OT:RR:CTF:FTM H330451 BJK
Center Director
Apparel, Footwear and Textiles CEE
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
237 West Service Road
Champlain, New York 12919
ATTN: Jason Lemieux, Supervisory Import Specialist
RE: Application for Further Review of Protest No. 2704-20-145056; Tariff Classification of
Certain Coated Fabrics
Dear Center Director:
The following is our decision regarding the Application for Further Review (“AFR”) of
Protest No. 2704-20-145056, timely filed on October 6, 2020, by The Obert Law Firm, P.L.L.C.
on behalf of their client, Nassimi, LLC (“Nassimi” or “Protestant”). Nassimi is protesting U.S.
Customs and Border Protection’s (“CBP”) classification of thirty styles of coated textile fabrics
imported from Taiwan.
Protest No. 2704-20-145056 is the lead protest for subsequent protests filed, Protest Nos.
4601-20-122015 and 4601-20-122017. We note that the coated fabrics at issue in the identified
protests were not previously considered in Headquarters Ruling Letter (“HQ”) H314080, dated
September 8, 2022, which considered other types of coated fabrics by Nassimi that were subject
to Section 301 duties. See HQ H314080. As such, this decision addresses the proper classification
of the coated fabrics imported by Nassimi subject to Protest No. 2704-20-145056 and subsequent
protests, as well the coated fabrics not considered in HQ H314080 under the Harmonized Tariff
Schedule of the United States (“HTSUS”).
1
FACTS:
At issue are thirty styles of coated textile fabrics, which span three protests. These protests,
Protest Nos. 2704-20-145056, 4601-20-122015, and 4601-20-122017 cover six entries that were
entered between June 8, 2019 and July 12, 2019. 1 The thirty styles of coated textile fabrics that
are subject to this AFR are identified as follows: Bottega, Canyon, Classic, Clutch, Equate, Gatsby,
Glaze, Imperial (Imp) 70, Imp 600H, Imp 1200, Imp 1800, Imp Promo, Isabella, Kimono,
Leatherette Junior, Muse, Persuasion, Phoenix, Primary, Promotional, San Remo, Seduction,
Shagreen, Tinge, Traveler, Twist, Vibe, Vintage, Wish, and Wonder.
The table below identifies the respective styles and associated entries:
Table 1: Protested Entries and Corresponding Styles
Protest Entry Number Styles
2704-20-145056 EQP XXXX1291 • Canyon
• Classic
• Glaze
• Kimono
• Muse
• Persuasion
• Phoenix
• Promotional
• San Remo
• Traveler
• Twist
• Vintage
4601-20-122015 EQP XXXX1002 • Bottega
• Clutch
• Imp 70
• Imp 600H
• Imp 1800
• San Remo
• Twist
1
These entries are covered by lead Protest No. 2704-20-145056 and subsequent Protest Nos. 4601-20-
122015 and 4601-20-122017.
2
EQP XXXX1010 • Bottega
• Classic
• Clutch
• Gatsby
• Kimono
• Muse
• Persuasion
• Phoenix
• Twist
• Vibe
• Wish
• Wonder
4601-20-122017 EQP XXXX1929 • Canyon
• Classic
• Clutch
• Equate
• Glaze
• Imp 600H
• Isabella
• Kimono
• Leatherette Junior
• Muse
• Persuasion
• Primary
• Seduction
• Shagreen
• Traveler
• Twist
• Vibe
• Vintage
EQP XXXX1374 • Classic
• Gatsby
• Glaze
• Imp 70
• Imp 600H
• Imp 1200
• Imp Promo
• Muse
• Phoenix
• San Remo
• Traveler
• Twist
EQP XXXX2273 • Classic
• Glaze
• Kimono
• Muse
3
• Primary
• Promotional
• San Remo
• Tinge
• Traveler
• Twist
• Vibe
At the time of entry, the subject textile fabrics were classified under subheading
5903.20.15, HTSUS, which provides for “Textile fabrics impregnated, coated, covered or
laminated with plastics, other than those of heading 5902: With polyurethane: Of man-made fibers:
Fabrics specified in note 9 to section XI: Over 60 percent by weight of plastics.” The Column 1
General rate of duty was “Free.” On February 20, 2020, CBP issued a Notice of Action, CBP
Form 29, and explained that following CBP’s Scientific Services Laboratory (“CBP Lab”) analysis
of a sample provided, the subject merchandise was being reclassified and liquidated under
subheading 5903.20.25, HTSUS, as “Textile fabrics impregnated, coated, covered, or laminated
with plastics, other than those of heading 5902: With polyurethane: Of man-made fibers: Other:
Other.” The Column 1 General rate of duty was 7.5% ad valorem. All six entries were liquidated
on April 10, 2020.
