CLA 2 RR:CR:TE 960772 SG
Ms. Fiona Chau
Trade Specialist
Hong Kong Economic and Trade Affairs Office
1520 18 Street, NW
Washington, D.C. 20036
RE: Request for Reconsideration of PC B83629 and binding classification for boiled wool jackets and sweaters; subheading 6104.31.00, HTSUSA
Dear Ms. Chau:
This is in response to your letter, dated July 22, 1997, requesting reconsideration of PC B83629, dated May 23, 1997, regarding the classification of a ladies 100% boiled wool knitted cardigan. The garment was imported by J. Crew Group, Inc. Pre-entry classification was requested and obtained by the importer. In that decision Customs determined that the garment should be classified as a jacket/coat. Given the lack of sufficient jacket features and weather protection capacity on the garment, it is your office’s view that the garment may not have been properly classified. In addition, you question Customs classification of another garment of similar style. We have ascertained that the importer of that garment was the Jebamile Corp. Samples of both garments were provided to this office for examination and will be returned under separate cover.
FACTS:
Style 20112, for the J. Crew Group, Inc., which was the subject of PC B83629, is a woman’s 100% wool knitted cardigan with a full-front, four button opening and long sleeves. The garment has a shirt-type collar with a notched lapel and two patch pockets at the waist. The ends of the sleeves, the edge of the placket, and the edge of the garment’s bottom are all hemmed. There are no special tailoring features on the garment, and its fabric is somewhat stretchable in the horizontal direction. It is intended for wear on the upper torso and it extends from the neck and shoulders of the wearer to below her waist. The outer surface of the fabric has more than nine stitches per two centimeters measured in the horizontal direction. There are two front and two rear panels on the garment that are sewn together lengthwise. In PC B83629, classification was given in heading 6104, HTSUSA, under the provision for a woman's suit type jacket.
2
Style 003, for the Jabamile Corp., is a women’s 100% wool knitted cardigan with a full-front zippered opening and long sleeves. The garment has a small shawl-like type collar and a pronounced ribbed waistband and sleeve cuffs. There are no special tailoring features on the garment and its fabric is somewhat stretchable in the horizontal direction. It is intended for wear on the upper torso and it extends from the wearer’s neck and shoulders to below her waist. The fabric has less than nine stitches per two centimeters, measured in the horizontal direction. Upon entry, the goods were classified as sweaters, of wool, in subheading 6110.10.2030, HTSUSA.
The samples are both constructed from 100 percent wool knit fabric that has been specially treated, to some degree, prior to its assembly as a garment. The procedure involves boiling the fabric in water under very high temperatures. This boiling process causes the knit stitches on the fabric to come closer together, making it denser and more constricted. The resulting fabric is warmer and provides some wet weather protection. In appearance, the resulting fabric is more “fuzzy” and it is harder to see the knit stitches aligned in their rows (the wales and courses).
Examination of the J. Crew sample did not reveal the rows of stitches either on the inside or the outside unless the “fuzz” was shaved off. On the Jebamile sample, the rows on the inside were visible without resorting to shaving the “fuzz”; the rows outside were not.
ISSUE:
Whether the merchandise, subject of PC B83629, is classifiable under heading 6110, HTSUSA, which provides for sweaters and similar articles, or under heading 6104, HTSUSA, which provides for women's or girl's suit type jackets? Whether the merchandise imported by Jebamile Corp. was properly classified as a sweater?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Classification of goods under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States Annotated (HTSUSA) is governed by the General Rules of Interpretation (GRI). GRI 1 provides that classification is determined first in accordance with the terms of the headings of the tariff 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 the order of their appearance.
