MAR-2-05 CO:R:C:V 734670 RSD
Edward Otrompke
Customs Compliance Manager
Kmart Fashions
7373 West Side Avenue
North Bergen, New Jersey 07047-6411
RE: Country of origin marking requirements for imported hair
bows; sewing; simple assembly; 19 CFR 12.130; 19 CFR 134.1(b);
HQ 733603
Dear Mr. Otrompke:
This is in response to your letter dated April 22, 1992,
addressed to the national import specialist at the New York
Seaport regarding the country of origin marking requirements for
imported hair bows. The national import specialist has forwarded
your letter to our office for a reply. Accompanying your letter
were samples of a finished hair bow and an unassembled hair bow.
FACTS:
Kmart Corporation is planning to import hair bows. The hair
bow is composed of a textile fabric and a metal clip, both of
which are made in Taiwan. The fabric is also cut in Taiwan. The
pieces of fabric and the clip are sent to China for sewing and
assembly into the finished hair bow. Based on the samples
submitted, the fabric appears to be twisted into the shape of the
finished bow before it is sewn together. No description of the
sewing operation, including the time it takes and the skill
level, was furnished. However, it appears that the sewing
operation is not especially complicated. The finished bow is
about 7 inches wide and about 4 inches long at the widest point.
ISSUE:
Does the sewing of the fabric and the assembly of the hair
bow constitute a substantial transformation?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Section 304 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended (19
U.S.C.1304), provides that, unless excepted, every article of
foreign origin imported into the U.S. shall be marked in a
conspicuous place as legibly, indelibly, and permanently as the
nature of the article (or container) will permit, in such a
manner as to indicate to the ultimate purchaser in the U.S. the
English name of the country of origin of the article.
Congressional intent in enacting 19 U.S.C. 1304 was "that the
ultimate purchaser should be able to know by an inspection of the
marking on the imported goods the country of which the goods is
the product. The evident purpose is to mark the goods so that at
the time of purchase the ultimate purchaser may, by knowing where
the goods were produced, be able to buy or refuse to buy them, if
such marking should influence his will." United States v.
Friedlaender & Co., 27 C.C.P.A. 297 at 302 (1940).
Part 134, Customs Regulations (19 CFR Part 134), implements
the country of origin marking requirements and exceptions of 19
U.S.C. 1304. Section 134.41(b), Customs Regulations (19 CFR
134.41(b)), mandates that the ultimate purchaser in the U.S. must
be able to find the marking easily and read it without strain.
Section 134.1(b), Customs Regulations ( 19 CFR 134.1(b))),
defines "country of origin" as the country of manufacture,
production or growth of any article of foreign origin entering
the U.S. Further work or material added to an article in another
country must effect a substantial transformation in order to
render such other country the country of origin within the
meaning of the marking laws and regulations. The case of U.S.
v. Gibson-Thomsen Co., Inc., 27 C.C.P.A. 267 (C.A.D. 98) (1940),
provides that an article used in manufacture which results in an
article having a name, character, or use differing from that of
the constituent article will be considered substantially
transformed.
Section 12.130, Customs Regulations (19 CFR 12.130), sets
forth the principles for making country of origin determinations
for textile and textile products subject to section 204 of the
Agricultural Act of 1956, as amended (7 U.S.C. 1854)("section
204"). According to T.D. 90-17, published in the Federal
Register on March 1, 1990, (55 FR 7303), the principles of
country of origin for textiles and textile products contained in
19 CFR 12.130 are applicable to such merchandise for all
purposes, including duty and marking. Customs has determined
that 19 CFR 12.130 will be applied to determine the country of
origin of all imported articles which are classified in Section
XI, Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States, or to any
imported article classified outside of Section XI, HTSUSA, under
a subheading which has a textile category number associated with
it.
Although the hair bows are composed largely of fabric, we
have been informally advised by the Textile Classification Branch
that at present the bows are not classified in section XI or
under a subheading which has a textile category number associated
with it, but this determination is now under a review.
Accordingly, for the purposes of this ruling, the regular
substantial transformation rules will be applied to determine the
country of origin of the hair bows. In the event the hair bows
are reclassified to a subheading that has a textile category
number associated with it, the substantial transformation rules
of 19 CFR 12.130 would apply.
In HQ 733603 October 15, 1991, Customs considered the
country of origin for a barrette made up of a base metal clip and
fabric bow. The clip was made in France and the fabric bow was
made in Canada. The clips were attached to the bows in Canada.
We determined that the manufacturing process in Canada, wherein a
Canadian-made bow was combined with a French-made clip, was a
substantial transformation of the clip. In another words, the
country of origin of the finished barrette was Canada.
This case is distinguishable from HQ 733603 because in that
case one of the two major components of the hair bow originated
from the same country where the assembly was performed.
Conversely, in the instant case, neither component originates
from China, the place of assembly. The simple stitching together
in China of Taiwanese fabric which is pre-cut to size in Taiwan
and the subsequent attachment of a clip of Taiwanese origin to
the bow constitute simple finishing operations which do not
change the essential character of the fabric and clip. (See HQ
734350, April 9, 1992) where Customs ruled that where neither of
the two components used to create a hair bow originated from the
same country as the country of assembly, no substantial
transformation could be said to occur.) Therefore, we find that
the fabric and clip are not substantially transformed in China.
HOLDING:
The assembly in China of a clip and bow, both of Taiwanese
origin, to form a hair bow does not result in a substantial
transformation of the components. The country of origin of the
hair bow is Taiwan. Accordingly, the hair bow should be
permanently legibly, and conspicuously marked to indicate that
its country of origin is Taiwan.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division
cc: Area Director, New York Seaport
NIS Division