Protestant describes the textile fabrics as consisting “of man-made fibers laminated with
more than 70 percent by weight of polyvinyl chloride (PVC).” In particular, it contends that CBP
misclassified the subject textile fabrics under subheading 5903.20.25, HTSUS, instead of
subheading 5903.10.20, HTSUS.
Approximately fifty samples were provided to CBP. 2 With respect to the textile fabrics
subject to this AFR, twenty-one samples were submitted to the CBP Lab for analysis. These
samples are identified in the table below, along with the corresponding Laboratory Report Number.
Table 2: Laboratory Reports of Fabric Samples
Fabric Style Name CBP Laboratory Report Number
Canyon NY20220284S
Classic NY20201227S
Equate NY20211313
Gatsby NY20211312
Glaze 3 NY20201230S
NY20201231S
Imperial (Imp) 70 NY20211304
Imp 600 NY20201228S
Imp 1200 NY20211311
2
The samples provided included the textile fabrics subject to this AFR as well as certain textile
fabrics that were subject to HQ H314080.
3
Style Glaze was tested twice.
4
Imp 1800 NY20211314
Kimono NY20201225S
Persuasion NY20211303
Primary NY20201229S
Promotional NY20211307
San Remo NY20211317
Seduction NY20211315
Shagreen NY20211310
Tinge NY20211308
Traveler NY20211305
Twist NY20211309
Vintage NY20211316
Wish NY20211306
Wonder NY20211298
While not all thirty samples were analyzed by the CBP Lab, some styles featured the same
fabric construction and plastic composition and only differed with respect to color or pattern of
the embossed coating. As such, a primary sample was identified to represent other styles not
tested. These styles are identified in the table as follows:
Table 3: Lead and Corresponding Samples
Primary Sample Corresponding Samples
Canyon Bottega
Phoenix
Vibe
Classic Isabella
Muse
Glaze Clutch
Imp 70 Imp Promo
Promotional Leatherette Junior
CBP Lab Findings:
The CBP Lab report summaries, below, are distinguished between the samples coated with
polyvinyl chloride and the samples coated with polyurethane.
Polyvinyl Chloride Coated Fabrics:
Laboratory Report NY20201227S: The CBP Lab found the Classic fabric sample, and
related styles Isabella and Muse, to be a “swatch of coated fabric,” “to be a weft knit fabric with
brushing on the surface, not pile. The knit fabric [was] dyed a uniform color and is composed
wholly of polyester, man-made, staple fiber yarns, impregnated, coated, covered, or laminated with
a polyvinyl chloride type plastic material.” The CBP Lab determined that the sample weighed
5
612.6 grams per square meter, with plastic material accounting for 81.3% of the weight and textile
fabric accounting for 18.7% of the weight.
Laboratory Reports NY20201230S and NY20201231S: The CBP Lab found the Glaze
fabric sample, and related style Clutch, to be a swatch of fabric that is “coated, covered,
impregnated or laminated with one embossed cellular plastic type polyvinyl chloride material on
one of its surfaces.” The laboratory determined that the polyvinyl chloride material weighed 716.0
grams per square meter. The textile component, consisting of a brushed (but not pile construction)
plain woven fabric of polyester and cotton fibers weighed 148.0 grams per square meter. As such,
the plastic material accounted for 76.1% of the weight of the sample, whereas the textile fabric
accounted for 23.9% of the weight of the sample. While Laboratory Reports NY20201230S and
NY20201231S differed in exact weights and percentages, both samples were found to be coated
with more than 76.1% polyvinyl chloride material in the samples tested.
Laboratory Report NY20211304: The CBP Lab found the Imperial (Imp) 70 fabric sample,
and related style Imp Promo, to be a coated fabric swatch, consisting of a plain weave fabric
“coated, covered, or laminated with a polyvinyl chloride type cellular plastic material.” The textile
fabric was composed of nylon yarn and was neither of pile construction nor contained brushed or
napped fibers. The plastic material accounted for 82.3% of the weight of the sample (289.6 grams
per square meter) and the textile fabric accounted for 17.7% of the weight of the sample (62.3
grams per square meter).