The Explanatory Notes to the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System (EN), concerning heading 6103, HTSUSA, which includes men's or boy's jackets and blazers, and apply mutatis mutandis to the articles of heading 6104, HTSUSA, which include women's or girls' jackets and blazers, in describing the jacket portion of a suit, state:
(A) * * *
(a) the “suit coat or jacket” designed to cover the upper part of the body has a full 3
front opening without a closure or with a closure other than a slide fastener (zipper). It does not extend below the mid thigh area and is not for wear over another coat, jacket or blazer;
(b) the “panels” (at least two in front and two at the back) making up the outer shell of the suit coat or jacket must be sewn together lengthwise. For this purpose the term “panels” does not include sleeves, facings or collar, if any;
* * *
The competing provisions for the subject merchandise are heading 6110, HTSUSA, which provides for sweaters and similar articles, and heading 6104, HTSUSA, which provides for women's or girl's suit type jackets?
The dictionary definitions for the competing designations of this merchandise are delineated in Essential Terms of Fashion by Charlotte Mankey Calasibetta, (1986), which states the following:
sweater [c]lothing for the upper part of the body worn either as an outer garment or under a coat or jacket. (p. 210)
jacket [i]tem of apparel, usually shorter than hip length, designed to be worn over other clothing either indoors or outdoors....In the 20th [century] many styles, for both formal and informal occasions, were introduced for both men and women. (p.90)
coat [h]ip length to full length outerwear with sleeves, designed to be worn over other clothing.... (p.33)
It is evident by these definitions that while coats are clearly outerwear and jackets are definitely worn over other wearing apparel, sweaters are worn both ways as outerwear or under a coat or jacket.
Inasmuch as the garment imported by Jebamile Corp. has a full-front zippered opening, classification of that garment as a suit-type jacket in heading 6104, HTSUS, is precluded by the EN. In addition, for purposes of chapter 61, sweaters include garments constructed of nine or fewer stitches per two centimeters measured in the direction the stitches were formed. The garment imported by Jebamile Corp. has less than nine stitches per two centimeters, measured in the horizontal direction. Accordingly, the original classification of the garment as a sweater in subheading 6110.10.2030, HTSUSA, was correct. The rest of this ruling will only address the garment imported by J. Crew.
It is this office's opinion that although the merchandise imported by J. Crew may resemble both a sweater and a jacket in appearance, it is designed as a suit type jacket. The garment is constructed from 100 percent boiled wool. This fabric has traditionally been used in the
4
manufacture of "Tyrolean" jackets from Austria. The use of boiled wool in jackets continues
because of the fabric's suitable characteristics for this purpose: it has a neat tailored appearance; it is warm; it has some degree of natural water repellency; and it is a strong, stable knit fabric. See George E. Linton's The Modern Textile and Apparel Dictionary, (4th revised ed., 1973), p. 341, which states that this fabric "is an ideal cloth for use in winter wear garments... ."
Insofar as whether the garment is tailored enough to meet the definition of suit type jacket as set forth in the Textile Category Guidelines, C.I.E. 13/88, November 23, 1988. We note that the term "tailored" is frequently misconstrued to encompass only those garments which are constructed so as to fit the contours of the body. While this is an accurate definition, it is not all inclusive. The Reader's Digest Complete Guide to Sewing, May 1985, p.360, states, "(t)ailoring is just a refinement of standard sewing procedures, aimed at building permanent shape into the garment." Tailoring refers not only to the styling of a garment, but also to its workmanship. Styling refers to the cut and fit of a garment, whereas workmanship connotes the
degree to which the garment has been finished (i.e., the spacing and size of stitch used, the finishing of seams so that no raw edges show, the pressing of seams to ensure a streamlined silhouette). The Modern Textile and Apparel Dictionary, at p.567.
It is this office's position that the garment the subject of PC B83629 is "tailored" within the broader meaning of the term and therefore not precluded from classification as suit type jackets on this basis. We add that the use of boiled wool contributes to the tailored appearance of these garments in that it is a relatively rigid material. It is this limited elasticity which also detracts from these garments' viability as sweaters which are invariably made from stretchable knits.
