CLA-2 RR:CR:TE 962139 RH

Ms. Ruby L. Wood
Evans and Wood & Co., Inc.
P.O. Box 610005
D/FW Airport, TX 75261

RE: Request for reconsideration of C82441, dated December 23, 1997, concerning the classification of a woven bracelet

Dear Ms. Wood:

This is in reply to your letter of August 12, 1998, on behalf of Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., requesting reconsideration of Port Decision C82441, dated December 23, 1997, concerning the classification of a nylon woven bracelet with a plastic buckle.


The article under reconsideration is a 100 percent nylon woven bracelet with a plastic buckle. Lettering will also be woven into the bracelet.

In C82441, Customs classified the bracelet under subheading 6217.10.9530 of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA), which provides, in part, for accessories of man-made fibers.

You contend that the bracelet is akin to jewelry and should have been classified under Chapter 71, HTSUSA. Alternatively, you state that the bracelet is not an accessory of heading 6217, HTSUSA, and should be classified under heading 6307, HTSUSA, as an other made up article.

- 2 -


Is the textile bracelet classifiable as jewelry under Chapter 71, HTSUSA, as an accessory under heading 6217, HTSUSA, or as an other made up article under heading 6307, HTSUSA?


Classification of goods under the HTSUSA is governed by the General Rules of Interpretation (GRIs). GRI 1 provides that classification shall be determined according to the terms of the headings and any relative section or chapter notes. Where goods cannot be classified solely on the basis of GRI 1, the remaining GRI will be applied, in order of their appearance.

Additionally, in interpreting the headings and subheadings, Customs looks to the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System Explanatory Notes, which are not legally binding, but are recognized as the official interpretation of the Harmonized System at the international level.

Chapter 71, HTSUSA, encompasses, among other things, imitation jewelry. Note 3(g) to Chapter 71, HTSUSA, excludes “Goods of section XI (textiles and textile articles)” from classification within that chapter. You argue that this legal note does not exclude all articles made of textile materials, but only those which fall within Section XI, HTSUSA. Customs addressed a similar argument in Headquarters Ruling Letter (HQ) 080498, dated December 28, 1989, and in HQ 088332, dated March 19, 1991.

In HQ 088332, Customs addressed whether a friendship bracelet made of 100 percent cotton yarns woven into a narrow strip and then braided into two strands was classifiable as jewelry in chapter 71. Customs determined that:

Although classification of the present item as a bracelet of heading 7117, HTSUSA, seems, at least, prima facie logical, Chapter note 3(f) [now 3(g)] expressly bars goods of Section XI (textiles and textile articles). This means that all textiles and textile articles are excluded from Chapter 71 because such textiles and articles thereof are, ipso facto, articles of Section XI. We thus reiterate that, since the friendship bracelet is made of cotton textile, it may not be considered for classification within heading 7117, HTSUSA.

In HQ 080498, Customs rejected the importer’s claim that a woman’s bar pin consisting of an oval rhinestone ornament and a metallic gold colored “Mylar” fabric was a composite good classifiable under the principles of GRI 3(a) in heading 7117, because that provision more specifically described the merchandise than headings 6217 and 6307. The rationale in that ruling reads, in pertinent part:

It should be noted that Explanatory Note II to GRI 3 provides in pertinent part that “[t]he rule only takes effect provided the terms of headings or section or chapter notes do not otherwise require.” The provision for jewelry in subheading 7117.90.5000, HTSUSA, - 3 -

cannot be looked at in a vacuum. Certainly, the limitation placed on that subheading by Legal Note 3(f) [now 3(g)] to that chapter which excludes textile articles from classification thereunder makes it impossible to conclude that the specificity requirements of GRI 3(a) control classification of the bar pin.

Accordingly, in HQ 080498 Customs classified the bar pin under a GRI 3(b) analysis in subheading 6217.10.0030, HTSUSA, finding that the textile material imparted the essential character to the article.

Moreover, in the ruling you cite, HQ 955385, dated April 13, 1994, we held that although a textile wrist bracelet was similar to a piece of jewelry, it was excluded from classification in Chapter 71 by Note 3(f) [now 3(g)] to that chapter.

We agree with you, however, that note 3(g), Chapter 71, excludes only articles of Section XI and not necessarily every article containing textile materials. In fact, in HQ 088126, dated January 10, 1991, Customs held that a snap bracelet consisting of a flexible strip of spring steel approximately nine inches long and one inch wide covered in textile material was not precluded by note 3(f) [now 3(g)] from classification under Chapter 71 noting that its form, shape and function were derived from the flexible spring steel strip and the textile material was merely a decorative covering for the steel strip. We held that due to its metal construction the “snap bracelet” was not a textile article.

Your alternative claim is that the bracelet is classifiable in heading 6307 as an other made up article and not as an accessory of heading 6217. In HQ 955385, the importer argued that the textile bracelet was not similar to the list of exemplars of heading 6217 in the EN and, like you, claimed that it was classifiable under heading 6307. In that ruling, Customs cited the definition of an accessory from Webster’s Third New International Dictionary, Unabridged (1986) as “an object or device that is not essential in itself but that adds to the beauty, convenience, or effectiveness of something else. . . . any of various articles of apparel (as a scarf, belt, or piece of jewelry) that accent or otherwise complete one’s costume.” We held that the textile bracelet was a piece of jewelry that accents or otherwise completes clothing and that it met the definition of an accessory under heading 6217. Additionally, Customs has classified textile bracelets as accessories under heading 6217 in New York Ruling Letter (NY) 858606, dated December 18, 1990 (child’s textile bracelet), in NY 813620, dated August 28, 1995 (textile hook and loop buckle bracelet), and in NY C80969, dated October 23, 1997 (textile rope/fabric bracelet).

- 4 -


Port Decision C82441 is affirmed. The woven bracelet in question is classifiable under subheading 6217.10.9530, HTSUSA, which provides for “Other made up clothing accessories; parts of garments or of clothing accessories, other than those of heading 6212: Accessories: Other: Other: Of man-made fibers.” It is dutiable at the general column one rate of duty at 15 percent ad valorem and the textile category is 659.

John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division