Laboratory Reports NY20201228S (Imp 600), NY20211311 (Imp 1200), and
NY20211314 (Imp 1800): The CBP Lab found the Imp 600, Imp 1200, and Imp 1800 fabric
samples to be a coated fabric swatch consisting of a plain weave fabric coated with a polyvinyl
chloride cellular plastic material. These fabrics were composed of polyester yarns and were neither
of pile construction and did not contain brushed or napped fibers. The plastic material did not
account for more than 70% of the weight of the sample for these three styles.
Laboratory Reports NY20211307, NY20201229S, and NY20211312: The CBP Lab found
the Promotional fabric sample, and related styles Leatherette Junior, Primary, and Gatsby, to be
coated fabric swatches consisting of a knit fabric “coated, covered, or laminated with a polyvinyl
chloride type cellular plastic material.” The fabrics were not of pile construction and did not
contain brushed or napped fibers. The fabrics were composed of polyester yarns. The plastic
material accounted for the majority of the weight of the sample, in comparison to the textile fabric.
Laboratory Reports NY20211313, NY20201225S, NY20211303, NY20211317,
NY20211315, NY20211310, NY20211308, NY20211305, NY20211309, NY20211316,
NY20211306, and NY20211298: The CBP Lab found the fabric samples for the styles Equate,
Kimono, Persuasion, San Remo, Seduction, Shagreen, Tinge, Traveler, Twist, Vintage, Wish and
Wonder, to be a fabric swatch coated with a polyvinyl chloride cellular plastic material. The
fabrics were composed of polyester fibers and, while not of pile construction, consisted of brushed
fibers. The plastic material accounted for the majority of the weight of the sample, in comparison
to the textile fabric.
6
Polyurethane Coated Fabrics:
Laboratory Report NY20220284S: The CBP Lab found the Canyon fabric sample, and
related styles Bottega, Phoenix, and Vibe, to be a “swatch of tan fabric, coated on the front face
with a tan coating.” The sample was determined to be a weft knit fabric, dyed a single uniform
color, of pile construction with brushed raised fibers. The fabric was composed of man-made
synthetic fibers. The sample was coated, covered, impregnated, or laminated with one plastic
material layer, which is composed of polyurethane and is cellular in nature. The coated fabric
sample weighed 477.6 grams per square meter, with the fabric accounting for 157.5 grams per
square meter and the coating accounting for 320.1 grams per square meter. Plastic comprised
67.0% of the sample, while textile comprised 33.0% of the sample.
ISSUE:
What is the tariff classification of the coated fabrics under the Harmonized Tariff Schedule
of the United States (“HTSUS”)?
LAW AND ANALYSIS:
Initially, we note that this matter is protestable under 19 U.S.C. § 1514(a)(2) as a decision
on classification. The protest was timely filed within 180 days of liquidation of the entry.
(Miscellaneous Trade and Technical Corrections Act of 2004, Pub. L. 108-429, § 2103(2)(B)(ii),
(iii) (codified as amended at 19 U.S.C. § 1514(c)(3) (2006)).
Further review of Protest No. 2704-20-145056 is properly accorded further review
pursuant to 19 C.F.R. § 174.24(b) because the decision against which the protest was filed is
alleged to involve questions of law or fact which have not been ruled upon by the Commissioner
of CBP or by the Customs courts. See 19 C.F.R. § 174.24(b). Specifically, Protest No. 2704-20-
145056 and associated protests involve different products subject to Section 301 duties that were
not at issue in HQ H314080.
Classification under the HTSUS is made in accordance with the General Rules of
Interpretation (GRIs). GRI 1 provides that the classification of goods shall be determined
according to the terms of the headings of the tariff schedule and any relative section or chapter
notes. If the goods cannot be classified solely on the basis of GRI 1, and if the headings and legal
notes do not otherwise require, the remaining GRIs 2 through 6 may then be applied in order.