We are in receipt of evidence as to how the trade treats these types of garments in the United States. A recent clothing catalogue features a photograph of a woman wearing a boiled wool garment with a full front six button closure, similar to those at issue, and the copy twice refers to the garment as a "jacket." This is persuasive evidence that the industry treats garments similar to those at issue as jackets and not sweaters. This is significant because when Customs is asked to classify a garment, we will consider not only how an importer treats the garment, but also the manner in which a garment is treated in the trade and commerce of the United States.
The boiled wool garment imported by J. Crew meets the definition for a jacket in that it is worn over other apparel and provides considerable warmth. It also qualifies as a jacket capable of being worn on more formal occasions, and allows the wearer to display a fashionable, high quality, high fashion jacket with dressier skirts and pants. To assert that this garment is not intended to be worn as primary protection from the elements outdoors is to underestimate and severely limit the function of the garments.
This office has previously issued rulings which cite the distinctions between jackets and sweaters and classified certain garments as the latter under heading 6110, HTSUSA. The garment in HRL 084180, dated August 3, 1989, was deemed to lack the tailoring typical of a
5
suit type jacket. We note that the garment classified in that ruling was quite different from the one currently under review. The garment in HRL 084180 was a fine knit cardigan like garment
with long sleeves, two inset pockets, a full front opening without means of closure and a deep V neck. Similarly, in HRL 089578, dated October 8, 1991, this office classified a cardigan style garment made from lightweight fabric with a deep V neck and full front opening with a double breasted four button closure, long sleeves, rib knit cuffs, a pronounced rib waistband and a partial rib knit neckline. Both of these garments are similar to athletic sweaters often referred to
as "letter" sweaters. See Essential Terms of Fashion, at p.211. Not only is the garment currently at issue distinguishable in overall style from those described above, but the type of fabric used, boiled wool, is not a traditional sweater fabric but rather one normally associated with jackets. This fabric lacks the horizontal elasticity found in most sweaters. Although the garments in NYRL's 869034 and 871108 have rib knit cuffs, waistbands and necklines, these features are found on both sweaters and jackets. Rib knit cuffs and the like will not by itself render these garments sweaters when all other features, taken in their totality, indicate the garments are suit type jackets. The garments at issue in those rulings are so different in construction and appearance from the subject merchandise, that no precedential analogy may be drawn.
We recognize that the court's decision in Pollak Import Export Corp. v. U.S., 118 C.I.T. 111 (1994), held that boiled wool jackets are not outerwear coats. That case, however, was decided under the Tariff Schedules of the United States (TSUS) and at that time, prior to 1989, the TSUS only allowed a limited classification choice between "coats" and an "other" designation for the statutory breakout at the five digit level. The Pollak court determined that the tariff provision for coats was a use provision and that the chief use of imported merchandise was the principal use. The court felt that the common definition of "coat" did not encompass the boiled wool garments and the garment was classified under the "other" breakout. In the interim, the HTSUSA has replaced the TSUSA and several specific headings and statutory breakouts have been added, including a provision for suit type jackets and blazers. This new provision renders the reasoning in Pollak obsolete with regard to why the garment in that case had to be either a "coat" or an "other" garment, as boiled wool garments are now aptly provided for under a breakout for suit type jackets.
In addition, this office has ruled on a number of 100% boiled wool knit cardigan-style garments. In HQ 952842, dated January 7, 1993, we affirmed two New York classification decisions which held that two cardigan type garments made of boiled wool were classifiable as suit-type jackets in heading 6104, HTSUS, rather than as sweaters in heading 6110. In HQ 951755, dated October 9, 1992, three cardigan style garments made of boiled wool were also classified as suit-type sweaters in heading 6104, HTSUS. HQ 954487, issued October 14, 1993, also ruled that a women’s boiled wool knit cardigan-style garment with full front opening, was properly classifiable in heading 6104, HTSUS, as a suit-type jacket.
6
HOLDING:
In consideration of the foregoing, it is this office's position that the merchandise at issue, style 20112, which was the subject of PC B83629, was properly classified as suit type jackets under heading 6104, HTSUSA. Accordingly, PC B83629 is upheld.
Sincerely,
John Durant, Director
Commercial Rulings Division