CLA-2 CO:R:C:G 085291 DFC
Leonard L. Rosenberg, Esq.
Sandler, Travis & Rosenberg
Attorneys at Law
444 Brickell Avenue
Miami, Florida 33131-2470
RE: Leather footwear uppers
Dear Mr. Rosenberg:
In a letter dated July 26, 1989, on behalf of G.H. Bass
Caribbean, Inc., you inquired as to the tariff classification
of footwear uppers produced in the Dominican Republic. Samples
were submitted for examination.
The samples consist of 11 half pairs of moccasin uppers in
their condition as imported and the 11 half pairs of the same
uppers after they have received the final lasting by being
attached to a cardboard half-insole in the rear. You point out
that in all cases the opening in the bottom extends to the heel
of the upper. Further, none of the uppers can be bottomed
without further processing on a heel seat lasting machine.
The sample uppers involved may be described as follows:
Description Pattern No. Stock No. Bottom opening
Women's Rangeley 10177 1132W 1 3/8" x 2"
Women's Rangeley 10182 1155W 1" x 2 1/2"
Signature Shoe 10371 1242 1 1/4" x 5 1/2"
Women's Rangeley 10453 1007 1" x 2 1/2"
Men's Rangeley 10191 1015 3/4" x 2 3/4"
Men's Rangeley 10397 1067 1 1/8" x 2 1/2"
Penny Pattern 10367 731 1" x 5 1/5"
Men's Rangeley 10356 1083 1" x 4"
Tassel Pattern 10367-1 637 1 1/4" x 5 1/2"
Women's Weejuns 10183 721 1" x 4 3/4"
Signature Shoe 10406 1600 1 1/4" x 5 1/5"
It is your opinion that the samples are properly
classifiable under subheading 6406.10.6500, Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA), as parts of
footwear, uppers and parts thereof, other, of leather.
Are these samples considered formed uppers for tariff
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Additional U.S. Note to Chapter 64, HTSUSA, reads in
pertinent part as follows:
. . . Provisions for "formed uppers" cover uppers, with
closed bottoms, which have been shaped by lasting, molding
or otherwise but not by simply closing at the bottom.
It is our observation that all the samples are front-part
and back-part lasted with the exception of stock 721 which is
not back-part lasted.
In Headquarters Ruling Letter (HRL) 082075 dated
December 1, 1988, this office stated that "[w]e construe the
phrase closed bottoms as uppers which are substantially closed.
(Emphasis added.) It is our view that substantially closed
means that more of the lower surface that is intended to cover
the bottom of the foot is present, than is absent." In HRL
082573 dated December 28, 1989, this office modified this
position stating that we "are now of the opinion that uppers
which have substantial openings cut out of the bottoms, as is
the case here, are not closed within the meaning of Additional
Note 4 to Chapter 64, Supra.
In our decision of December 1, 1988, supra, this office
held that certain footwear uppers which were not back-part
lasted and needed to be soaked, re-lasted and dried after
importation in order to obtain their final shape, are not
formed uppers for tariff purposes.
In view of the foregoing, none of the samples can be
considered a formed upper for tariff purposes since they have
substantial openings in their bottoms. Additionally, stock 721
is also precluded from being considered a formed upper because
it is not back-part lasted.
The sample uppers are classifiable under subheading
6406.10.6500, HTSUSA, as parts of footwear, uppers and parts
thereof, other, of leather, with duty at the general rate of
3.7 percent ad valorem or entitled to free entry under the
Generalized System of Preferences or the Caribbean Economic
Recovery Act, if otherwise qualified.
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division
6cc AD NY Seaport
1cc Dist Dir Miami
1cc Dist Dir San Juan
1cc James Sheridan