The 2019 HTSUS provisions under consideration are as follows:
3921 Other plates, sheets, film, foil and strip, of plastics:
3921.12 Of polymers of vinyl chloride: Combined with textile materials: Products with
textile components in which man-made fibers predominate by weight over any
other single textile fiber:
3921.12.11 Over 70 percent by weight of plastics
7
3921.12.15 Other
* * *
5903 Textile fabrics impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics, other than those of
heading 5902:
5903.10 With poly(vinyl chloride):
5903.10.10 Of cotton
5903.10.20 Of man-made fibers: Other: Over 70 percent by weight of rubber or plastics
5903.20 With polyurethane
5903.20.15 Of man-made fibers: Fabrics specified in note 9 to section XI: Over 60
percent by weight of plastics
5903.20.25 Of man-made fibers: Other: Other
* * *
6001 Pile fabrics, including “long pile” fabrics and terry fabrics, knitted or crocheted:
6001.92.00 Other: Of man-made fibers:
* * *
Note 2 to Chapter 59, HTSUS, provides in pertinent part:
Heading 5903 applies to:
(a) Textile fabrics, impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics, whatever the
weight per square meter and whatever the nature of the plastic material (compact or
cellular), other than:
...
(5) Plates, sheets or strips of cellular plastics, combined with textile fabric, where the
textile fabric is present merely for reinforcing purposes (chapter 39); . . . .
* * *
Note 1 to Chapter 60, HTSUS, provides in pertinent part:
This chapter does not cover:
...
8
(c) Knitted or crocheted fabrics, impregnated, coated, covered or laminated, of chapter 59.
However, knitted or crocheted pile fabrics, impregnated, coated, covered or laminated,
remain classified in heading 6001.
* * *
In addition, the Explanatory Notes (EN) to the Harmonized Commodity Description and
Coding System represent the official interpretation of the tariff at the international level. While
neither legally binding nor dispositive, the ENs provide a commentary on the scope of each
heading of the HTSUS and are generally indicative of the proper interpretation of these headings.
See T.D. 89-80, 54 Fed. Reg. 35127, 35128 (Aug. 23, 1989).
The ENs for Chapter 39, HTSUS, state in pertinent part:
[U]nfigured, unbleached, or uniformly dyed textile fabrics, felt or nonwovens,
when applied to one face only of these [plastic] plates, sheets or strip, are regarded
as serving merely for reinforcing purposes. Figured, printed or more elaborately
worked textiles (e.g., by raising) and special products, such as pile fabrics, tulle and
lace and textile products of heading 58.11, are regarded as having a function beyond
that of mere reinforcement.
* * *
The AFR under consideration involves thirty styles of coated fabrics of varying designs
and finishes. There is no dispute that the fabrics are coated for tariff classification purposes. At
the time of entry, Protestant classified the fabrics under subheading 5903.20.15, HTSUS, which
provides for “Textile fabrics impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics, other than
those of heading 5902: With polyurethane: Of man-made fibers: Fabrics specified in note 9 to
section XI: Over 60 percent by weight of plastics.” CBP rate advanced the shipment under
subheading 5903.20.25, HTSUS, which provides for “Textile fabrics impregnated, coated, covered
or laminated with plastics, other than those of heading 5902: With polyurethane: Of man-made
fibers: Other: Other.” In its protest, Protestant claims that the fabrics are constructed of a polyvinyl
chloride coating and are classified under subheading 5903.10.20, HTSUS, which provides for
“Textile fabrics impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics, other than those of
heading 5902: With poly(vinyl chloride): Of man-made fibers: Other.”
CBP’s Lab testing determined that the subject fabrics were either coated with polyvinyl
chloride or coated with polyurethane. The polyurethane coated fabrics are not classified under
subheading 5903.10, HTSUS, which provides for polyvinyl chloride coated fabrics. Similarly, the
polyvinyl chloride coated fabrics are not classified under subheading 5903.20, HTSUS, which
provides for fabrics coated with polyurethane. Thus, CBP must distinguish the styles coated with
polyurethane from those coated with polyvinyl chloride to proceed with tariff classification. The
styles featuring polyvinyl chloride coating are Classic, Clutch, Equate, Gatsby, Glaze, Imp 70, Imp
600H, Imp 1200, Imp 1800, Imp Promo, Isabella, Kimono, Leatherette Junior, Muse, Persuasion,
Primary, Promotional, San Remo, Seduction, Shagreen, Tinge, Traveler, Twist, Vintage, Wish,
and Wonder. The styles featuring polyurethane coating are Bottega, Canyon, Phoenix, and Vibe.
