, styles 2006 and
2008V are blouses and should not have been classified as vests in
category 659.
However, while the subject men's and women's garments are
essentially the same, a contrary result is reached for the men's
styles--1006, 1008V, and 1010V. While this may appear to be an
anomaly on its face, in actuality, it's merely a recognition
that men may wear garments differently than women. In this
instance, women wear these type garments over underwear, men wear
these garments only over other outer wear garments.
Until June 17, 1987, garments similar to the subject
garments were classifiable as men's shirts. We have been unable
to determine the rationale behind that classification. On that
date we issued HRL 079508, which changed the classification of
these type garments to vests because they lacked shirt
characteristics and were commonly and commercially known in this
country as vests.
HOLDING:
The women's garments, styles 2006 and 2008V, are
classifiable under the provision for other sweaters, pullovers,
and similar knit articles of man-made fibers, in Subheading
6110.30.3055, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States
Annotated (HTSUSA). In 1988, those garments were classifiable
under the provision for other women's man-made fiber knit
blouses, not ornamented, in item 384.8012, Tariff Schedules of
the United States Annotated (TSUSA). In either case, textile and
apparel category 639 is applicable.
The men's garments, styles 1006, 1008V, and 1010V, are
classifiable under the provision for men's knit man-made fiber
vests, in Subheading 6110.30.3030, HTSUSA. In 1988, the
merchandise was classifiable under a similar provision, item
381.9224, TSUSA. In either case, textile and apparel category
659 is applicable. We suggest that you contact the Department of
Commerce concerning your request for an adjustment to the
category trade figures.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division