Since polyvinyl chloride coated fabrics appear before polyurethane coated fabrics under Chapter
59, HTSUS, we first examine the classification of the polyvinyl chloride coated fabrics under the
HTSUS and in accordance with GRI 1.
9
POLYVINYL CHLORIDE COATED FABRICS:
Styles Classic, Isabella, and Muse: The CBP Lab described the Classic style, and similar
styles of Isabella and Muse, as “[a] swatch of coated fabric,” “a weft knit fabric with brushing on
the surface, not pile. The knit fabric [was] dyed a uniform color and is composed wholly of
polyester, man-made, staple fiber yarns, impregnated, coated, covered, or laminated with a
polyvinyl chloride type plastic material.” For purposes of tariff classification, we note that while
the fabric is not of pile construction, it is otherwise worked by brushing, which indicates that the
textile fabric is not for mere reinforcing purposes. While the textile component accounts for 18.7%
of the weight of the fabric, the plastic material accounts for a majority 81.3% of the weight, which
is consistent with subheading 5903.10.20, HTSUS, which provides for a coated textile fabric in
which the plastic material accounts for the majority of the weight. In accordance with GRI 1,
styles Classic, Isabella, and Muse, are classified under subheading 5903.10.20, HTSUS, as
“Textile fabrics impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics, other than those of
heading 5902: With poly(vinyl chloride): Of man-made fibers: Other: Over 70 percent by weight
of rubber or plastics.”
Styles Clutch and Glaze: The Glaze fabric, and related Clutch style, were found to be a
swatch of fabric that was “coated, covered, impregnated or laminated with one embossed cellular
plastic type polyvinyl chloride material on one of its surfaces.” The textile component consisted
of a brushed (but not pile construction) plain woven fabric of polyester and cotton fibers. For the
Classic style, the CBP Lab notes that while the fabric is not of pile construction, it is brushed,
indicating further working. Because of this brushing, this textile component is not present for
mere reinforcement of the plastic material. The plastic material accounted for 76.1% of the weight
of the sample, whereas the textile fabric accounted for 23.9% of the weight of the sample. Thus,
in accordance with GRI 1, the Glaze and Clutch styles are classified under subheadings
5903.10.10, HTSUS, as “Textile fabrics impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics,
other than those of heading 5902: With poly(vinyl chloride): Of cotton,” or 5903.10.20, HTSUS,
as “Textile fabrics impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics, other than those of
heading 5902: With poly(vinyl chloride): Of man-made fibers: Other: Over 70 percent by weigh
of rubber or plastics,” depending on the percentage of cotton to polyester fibers present in the
fabrics.”
Styles Equate, Kimono, Persuasion, San Remo, Seduction, Shagreen, Tinge, Traveler,
Twist, Vintage, Wish and Wonder: These named styles were found to be a fabric swatch coated
with a polyvinyl chloride cellular plastic material. The fabrics were composed of polyester fibers
and consisted of brushed fibers, not of pile construction. The plastic material accounted for most
of the weight of the sample, in comparison to the textile fabric. Consistent with CBP’s approach
to the Classic and related styles, and the Clutch and Glaze styles, the brushed fibers indicate that
the textile component is for more than mere plastic material reinforcing purposes. As such, in
accordance with GRI 1, the named styles are properly classified under subheading 5903.10.20,
HTSUS, as “Textile fabrics impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics, other than
those of heading 5902: With poly(vinyl chloride): Of man-made fibers: Other: Over 70 percent by
weight of rubber or plastics,” depending on the percentage of cotton to polyester fibers present in
the fabrics.”
10
Styles Imp 70, Imp 600, Imp 1200, Imp 1800, and Imp Promo: Contrary to the other
polyvinyl chloride coated fabrics discussed above, the CBP Lab found that the Imp 70, Imp 600,
Imp 1200, Imp 1800 and Imp Promo style samples consisted of a plain weave fabric “coated,
covered, or laminated with a polyvinyl chloride type cellular plastic material.” The textile fabric
was composed of nylon yarn and was neither of pile construction nor contained brushed or napped
fibers. Pursuant to the Legal Note of Chapter 59, HTSUS, and the ENs of Chapter 39, HTSUS, a
textile component that serves as mere reinforcement for a plastic material is best classified as an
article of plastic under Chapter 39, HTSUS. Here, the fabric, composed of man-made nylon yarn,
is neither of pile construction nor of brushed or napped fibers. The plain weave fabric, therefore,
indicates that its purpose is to merely reinforce the polyvinyl chloride material. As the presence
of the textile component for mere reinforcement precludes classification under Chapter 59,
HTSUS, the identified fabrics here are best classified under Chapter 39, HTSUS, as plastics. While
the plastic material accounts for more than 80% of the weight for the Imp 70 and Imp Promo styles,
it accounts for less than 70% of the weight for the Imp 600, Imp 1200, and Imp 1800 styles.
Accordingly, pursuant to GRI 1, the Imp 70 and Imp Promo styles are classified under subheading
3921.12.11, as “Other plates, sheets, film, foil and strip, of plastics: Cellular: Of polymers of vinyl
chloride: Combined with textile materials: Products with textile components in which man-made
fibers predominate by weight over any other single textile fiber: Over 70 percent by weight of
plastics.” Furthermore, pursuant to GRI 1, the Imp 600, Imp 1200, and Imp 1800 styles are
classified under subheading 3921.12.15, as “Other plates, sheets, film, foil and strip, of plastics:
Cellular: Of polymers of vinyl chloride: Combined with textile materials: Products with textile
components in which man-made fibers predominate by weight over any other single textile fiber:
Other.”
Styles Promotional, Leatherette Junior, Primary, and Gatsby: The CBP Lab found these
identified styles were fabrics “coated swatches consisting of a knit fabric ‘coated, covered, or
laminated with a polyvinyl chloride type cellular plastic material.’” The CBP Lab determined that
the fabrics were not of pile construction nor did they contain brushed or napped fibers. The fabrics
were composed of polyester yarns. The plastic material accounted for the majority of the weight
of the sample, in comparison to the textile fabric. Similar to the Imp styles discussed above, the
CBP Lab explained that these fabrics are not of pile construction or of brushed or napped fibers.
While the fabrics are of knit construction, compared to the Imp styles that were of a plain weave,
the absence of additional working to the fabric suggests that these styles consist of a textile
component that serves mere reinforcing purposes to the plastic material. As the presence of the
textile component for mere reinforcement precludes classification under Chapter 59, HTSUS, the
identified fabrics here are best classified under Chapter 39, HTSUS, as plastics. Thus, pursuant to
GRI 1, the Promotional, Leatherette Junior, Primary, and Gatsby styles are classified under
subheading 3921.12.11, as “Other plates, sheets, film, foil and strip, of plastics: Cellular: Of
polymers of vinyl chloride: Combined with textile materials: Products with textile components in
which man-made fibers predominate by weight over any other single textile fiber: Over 70 percent
by weight of plastics.”
POLYURETHANE COATED FABRICS
11
Of the thirty styles of coated fabrics at issue four styles, Bottega, Canyon, Phoenix, and
Vibe, are coated with polyurethane, in contrast to the polyvinyl chloride coated styles. Since
subheading 5903.10, HTSUS, only covers coated fabrics with polyvinyl chloride, then these
polyurethane coated styles must be classified in another HTSUS subheading.
In examining the proper tariff classification of the polyurethane coated fabric styles, we
consider the CBP Lab findings. In its testing of the samples provided, the CBP Lab found these
fabric styles to be weft knit fabrics, dyed a single uniform color, of pile construction with brushed
raised fibers. The fabrics were composed of man-made synthetic fibers. The CBP Lab determined
that the polyurethane coating was also cellular in nature. The coated fabric sample weighed 477.6
grams per square meter, with the fabric accounting for 157.5 grams per square meter and the
coating accounting for 320.1 grams per square meter. Plastic comprised 67.0% of the sample,
while textile comprised 33.0% of the sample.
Unlike the polyvinyl chloride coated fabrics, the four polyurethane coated fabrics are
composed of a knit fabric consisting of pile construction. Pursuant to the ENs for Chapter 39,
HTSUS, pile construction is prima facie evidence that the fabric serves more than mere reinforcing
purposes and precludes classification under this chapter. While the fabrics with brushed fibers and
coated with polyvinyl chloride are classified under heading 5903, HTSUS, the polyurethane coated
styles of pile construction, which are excluded from classification under Chapter 59, HTSUS. We
turn to heading 6001, HTSUS, which provides for pile fabrics, including “long pile” fabrics and
terry fabrics, knitted or crocheted. CBP has opined that “a knitted pile fabric laminated with plastic
would remain classified under heading 6001, HTSUS[], while a knitted non-pile fabric laminated
with plastic would be classified under heading 5903, HTSUS[], as a textile fabric laminated with
plastic.” See HQ 965419, dated February 8, 2002 (finding that the classification of certain
garments was dependent on whether or not the laminated fabric was pile or non-pile knitted fabric).
Note 1 to Chapter 60, HTSUS, states that “knitted or crocheted pile fabrics, impregnated, coated,
covered or laminated, remain classified in heading 6001.” As determined by the CBP Lab, the
Bottega, Canyon, Phoenix, and Vibe styles are knitted pile fabrics coated with polyurethane.
Therefore, in accordance with GRI 1, they must be classified under heading 6001, HTSUS, and
specifically subheading 6001.92.00 as “Pile fabrics, including ‘long pile’ fabrics and terry fabrics,
knitted or crocheted; Other: Of man-made fibers.”
HOLDING:
By application of GRI 1, the tariff classification for the coated fabrics at issue are as
follows:
Styles Classic, Equate, Isabella, Kimono, Muse, Persuasion, San Remo, Seduction,
Shagreen, Tinge, Traveler, Twist, Vintage, Wish and Wonder are classified under subheading
5903.10.20, HTSUS, as “Textile fabrics impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics,
other than those of heading 5902: With poly(vinyl chloride): Of man-made fibers: Other: Over 70
percent by weigh of rubber or plastics,” depending on the percentage of cotton to polyester fibers
present in the fabrics.” The column one, general rate of duty is Free.
12
Styles Clutch and Glaze are classified under subheadings 5903.10.10, HTSUS, as “Textile
fabrics impregnated, coated, covered or laminated with plastics, other than those of heading 5902:
With poly(vinyl chloride): Of cotton,” or 5903.10.20, HTSUS, as “Textile fabrics impregnated,
coated, covered or laminated with plastics, other than those of heading 5902: With poly(vinyl
chloride): Of man-made fibers: Other: Over 70 percent by weigh of rubber or plastics,” depending
on the percentage of cotton to polyester fibers present in the fabrics.” The column one, general
rate of duty is 2.7% ad valorem or Free, respectively.
Styles Gatsby, Imp 70, Imp Promo, Leatherette Junior, Primary and Promotional are
classified under subheading 3921.12.11, HTSUS, as “Other plates, sheets, film, foil and strip, of
plastics: Cellular: Of polymers of vinyl chloride: Combined with textile materials: Products with
textile components in which man-made fibers predominate by weight over any other single textile
fiber: Over 70 percent by weight of plastics.” The column one, general rate of duty is 4.2% ad
valorem.
Styles Imp 600, Imp 1200, and Imp 1800 are classified under subheading 3921.12.15,
HTSUS, as “Other plates, sheets, film, foil and strip, of plastics: Cellular: Of polymers of vinyl
chloride: Combined with textile materials: Products with textile components in which man-made
fibers predominate by weight over any other single textile fiber: Other.” The column one, general
rate of duty is 6.5% ad valorem.
Styles Bottega, Canyon, Phoenix, and Vibe are classified under subheading 6001.92.00,
HTSUS, as “Pile fabrics, including ‘long pile’ fabrics and terry fabrics, knitted or crocheted; Other:
Of man-made fibers.” The column one, general rate of duty is 17.2% ad valorem.
Consistent with the decision set forth above, you are instructed to DENY the protest, except
to the extent reclassification of the merchandise as indicated above results in a net duty reduction
and partial allowance.
You are instructed to notify the protestant of this decision no later than 60 days from the
date of this decision. Any reliquidation of the entry or entries in accordance with the decision
must be accomplished prior to this notification. Sixty days from the date of the decision, the Office
of Trade, Regulations and Rulings will make the decision available to CBP personnel and the
public on the Customs Rulings Online Search System (CROSS) at https://rulings.cbp.gov/ and
other methods of public distribution.
Sincerely,
Yuliya A. Gulis, Director
Commercial and Trade Facilitation Division
13